AzTrials
AzTrials

Essential TremorNCT05362448

Neurophysiologic Assessment of ET Patients Treated by Vim DBS

A study testing Frequency in people with Essential Tremor, run by University College London Hospitals at 1 site in United Kingdom.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Essential tremor is a chronic and progressive neurological disease characterized by upper limb tremor. This is one of the most frequent movement disorders. Most of the time the disease worsens over the time, affecting patients' work abilities and in the most severe cases activities of daily living such as eating or… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 90 years
Conditions the study is for
Essential Tremor
What is being tested?
Frequency
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
How many people
20 participants
Where
1 siteUnited Kingdom
Study dates
23 May 2022to 1 Nov 2022
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 90 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Age > 18 years
  • No gender specification
  • Patient suffering from severe medically intractable essential tremor and treated by Vim-DBS
  • Willing and able to provide written informed consent

Who cannot join

  • Concurrent and/or recent involvement in other research that is likely to interfere with the intervention within the last 3 months before study enrolment
  • Patients presenting with other cause(s) of balance or gait disorders (stroke, concomitant neurological, rheumatological or orthopaedic disease, severe hypopallesthesia, visual impairment, neuromuscular or vestibular disorders)
  • Recently implanted patients (<3 months)
  • Patients unable to provide written informed consent (patients presenting with psychiatric or cognitive disorders)

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Patricia Limousin, MD PhD contact

02034567890 ext. +44

p.limousin@ucl.ac.uk

United Kingdom1 site, 1 recruiting
  • National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery

    London, England, WC1N 3BG

    Patricia Limousin, MD PhD, 0203 448 8723 ext. +44, p.limousin@ucl.ac.uk

    Thomas Wirth, MD MS, 0203 448 8723 ext. +44, t.wirth@nhs.net

    Recruiting

Other trials in United Kingdom

About this study

Official title: Assessment of Cerebellar Ataxia Associated With Ventral Intermediate Median Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation in Essential Tremor: a Multimodal Neurophysiologic Study

Essential tremor is a chronic and progressive neurological disease characterized by upper limb tremor. This is one of the most frequent movement disorders. Most of the time the disease worsens over the time, affecting patients' work abilities and in the most severe cases activities of daily living such as eating or dressing. For the most disabled patients, Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the thalamic ventral intermediate median nucleus (Vim), a procedure consisting in an electrode implantation in a structure of the brain involved in tremor genesis, is the gold standard treatment. While this therapy is most of the time highly effective in alleviating the tremor, some subjects may exhibit gait impairment or upper limb coordination troubles years after the surgery, which are thought to be due to the involuntary stimulation of efferent cerebellar fiber tract. Unfortunately, this DBS induced side effect cannot be systematically avoided and may limit the possibilities of settings adaptation required to control the tremor. Surprisingly, while it could be a valuable therapeutic option for these patients suffering from DBS induced balance troubles, little is known about the effect of varying the rate of stimulation on the gait disorders associated with essential tremor and Vim DBS. The aim of or study is consequently to assess the effect of different frequency of stimulation on tremor, gait and balance disorders as well as on eye movements in patients uni or bilaterally stimulated in the Vim for a severe and medically intractable essential tremor. Patients followed at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (University College London Hospital) will be included. To better characterize the different symptoms, the investigators will use ataxia and tremor rating scale together with 3D gait motion analysis, oculography and computerized spiral test analysis. Our findings might lead to a better understanding of Vim-DBS associated gait disorders in essential tremor.

Read the detailed description

Essential tremor (ET) is a chronic, progressive neurological disease characterized by a symmetrical 4-12 Hz kinetic tremor constantly affecting hands and arms. The tremor can also involve the neck, the lower limb, the voice, the mouth, the tongue or other body regions. ET is among the most frequent movement disorders, with an estimated prevalence of 0,9% of the global population. While the tremor can be mildly disabling at the beginning of the disease, most patients experience a worsening of their tremor over the time. Eventually, disease progression can lead to severe disability, impacting patients' working abilities and in the most severe cases, activity of daily living. Though ET being a frequent debilitating condition, there are still few therapeutic options for the most disabled patients. Several surgical procedures have been evaluated in ET including Deep brain Stimulation (DBS) of Thalamic Ventral intermediate nucleus (Vim) or within the posterior subthalamic area, surgical thalamotomy, Gamma knife or, more recently, MRI guided focused ultrasound thalamotomy. While Gamma knife and focused ultrasound thalamotomy may be safer due to the absence of craniotomy, Vim-DBS remains currently the reference treatment and the most used procedure for medically refractory ET.

