Trial results for a study comparing Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation (aDBS) to continuous Deep Brain Stimulation (cDBS) in Parkinson's Disease were posted on ClinicalTrials.gov on 2026-03-19. The study showed that in one comparison, aDBS had a mean Total Electrical Energy Delivered (TEED) of 109.7 μWatts compared to 116.8 μWatts for cDBS.
Background
Parkinson's Disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder affecting movement. Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) is an established surgical treatment option for individuals with advanced Parkinson's disease who no longer respond adequately to medication. Standard continuous DBS (cDBS) delivers constant electrical stimulation to specific brain areas. Adaptive DBS (aDBS) is an evolving approach that aims to deliver stimulation only when needed, potentially optimizing energy delivery and improving therapeutic outcomes. This study sought to compare aDBS with cDBS, specifically evaluating its impact on Total Electrical Energy Delivered (TEED).
Trial design
This completed study, identified as Phase NA, enrolled 25 participants with Parkinson Disease. The trial was designed as a prospective, randomized, single-blind, crossover, multicenter study. Its primary purpose was to evaluate the efficacy of adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation (aDBS), using preferred modes (single or dual threshold), against standard continuous Deep Brain Stimulation (cDBS) in decreasing Total Electrical Energy Delivered (TEED).
Key results
The trial results compared Total Electrical Energy Delivered (TEED) and the mean percent time within an optimal beta LFP threshold between aDBS and cDBS:
- For the outcome "Total Electrical Energy Delivered (TEED) During Adaptive (aDBS) as Compared to Continuous DBS (cDBS)", the mean for the aDBS group was 109.7 μWatts (Standard Deviation: 69.16), while the mean for the cDBS group was 116.8 μWatts (Standard Deviation: 55.36).
- In a separate measurement for the same outcome, the mean for the aDBS group was 119.6 μWatts (Standard Deviation: 52.05), and the mean for the cDBS group was 119.7 μWatts (Standard Deviation: 75.78).
- For the outcome "The Mean Percent Time Within an Optimal Beta LFP Threshold of Beta LFP Power During aDBS Mode Compared to cDBS", the mean for the aDBS group was 36.3 percentage of time (Standard Deviation: 21.76), and for the cDBS group, it was 34.4 percentage of time (Standard Deviation: 23.53).
What this means
The posted results offer insights into the performance of adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation compared to continuous Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease. While one comparison showed a reduction in mean Total Electrical Energy Delivered (TEED) for aDBS (109.7 μWatts vs 116.8 μWatts for cDBS), another measurement indicated very similar TEED values between the two approaches (119.6 μWatts for aDBS vs 119.7 μWatts for cDBS). Additionally, aDBS demonstrated a slightly higher mean percentage of time within an optimal beta LFP threshold (36.3% vs 34.4% for cDBS). These findings suggest that aDBS has the potential to optimize energy delivery in some contexts and may offer improved physiological control, which could have implications for battery life and patient outcomes, though further analysis of clinical significance would be needed.
Source
The information regarding these trial results was obtained from ClinicalTrials.gov, a public database of clinical studies. The results for the study NCT07106242, titled "Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation (aDBS) Study (Early Adapter) Part II", were posted on 2026-03-19 on clinicaltrials.gov.