Comparison of deep brain stimulation and responsive neurostimulation wound complication rates and risk factors: a single-center retrospective study.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 NEUROIMAGING
Eric Bayman, Chiagoziem Anigbogu, Ashkaun Razmara, Steven G Ojemann, John A Thompson, Daniel R Kramer
{"title":"Comparison of deep brain stimulation and responsive neurostimulation wound complication rates and risk factors: a single-center retrospective study.","authors":"Eric Bayman, Chiagoziem Anigbogu, Ashkaun Razmara, Steven G Ojemann, John A Thompson, Daniel R Kramer","doi":"10.1159/000545146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neural stimulation (RNS) are effective for patients with pharmacoresistant epilepsy. Similar outcomes and increasingly convergent indications means the choice of device may come down to other factors. Common to implanted therapeutic devices, wound associated adverse outcomes are among the more common complications for these two procedures. However, there have been limited studies evaluating the differences in wound complication rates between DBS and RNS, despite the procedural differences for implantation for the two devices. Our objective is to analyze the differences in wound complication rates between patients who received DBS and RNS devices at the University of Colorado Hospital between 2016 and 2023.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All DBS and RNS surgeries performed from 2016 to 2023 for two surgeons at the University of Colorado Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Wound complications included infection, hardware protrusion, or wound erosion requiring surgical washout, explant, or replacement. Risk factors evaluated included age, sex, diabetes, body mass index, and immunocompromised status. Incidence of complications and risk factors were evaluated and compared using a Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U test. The relationship between selected risk factors and the probability of wound complication was evaluated using a binomial logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 297 patients underwent DBS (n=234, n=218 for movement disorders, n=16 for epilepsy) and RNS (n=63) implantation. The DBS group had higher median age at the time of surgery compared to the RNS group (65 vs 37, p<0.001), no other significant differences in group characteristics were noted. Wound complication incidence was greater in the RNS group compared to DBS (12.7% vs 4.3%, p<0.001). No other risk factors were noted to contribute to wound complication rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Wound complication incidence was greater in RNS patients compared to DBS patients. Differences in age, sex, body mass index, and immunocompromised status were not associated with increased wound complication risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":22078,"journal":{"name":"Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000545146","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) and responsive neural stimulation (RNS) are effective for patients with pharmacoresistant epilepsy. Similar outcomes and increasingly convergent indications means the choice of device may come down to other factors. Common to implanted therapeutic devices, wound associated adverse outcomes are among the more common complications for these two procedures. However, there have been limited studies evaluating the differences in wound complication rates between DBS and RNS, despite the procedural differences for implantation for the two devices. Our objective is to analyze the differences in wound complication rates between patients who received DBS and RNS devices at the University of Colorado Hospital between 2016 and 2023.

Methods: All DBS and RNS surgeries performed from 2016 to 2023 for two surgeons at the University of Colorado Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Wound complications included infection, hardware protrusion, or wound erosion requiring surgical washout, explant, or replacement. Risk factors evaluated included age, sex, diabetes, body mass index, and immunocompromised status. Incidence of complications and risk factors were evaluated and compared using a Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U test. The relationship between selected risk factors and the probability of wound complication was evaluated using a binomial logistic regression.

Results: A total of 297 patients underwent DBS (n=234, n=218 for movement disorders, n=16 for epilepsy) and RNS (n=63) implantation. The DBS group had higher median age at the time of surgery compared to the RNS group (65 vs 37, p<0.001), no other significant differences in group characteristics were noted. Wound complication incidence was greater in the RNS group compared to DBS (12.7% vs 4.3%, p<0.001). No other risk factors were noted to contribute to wound complication rate.

Conclusion: Wound complication incidence was greater in RNS patients compared to DBS patients. Differences in age, sex, body mass index, and immunocompromised status were not associated with increased wound complication risk.

脑深部刺激与反应性神经刺激伤口并发症发生率及危险因素的比较:单中心回顾性研究。
背景和目的:脑深部刺激(DBS)和反应性神经刺激(RNS)对药物耐药性癫痫患者有效。相似的疗效和日益趋同的适应症意味着选择何种装置可能取决于其他因素。与植入式治疗设备一样,与伤口相关的不良后果也是这两种手术中较为常见的并发症。然而,尽管 DBS 和 RNS 在植入程序上存在差异,但评估这两种器械伤口并发症发生率差异的研究却很有限。我们的目的是分析 2016 年至 2023 年期间在科罗拉多大学医院接受 DBS 和 RNS 装置的患者在伤口并发症发生率方面的差异:我们对科罗拉多大学医院两名外科医生在 2016 年至 2023 年期间进行的所有 DBS 和 RNS 手术进行了回顾性审查。伤口并发症包括感染、硬件突出或伤口侵蚀,需要进行手术冲洗、切除或更换。评估的风险因素包括年龄、性别、糖尿病、体重指数和免疫力低下状况。并发症的发生率和风险因素采用Chi-squared和Mann-Whitney U检验进行评估和比较。采用二项式逻辑回归法评估了所选风险因素与伤口并发症发生概率之间的关系:共有 297 名患者接受了 DBS(n=234,n=218 用于运动障碍,n=16 用于癫痫)和 RNS(n=63)植入手术。与 RNS 组相比,DBS 组患者手术时的中位年龄更高(65 岁对 37 岁,p 结论:DBS 组患者的伤口并发症发生率高于 RNS 组:RNS患者的伤口并发症发生率高于DBS患者。年龄、性别、体重指数和免疫功能低下状况的差异与伤口并发症风险的增加无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: ''Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery'' provides a single source for the reader to keep abreast of developments in the most rapidly advancing subspecialty within neurosurgery. Technological advances in computer-assisted surgery, robotics, imaging and neurophysiology are being applied to clinical problems with ever-increasing rapidity in stereotaxis more than any other field, providing opportunities for new approaches to surgical and radiotherapeutic management of diseases of the brain, spinal cord, and spine. Issues feature advances in the use of deep-brain stimulation, imaging-guided techniques in stereotactic biopsy and craniotomy, stereotactic radiosurgery, and stereotactically implanted and guided radiotherapeutics and biologicals in the treatment of functional and movement disorders, brain tumors, and other diseases of the brain. Background information from basic science laboratories related to such clinical advances provides the reader with an overall perspective of this field. Proceedings and abstracts from many of the key international meetings furnish an overview of this specialty available nowhere else. ''Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery'' meets the information needs of both investigators and clinicians in this rapidly advancing field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信