DBS therapy for a persistent vegetative state: ten years follow-up results

  • Takamitsu Yamamoto
  • Y. Katayama
  • K. Kobayashi
  • M. Kasai
  • H. Oshima
  • C. Fukaya
Conference paper
Part of the Acta Neurochirurgica Supplements book series (NEUROCHIRURGICA, volume 87)

Summary

Twenty-one cases of a persistent vegetative state (PVS) caused by various kinds of brain damage were evaluated neurologically and electrophysiologically at 3 months after the brain injury. The 21 cases were treated by deep brain stimulation (DBS) therapy, and followed up for over 10 years. The stimulation sites were the mesencephalic reticular formation (2 cases) and CM-pf complex (19 cases). Eight of the patients emerged from the PVS, and became able to obey verbal commands. However, they remained in a bedridden state. These 8 cases revealed a desynchronization on continuous EEG frequency analysis. The Vth wave of the ABR and N20 of the SEP could be recorded even with a prolonged latency, and the painrelated P250 was recorded with an amplitude of over 7 µV. The mean survival time of these 8 cases was 6.1 years, as compared to 3.1 years for the other 13 cases. Overall, 4 cases are alive after more than 10 years. DBS therapy may be useful for allowing patients to emerge from a PVS, if the candidates are selected according to neurophysiological criteria. The fact that 19% (4/21) of the PVS cases treated with DBS survived for over 10 years should be stressed in comparison with the usual survival period for the untreated PVS.

Keyword

Vegetative state deep brain stimulation CM-pf complex 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References References

  1. 1.
    Dempsey EWA, Morison RS (1942) A study of thalamocortical relation. Am J Physiol 135: 291–292Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Giacino JT, Ashwal S, Childs N, Cranford R, Jennett B, Katz DI et al (2002) The minimally conscious state: Definition and diagnostic criteria. Neurology 58: 349–353PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jennett B, Plum F (1972) Persistent vegetative state after brain damage. Lancet 1: 734–737PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jasper HH, Naquet R, King LE (1955) Thalamocortical recruiting responses in sensory receiving areas in the cat. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 7: 99–114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Katayama Y, Tsubokawa T, Yamamoto Y, Hirayama T, Miyazaki S, Koyama S (1991) Characterization and modification of brain activity with deep brain stimulation in a persistent vegetative state. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 14: 116–121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    The Multi-Society Task Force on PVS (1994) Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state. (First of two parts). N Engl J Med 330: 1499–1508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    The Multi-Society Task Force on PVS (1994) Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state. (Second of two parts). N Engl J Med 330: 1572–1579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tsubokawa T, Yamamoto Y, Katayama Y, Hirayama T, Maejima S, Moriya T (1990) Deep brain stimulation in a persistent vegetative state: Follow-up results and criteria for selection of candidates. Brain Injury 4: 315–327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tsubokawa T, Yamamoto Y, Katayama Y (1990) Prediction of the outcome of prolonged coma caused by brain damage. Brain Injury 4: 329–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yamamoto T, Katayama Y, Oshima H, Fukaya C, Kawamata T, Tsubokawa T (2001) Deep brain stimulation therapy for a persistent vegetative state. Acta Neurochir (Wien) [Suppl] 79: 79–82Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takamitsu Yamamoto
    • 1
  • Y. Katayama
    • 1
  • K. Kobayashi
    • 1
  • M. Kasai
    • 1
  • H. Oshima
    • 1
  • C. Fukaya
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Neurological Surgery and Division of Applied System NeuroscienceNihon University School of MedicineTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations