Postoperative MRI localisation of electrodes and clinical efficacy of pallidal deep brain stimulation in cervical dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Pallidal deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been shown to be effective in cervical dystonia (CD) with an improvement of about 50-60% in the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating (TWSTR) Scale. However, predictive factors for the efficacy of DBS in CD are missing with the anatomical location of the electrodes being one of the most important potential predictive factors. METHODS: In the present blinded observational study we correlated the anatomical localisation of DBS contacts with the relative clinical improvement (CI %) in the TWSTR as achieved by DBS at different pallidal contacts in 20 patients with CD. Localisations of DBS contacts were derived from postoperative MRI-data following anatomical normalisation into the standard Montreal Neurological Institute stereotactic space. The CIs following 76 bilateral test stimulations of 24 h were mapped to stereotactic coordinates of the corresponding bilateral 152 active contacts and were allocated to low CI (<30%; n=74), intermediate CI (≥30%; <60%; n=52) or high CI (≥60%; n=26). RESULTS: Euclidean distances between contacts and the centroid differed between the three clusters (p<0.001) indicating different anatomical variances between clusters. The Euclidean distances between contacts and the centroid of the cluster with high CIs correlated with the individual level of CIs (r=-0.61; p<0.0001). This relationship was best fitted with an exponential regression curve (r(2)=0.41). DISCUSSION: Our data show that the clinical effect of pallidal DBS on CD displays an exponential decay over anatomical distance from an optimised target localisation within a subregion of the internal pallidum. The results will allow a comparison of future DBS studies with postoperative MRI by verifying optimised (for instance pallidal) targeting in DBS-treated patients.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".