Home / Neuromodulation & Neuro-Implants / Deep Brain Stimulation Clinical Trial CRO
Deep brain stimulation · Class III active implantable · EU MDRDesign and execute DBS clinical investigations in Europe with integrated study strategy, specialist site feasibility, neurological endpoint planning, imaging workflows, ISO 14155 clinical operations, EDC, monitoring, biostatistics and long-term evidence generation. From endpoint strategy and implanting center feasibility through imaging, stimulation data, database lock, the clinical investigation report and PMCF.
Depending on contracted scope, a European DBS engagement produces:
These are five areas we address prospectively during protocol and study design development.
Depending on the indication, stimulation paradigm and endpoint, treatment effects or stimulation-related effects can compromise blinding. The protocol should therefore prospectively define who programs the device, who performs outcome assessments, how treatment allocation is protected and how potential unblinding is evaluated.
Where an endpoint depends on stimulation reaching an intended anatomical target, an effectiveness finding may be difficult to interpret independently from lead placement unless the protocol prospectively defines how placement will be verified and incorporated into the analysis. That means a protocol-defined anatomical target, imaging verification, adjudication where appropriate, and a rule for analysis-set handling.
Stimulation settings are clinician-set and revised over time. Without a defined titration window, permitted parameter space and reprogramming schedule, programming can behave as an uncontrolled co-intervention that varies between centers, and the record may not support what was actually delivered.
Rater-dependent clinical scales can introduce clinically meaningful inter-rater variability if qualification, assessment state, training and review are not standardized across centers. We define rater qualification, training and requalification where justified, medication and stimulation state at each assessment, and central review where appropriate.
DBS programs may involve long implant duration, evolving programming, disease or symptom progression depending on the indication, and device-specific battery, recharge or replacement considerations. The observation windows, handling of device replacement or therapy changes, and censoring rules should be prospectively defined according to the study objective.
Endpoint selection depends on the intended indication, the intended clinical benefit, the patient population, the clinical claim and the study design. We work backwards from the claim in the intended purpose to the assessment that can support it, then to the blinding structure that keeps that assessment credible, with the statistical strategy defined prospectively in the statistical analysis plan and aligned with Eclevar's medical device biostatistics services.
The indication, the target and the therapeutic hypothesis come from the sponsor and its investigators.
Where an endpoint depends on stimulation reaching an intended structure, placement verification is a data stream with its own plan rather than a surgical note.
Device and therapy data can be important exposure variables and covariates in a DBS investigation. If therapy parameters are recorded only as unstructured free text, they may be difficult to reconstruct consistently, incorporate into analysis and review during monitoring or audit.
Milo EDC can be configured around the device, therapy-parameter, imaging and outcome structure required by the program.
Depending on the device, procedure and indication, the safety dataset may need to distinguish:
Safety definitions, attribution rules and any required adjudication pathway should be prospectively defined before enrollment begins. Where MRI is expected during the investigation or follow-up, site procedures must reflect the device-specific MR safety and MR-conditional labeling and the protocol requirements. Vigilance and reporting flows are traceable from event to risk management file to post-market evaluation.
Classification. Active implantable devices and their accessories are Class III under MDR Annex VIII, Rule 8.
Conformity assessment. For Class III devices, applicable pathways under MDR Article 52 include the relevant Annex IX route or the alternative pathway provided by the Regulation, depending on the manufacturer's strategy. Class III implantable devices fall within the clinical evaluation consultation procedure under Article 54 where applicable, subject to Article 54(2).
Pre-market investigations. Clinical investigations generating evidence for conformity assessment may fall under Article 62 and Annex XV, which determines sponsor obligations, clinical investigation plan content and the submission route per member state.
Post-market investigations. For a CE-marked device investigated within its intended purpose, the applicable MDR pathway depends on the study design. Under Article 74(1), specific notification requirements apply where the investigation involves procedures additional to normal use that are invasive or burdensome. Where a CE-marked device is clinically investigated outside its intended purpose, Article 74(2) provides that Articles 62 to 81 apply.
Clinical evaluation. Article 61 and Annex XIV Part A, with attention to the limits of equivalence where performance depends on target, lead geometry and programming.
Post-market clinical follow-up. Annex XIV Part B, with MDCG 2020-7 and MDCG 2020-8 as guidance on plan and evaluation report content. The PMCF strategy should address safety and performance across the expected device lifetime, using appropriately justified methods, follow-up periods and complementary data sources, which may combine PMCF investigations, registries, long-term follow-up, literature and post-market surveillance inputs.