Besides the early side effects of Vim-DBS such as haemorrhagic, ischemic and infectious complications occurring immediately after the electrodes implantation procedure, late side-effects such as cerebellar symptoms including gait or upper limb cerebellar ataxia, paraesthesia, dysarthria, dysphagia, and cognitive difficulties are quite frequent. These long-term consequences of the stimulation may dramatically impact the quality of life of patients suffering from ET years after the surgery and mitigate the benefits of this intervention. Considering gait ataxia, it has been reported that this complication may affect up to 37% of ET patients following Vim-DBS surgery and seem to occur more frequently in patient who had pre-operative gait impairment, greater disease severity, older age and when DBS was performed bilaterally. Upper limb ataxia is also common and characterized by the occurrence or the paradoxical worsening of an intention tremor together with asynergy, dyschronometria and dysdiadochokinesia. It has been shown that this latter can be induced by suprathreshold stimulation.

One of the major assets of Vim-DBS over surgical thalamotomy remain its ability to steadily adapt the current delivered by the electrodes by changing the stimulation parameters. Using traditional Implantable Pulse Generator (IPG), it is possible to modify the stimulation mode (monopolar or bipolar stimulation), amplitude, frequency and pulse width as well as to modify the contacts of the electrodes delivering the current. However, despite DBS being a treatment largely available worldwide as well as being part of the routine care for medically refractory tremor, only few studies have assessed the effects of varying DBS settings on cerebellar symptoms presented by patients suffering from ET and stimulated within the Vim. It has been reported that tremor responds best to amplitude, which is usually increased until a complete resolution of the tremor is obtained. Increasing the stimulation pulse width produces a similar clinical effect and may help to alleviate tremor. Interestingly, it has recently been shown that decreasing the pulse width may improve the gait disorders, widen the therapeutic window and diminishes DBS induced side effects. This clinical finding is supported by the recent dissection of the neuronal network underlying Vim DBS clinical response which suggest that tremor suppression could be due to dentato-rubro-thalamic tract stimulation while gait and limb ataxia could be promoted by the stimulation of the cerebello-rubro-spinal and the rubro-olivo-cerebellar tract meaning the possibility of correcting these side effects by accurately optimizing the DBS parameters.

Among the clinical effect of the different types of parameters, the stimulation frequency has certainly been the less extensively studied in ET. This is at first sight quite surprising given that decreasing the frequency of stimulation of the Subthalamic nucleus (STN) is a valuable therapeutic option in Parkinson's disease especially for patient presenting with dopa-refractory symptoms such as freezing of gait or speech impairment. Lower frequency stimulation has also shown to be beneficial for some patients suffering from dystonia, and it has been suggested that this sustained clinical improvement was obtained by avoiding the stimulation of the structure responsible of side effects.

In comparison, a very low number of studies has focused on the consequences of lower frequency stimulation on tremor. Noteworthy is the fact that most of them have pointed that the tremor suppression was better achieved for a frequency around 100 Hz, with little evidence for a small additional therapeutic effect for frequencies above 130 Hz. Conversely, frequency of 50 Hz or lower seems to not suppress tremor and could even worsen it or induce myoclonic jerks. Based on these clinical findings, it is currently admitted initiating the stimulation with a frequency of 130 Hz and increasing it up to 180 Hz if the therapeutic effect on tremor remains unsatisfying despite concomitant high amplitude and large pulse width. A recent small case series has interestingly shown that some patients presenting with balance disorder years after Vim DBS surgery were having their trouble improved when the stimulation frequency was decreased to 130 Hz. Additionally, there are some evidence that, similarly to short pulse width stimulation, decreasing the frequency up to 100 Hz may help to optimize postural or intention tremor and DBS side effects control by widening the therapeutic window. Taken together, these findings suggest that, similarly to shorter pulse width, a lower frequency of stimulation could be an interesting therapeutic approach for ET patients suffering from balance disorders or upper limb ataxia promoted by Vim-DBS. However, since all the above-mentioned studies were unblinded and non-randomized, the level of evidence supporting such a strategy remain weak. Additionally, none of these works has aimed at evaluating the effect of decreasing DBS frequency on gait and balance, neither by using clinical testing, nor by using quantitative measurement such as 3D motion analysis or computerized posture assessment.

For these reasons, the aim of the present study will be to study the effect of varying Vim-DBS frequency on cerebellar features including gait and upper limb ataxia in ET by using non-invasive quantitative physiological tools, namely computerized spiral test analysis, 3D infrared gait motion analysis, balance measure against force perturbation analysis and oculography.

Patients presenting an ET treated by Vim-DBS stimulation for more than 3 months, followed at the National Hospital of Neurology and Neurosurgery, University College London Hospital, London, United Kingdom will be included.

Regarding the procedure, the investigators will first assess the therapeutic window by estimating the therapeutic and side effect thresholds for three different frequencies (80 Hz-130 Hz-180 Hz). Additionally, the investigators will subsequently analyse balance and gait using a 3D motion analysis system, the tremor using a tablet coupled to a computerized spiral analysis software and eye movements using oculography for the three different settings and with the DBS turned off.

