DBS Therapy is very effective at treating the symptoms of Parkinson's disease, however, the inherent high energy requirements of conventional DBS systems results in devices that require more frequent and costly surgical replacement and in devices that are larger than desired for many patients1.
Related risks and concerns include:
DBI's Innovative Technology Solution
DBI's proprietary Temporally Optimized Patterned Stimulation (TOPS™) technology is designed to improve the efficiency of DBS while maintaining its efficacy to enable the development of the smallest and the longest lasting DBS systems.
TOPS™ technology was developed by Duke University Biomedical Engineering Professor, Dr. Warren Grill. After more than a decade of research Dr. Grill's lab discovered a way to 'speak' to the area of the brain that controls movement in people with Parkinson's disease. The stimulation patterns, somewhat akin to Morse code for the brain, were designed to be much more efficient than conventional DBS. This is vital because the gains made in improved efficiency increase the longevity of implanted brain stimulation device, thus reducing health care costs, risks, and complications associated with frequent battery replacement for persons with DBS for Parkinson's disease.
In an attempt to address the high power consumption of conventional deep brain stimulation systems, computer models and engineering methods were used to design novel patterns of stimulation that could provide effective treatment while delivering more energy efficient stimulation. The resulting temporal patterns have been tested in intraoperative feasibility studies and results indicate equivalent improvement in bradykinesia (slowness of movement) in humans with Parkinson's disease in an NIH-funded clinical study, compared to conventional DBS.
1. DBI market research report, data on file.
2. Fily F, Haegelen C, Tattevin P, Buffet-Bataillon S, Revest M, Cady A, and Michelet C, Deep Brain Stimulation Hardware-Related Infections:
A Report of 12 Cases and Review of the Literature. Clin Infect Dis. (2011) 52 (8): 1020-1023. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir065