Clinical Outcome of Subthalamic Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease is Improved by Intraoperative Multiple Trajectories Microelectrode Recording
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The use of multiple trajectories microelectrode recording (MER) during implantation of deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrodes into the subthalamic nucleus (STN) in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) is discussed controversially because of possible risks and unclear benefits. The aim of the study is to investigate whether MER combined with intraoperative evaluation of stimulation effects improve clinical outcome in PD patients undergoing STN DBS surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prior to final DBS electrode implantation, we performed multiple trajectories MER and intraoperative test stimulations after magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided planning in 32 PD patients. In further 10 patients no MER (only intraoperative test stimulation) was used. RESULTS: We found a significantly better clinical outcome (Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale [UPDRS] III) in patients undergoing MER compared with non-MER patients. In MER patients, DBS electrode placement was performed using the central trajectory in 73%. Another than the central trajectory was taken in 27% of the patients. No difference in clinical outcome between DBS electrodes implanted on the central or a decentral trajectory was observed. CONCLUSIONS: DBS surgery based on intraoperative multiple trajectories MER and test stimulation improves clinical outcome if compared with intraoperative test stimulation alone. The data suggest that DBS surgery solely based on MRI and intraoperative test stimulation without MER may lead to nonoptimal placement of DBS electrodes and consequently poorer clinical outcome.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".