Eventually, the investigators will localize the position of the electrodes and model Volume of Tissue Activated using the DBS planning software Guide-XT® and the pre and postoperative brain MRI.

Being tested
Frequency
Keywords
Deep brain Stimulation, Ventral Intermediate nucleus, Gait motion analysis, Balance against force perturbation analysis, Computerized spiral test analysis, Frequency
Medical subject headings
Essential Tremor

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • FrequencyDevice

    First, we will calculate for each patient and each frequency the amplitude therapeutic window (difference between therapeutic and side effect threshold). We will determine an optimal amplitude for each frequency that we will apply in the second part of the study.

Study groups in NCT05362448
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
80 HzActive comparatorStimulation with a frequency of 80 Hz
Receives: Device: Frequency
130 HzActive comparatorStimulation with a frequency of 130 Hz
Receives: Device: Frequency
180 HzActive comparatorStimulation with a frequency of 180 Hz
Receives: Device: Frequency
DBS offSham comparatorAbsence of stimulation
Receives: Device: Frequency

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Center of Pressure Displacement

    Quantitative continuous variable assessed using balance against force perturbation analysis under the three different DBS settings conditions and with the DBS switched off

    Measured: 1 day

Secondary outcomes (24)
  1. Side effect threshold

    Amplitude of DBS stimulation needed to induce side effects under the three DBS settings conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  2. Therapeutic threshold

    Amplitude of DBS stimulation needed to correct tremor under the three DBS settings conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  3. Therapeutic window

    Difference between side effect threshold and therapeutic threshold under the three DBS settings conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  4. Total Energy Delivered

    Energy delivered by the pulse generator under the three different DBS settings conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  5. Charge density

    Charge delivered by the pulse generator under the three different DBS settings conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  6. Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia score

    Scoring of cerebellar ataxia under the three different DBS settings conditions and with the DBS switched off

    Measured: 1 day

  7. Tremor rating scale score

    Scoring of tremor severity under the three different DBS settings conditions and with the DBS switched off

    Measured: 1 day

  8. Volume of Tissue Activated

    Prediction through imaging of the volume of tissue activated by stimulation under the three different DBS settings conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  9. Computerized spiral test analysis (SWVI)

    Comparison of spiral width variability index (SWVI) between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  10. Computerized spiral test analysis (AUC)

    Comparison of the Area under the curve (AUC) of the acceleration after Fast Fourier Transform between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  11. Computerized spiral test analysis (tremor frequency)

    Comparison of the tremor frequency between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  12. Balance motion analysis (CoP initial position)

    Comparison of the center of pressure (CoP) initial position and the resisting force between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  13. Balance motion analysis (resisting force)

    Comparison of the resisting force between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  14. Gait motion analysis (step length)

    Comparison of step length between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  15. Gait motion analysis (number of steps)

    Comparison of the number of steps between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  16. Gait motion analysis (stride length)

    Comparison of the stride length between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  17. Gait motion analysis (stride velocity)

    Comparison of the stride velocity between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  18. Gait motion analysis (normalized double support time)

    Comparison of the normalized double support time between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  19. Gait motion analysis (step length asymmetry)

    Comparison of the step length asymmetry between the four different conditions

    Measured: 1 day

  20. Oculography (fixation index)

    Comparison of the fixation index between the four different conditions using eye tracking system

    Measured: 1 day

  21. Oculography (saccades velocity)

    Comparison of saccades velocity between the four different conditions using eye tracking system

    Measured: 1 day

  22. Oculography (saccades latency)

    Comparison of saccades latency (ms) between the four different conditions using eye tracking system

    Measured: 1 day

  23. Oculography (saccades accuracy index)

    Comparison of saccades accuracy index between the four different conditions using eye tracking system

    Measured: 1 day

  24. Oculography (VOR gain)

    Comparison of the vestibulo-ocular reflex gain (VOR) between the four different conditions using eye tracking system

    Measured: 1 day

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted5 May 2022
  2. Study start23 May 2022
  3. Primary completion1 Nov 2022 (estimated)
  4. Study completion1 Nov 2022 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Basic science
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Crossover
Masking
Triple blind
Who is masked
Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
20 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT05362448
Sponsor's protocol ID
274481
Status last verified
May 2022
First submitted
11 Apr 2022
Last updated
27 May 2022
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Frequency in people with Essential Tremor, run by University College London Hospitals at 1 site in United Kingdom.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 May 2022. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Patricia Limousin, MD PhD (02034567890 ext. +44, p.limousin@ucl.ac.uk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Center of Pressure Displacement (time frame: 1 day). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 May 2022.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in