Some studies have shown that low frequency stimulation(LFS,most commonly 60 Hz),compared to high frequency stimulation(HFS,most commonly 130 Hz),has beneficial effects,short-term or even long-term,on improving freezin...Some studies have shown that low frequency stimulation(LFS,most commonly 60 Hz),compared to high frequency stimulation(HFS,most commonly 130 Hz),has beneficial effects,short-term or even long-term,on improving freezing of gait(FOG)and other axial symptoms,including speech and swallowing function,in Parkinson disease(PD)patients with bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation(STN DBS).However,other studies failed to confirm this.It seems not clear what determines the difference in response to LFS.Differences in study design,such as presence or absence of FOG,exact LFS used(60 Hz versus 80 Hz),study size,open label versus randomized double blind assessment,retrospective versus prospective evaluation,medication On or Off state,total electric energy delivered maintained or not with the change in frequency,and the location of active contacts could all potentially affect the results.This mini-review goes over the literature with the aforementioned factors in mind,focusing on the effect of LFS versus HFS on FOG and other axial symptoms in PD with bilateral STN DBS,in an effort to extract the essential data to guide our clinical management of axial symptoms and explore the potential underlying mechanisms as well.Overall,LFS of 60 Hz seems to be consistently effective in patients with FOG at the usual HFS in regards to improving FOG,speech,swallowing function and other axial symptoms,though LFS could reduce tremor control in some patients.Whether LFS simply addresses the axial symptoms in the context of HFS or has other beneficial effects requires further studies,along with the mechanism.展开更多
文摘Some studies have shown that low frequency stimulation(LFS,most commonly 60 Hz),compared to high frequency stimulation(HFS,most commonly 130 Hz),has beneficial effects,short-term or even long-term,on improving freezing of gait(FOG)and other axial symptoms,including speech and swallowing function,in Parkinson disease(PD)patients with bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation(STN DBS).However,other studies failed to confirm this.It seems not clear what determines the difference in response to LFS.Differences in study design,such as presence or absence of FOG,exact LFS used(60 Hz versus 80 Hz),study size,open label versus randomized double blind assessment,retrospective versus prospective evaluation,medication On or Off state,total electric energy delivered maintained or not with the change in frequency,and the location of active contacts could all potentially affect the results.This mini-review goes over the literature with the aforementioned factors in mind,focusing on the effect of LFS versus HFS on FOG and other axial symptoms in PD with bilateral STN DBS,in an effort to extract the essential data to guide our clinical management of axial symptoms and explore the potential underlying mechanisms as well.Overall,LFS of 60 Hz seems to be consistently effective in patients with FOG at the usual HFS in regards to improving FOG,speech,swallowing function and other axial symptoms,though LFS could reduce tremor control in some patients.Whether LFS simply addresses the axial symptoms in the context of HFS or has other beneficial effects requires further studies,along with the mechanism.