Standards. ISO 14155:2026, Clinical investigation of medical devices for human subjects, Good clinical practice. ISO 14708-3:2017, Implants for surgery, Active implantable medical devices, Part 3: Implantable neurostimulators.
No statement on this page anticipates a Notified Body position or an assessment outcome.
Small, closely monitored, aimed at initial safety and performance in a defined population. Early Feasibility Study, or EFS, is FDA terminology, and sponsors planning a US route should ask for that content.
Designed to generate confirmatory evidence supporting the intended clinical purpose and claims, with statistical power determined by the applicable study design.
A prospective post-market evidence activity designed to confirm safety or performance, address residual uncertainties, identify emerging risks or answer other defined clinical-evidence questions.
Structured real-world and longitudinal clinical data across routine practice settings, where a medical device registry is appropriate to the question.
Sponsorship, ethics and data ownership settled before the first site opens.
DBS feasibility is center and indication specific. Relevant programs typically require functional neurosurgery capability together with the specialty pathway appropriate to the intended indication, which may involve movement disorder neurology, epilepsy, psychiatry or other expertise. Center structures differ, so qualification is assessed center by center rather than assumed by country.
Assessed against procedure activity in the target indication.
Including the imaging and planning workflow the protocol assumes.
Availability of an assessing team independent from treatment delivery, where required by the study's blinding or endpoint-assessment design.
Capacity to complete protocol-defined rater qualification and training, where required.
Acquisition capability and a transfer path that supports the verification protocol.
Ethics and contracting lead time in that jurisdiction.
Eclevar supports multicountry DBS clinical investigations across European markets using program-specific site feasibility and clinical-operations coverage. Country and center selection is driven by indication-specific patient access, functional-neurosurgery capability, research capacity and the applicable regulatory pathway.
Eclevar leads clinical evidence strategy, European study delivery, biometrics and regulatory integration. Indication-specific medical oversight is defined according to program needs and may involve sponsor investigators and appropriately qualified independent neurology or functional-neurosurgery specialists.
Chief Operating Officer
Former Notified Body reviewer at TÜV SÜD. Contribution to a DBS program: clinical and regulatory evidence architecture. Notified Body experience is professional background and is stated separately from any medical qualification. Former positions are stated for biographical context only, and Eclevar is independent and not affiliated with or endorsed by that organization.
Chief Clinical Operations & Strategy Officer
Contribution to a DBS program: European study execution, site activation, monitoring and cross-functional clinical operations.
Chief Data Officer · Head of Biometry
Contribution to a DBS program: device-parameter and imaging data architecture, clinical data management and biostatistics.
An indication-specific neurologist or functional neurosurgeon is named on a program only when formally appointed and verified for that program. See the leadership team.
The capabilities below are the ones that transfer to a DBS program. No client is named, no program is described, and no DBS-specific delivery is claimed on this page.
Related work across neuromodulation and neuro-implants is described on the therapeutic area page. Evidence is intended to support EU MDR clinical evaluation and PMCF activities.
DBS investigations can introduce additional considerations beyond generic medical-device trial delivery, including blinding where relevant, lead-placement verification, therapy-parameter control, rater-dependent assessments, imaging, and long-term device data where relevant.
Yes. Eclevar can support the program from clinical strategy, CIP and SAP through European site feasibility, regulatory and ethics start-up, monitoring, EDC, biostatistics, database lock and the clinical investigation report, according to contracted scope. Indication-specific medical oversight is defined according to program needs and may involve sponsor investigators and appropriately qualified independent neurology or functional-neurosurgery specialists.
It follows from the intended indication, the intended clinical benefit, the population, the clinical claim and the study design, then from what can be assessed credibly under the study's assessment and blinding strategy, where blinding is used, in a defined medication and stimulation state, at a defined interval from the last programming change.
Where the endpoint depends on it: a pre-specified imaging protocol, protocol-defined verification and image-registration methods standardized across sites with permitted technical variants defined in advance, an adjudication charter, and a pre-agreed rule for analysis sets when placement falls outside the intended target.
The strategy should address safety and performance across the expected device lifetime using justified methods, follow-up periods and complementary data sources, which may combine PMCF investigations, registries, long-term follow-up, literature and post-market surveillance inputs.
Eclevar supports multicountry DBS clinical investigations across European markets. Country and center selection is driven by indication-specific patient access, functional-neurosurgery capability, research capacity and the applicable regulatory pathway, rather than by country coverage alone.
Send us the draft protocol and we can review areas that may create clinical-evidence, operational or data-interpretability risk before the study is locked.
