Kaylee R Henry, Milina Michelle Miulli, Noa B Nuzov, Mark J Nolt, Joshua M Rosenow, Behzad Elahi, Julie Pilitsis, Laleh Golestanirad
{"title":"使用DiODe算法确定分段脑深部刺激导联实际方向的变化：不同导联设计和医疗机构的回顾性研究。","authors":"Kaylee R Henry, Milina Michelle Miulli, Noa B Nuzov, Mark J Nolt, Joshua M Rosenow, Behzad Elahi, Julie Pilitsis, Laleh Golestanirad","doi":"10.1159/000531644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Directional deep brain stimulation (DBS) leads have become widely used in the past decade. Understanding the asymmetric stimulation provided by directional leads requires precise knowledge of the exact orientation of the lead in respect to its anatomical target. Recently, the DiODe algorithm was developed to automatically determine the orientation angle of leads from the artifact on postoperative computed tomography (CT) images. However, manual DiODe results are user-dependent. This study analyzed the extent of lead rotation as well as the user agreement of DiODe calculations across the two most common DBS systems, namely, Boston Scientific's Vercise and Abbott's Infinity, and two independent medical institutions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from 104 patients who underwent an anterior-facing unilateral/bilateral directional DBS implantation at either Northwestern Memorial Hospital (NMH) or Albany Medical Center (AMC) were retrospectively analyzed. Actual orientations of the implanted leads were independently calculated by three individual users using the DiODe algorithm in Lead-DBS and patients' postoperative CT images. The deviation from the intended orientation and user agreement were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All leads significantly deviated from the intended 0° orientation (p < 0.001), regardless of DBS lead design (p < 0.05) or institution (p < 0.05). However, the Boston Scientific leads showed an implantation bias toward the left at both institutions (p = 0.014 at NMH, p = 0.029 at AMC). A difference of 10° between at least two users occurred in 28% (NMH) and 39% (AMC) of all Boston Scientific and 76% (NMH) and 53% (AMC) of all Abbott leads.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results show that there is a significant lead rotation from the intended surgical orientation across both DBS systems and both medical institutions; however, a bias toward a single direction was only seen in the Boston Scientific leads. Additionally, these results raise questions into the user error that occurs when manually refining the orientation angles calculated with DiODe.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10866684/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Variations in Determining Actual Orientations of Segmented Deep Brain Stimulation Leads Using the DiODe Algorithm: A Retrospective Study Across Different Lead Designs and Medical Institutions.\",\"authors\":\"Kaylee R Henry, Milina Michelle Miulli, Noa B Nuzov, Mark J Nolt, Joshua M Rosenow, Behzad Elahi, Julie Pilitsis, Laleh Golestanirad\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000531644\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Directional deep brain stimulation (DBS) leads have become widely used in the past decade. Understanding the asymmetric stimulation provided by directional leads requires precise knowledge of the exact orientation of the lead in respect to its anatomical target. Recently, the DiODe algorithm was developed to automatically determine the orientation angle of leads from the artifact on postoperative computed tomography (CT) images. However, manual DiODe results are user-dependent. This study analyzed the extent of lead rotation as well as the user agreement of DiODe calculations across the two most common DBS systems, namely, Boston Scientific's Vercise and Abbott's Infinity, and two independent medical institutions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from 104 patients who underwent an anterior-facing unilateral/bilateral directional DBS implantation at either Northwestern Memorial Hospital (NMH) or Albany Medical Center (AMC) were retrospectively analyzed. Actual orientations of the implanted leads were independently calculated by three individual users using the DiODe algorithm in Lead-DBS and patients' postoperative CT images. The deviation from the intended orientation and user agreement were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All leads significantly deviated from the intended 0° orientation (p < 0.001), regardless of DBS lead design (p < 0.05) or institution (p < 0.05). However, the Boston Scientific leads showed an implantation bias toward the left at both institutions (p = 0.014 at NMH, p = 0.029 at AMC). A difference of 10° between at least two users occurred in 28% (NMH) and 39% (AMC) of all Boston Scientific and 76% (NMH) and 53% (AMC) of all Abbott leads.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results show that there is a significant lead rotation from the intended surgical orientation across both DBS systems and both medical institutions; however, a bias toward a single direction was only seen in the Boston Scientific leads. Additionally, these results raise questions into the user error that occurs when manually refining the orientation angles calculated with DiODe.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10866684/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000531644\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000531644","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Variations in Determining Actual Orientations of Segmented Deep Brain Stimulation Leads Using the DiODe Algorithm: A Retrospective Study Across Different Lead Designs and Medical Institutions.
Introduction: Directional deep brain stimulation (DBS) leads have become widely used in the past decade. Understanding the asymmetric stimulation provided by directional leads requires precise knowledge of the exact orientation of the lead in respect to its anatomical target. Recently, the DiODe algorithm was developed to automatically determine the orientation angle of leads from the artifact on postoperative computed tomography (CT) images. However, manual DiODe results are user-dependent. This study analyzed the extent of lead rotation as well as the user agreement of DiODe calculations across the two most common DBS systems, namely, Boston Scientific's Vercise and Abbott's Infinity, and two independent medical institutions.
Methods: Data from 104 patients who underwent an anterior-facing unilateral/bilateral directional DBS implantation at either Northwestern Memorial Hospital (NMH) or Albany Medical Center (AMC) were retrospectively analyzed. Actual orientations of the implanted leads were independently calculated by three individual users using the DiODe algorithm in Lead-DBS and patients' postoperative CT images. The deviation from the intended orientation and user agreement were assessed.
Results: All leads significantly deviated from the intended 0° orientation (p < 0.001), regardless of DBS lead design (p < 0.05) or institution (p < 0.05). However, the Boston Scientific leads showed an implantation bias toward the left at both institutions (p = 0.014 at NMH, p = 0.029 at AMC). A difference of 10° between at least two users occurred in 28% (NMH) and 39% (AMC) of all Boston Scientific and 76% (NMH) and 53% (AMC) of all Abbott leads.
Conclusion: Our results show that there is a significant lead rotation from the intended surgical orientation across both DBS systems and both medical institutions; however, a bias toward a single direction was only seen in the Boston Scientific leads. Additionally, these results raise questions into the user error that occurs when manually refining the orientation angles calculated with DiODe.
期刊介绍：
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
