Prospective randomized 1-year follow-up comparison of bilateral subthalamotomy versus bilateral subthalamic stimulation and the combination of both in Parkinson's disease patients: a pilot study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been suggested that potential risk of hemiballismus after subthalamotomy makes DBS preferable to ablation for IPD treatment; however, cost and the need for regular electrode control have also been observed as disadvantages to stimulation. The objective was to compare efficacy and safety of different surgical approaches to STN, in a prospective randomized pilot study. Sixteen consecutive IPD patients randomized to receive either: bilateral STN-DBS, bilateral subthalamotomy or unilateral subthalamotomy plus contralateral STN-DBS implantation, and followed for 12 months after surgery. One patient died and was excluded from the analysis. Total and motor UPDRS scores, as well as drug-induced dyskinesias improved significantly at 1 year follow-up, regardless of the procedure administered and without statistically significant differences between treatment modalities. Discrete changes were observed on ACE and MMSE scores. Psychiatric examination of patients subjected to bilateral stimulation and lesion, revealed slight increment in apathy and irritability scores, coinciding with significant deterioration of mentation, behaviour and mood as measured using the UPDRS. One patient presented persistent hemiballismus and required ulterior posteroventral pallidotomy. In this small group of patients, overall motor performance significantly improved after all three procedures, without major differences in outcome. Adverse events were, nevertheless, observed after both ablation and stimulation. The role of bilateral subthalamotomy in patients unable to receive a DBS electrode-implant merits further exploration in a larger series of patients with longer follow-up.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it