Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a well accepted treatment modality for many movement disorders such as Parkinson's disease and an increasing number of other functional neurological disorders like dystonias and epilepsy. This review will highlight the recent developments in our knowledge regarding the effects of anesthetic agents on neurophysiologic recording and anesthetic management of patients undergoing the insertion of a DBS. RECENT FINDINGS: There are new indications for DBS as well as new therapeutic target nuclei that are being examined. Better surgical technique and new imaging techniques like frameless stereotaxy are likely to improve patient tolerance of these procedures. The effects of anesthetic drugs on nuclei microelectrode recording and the need for an awake and cooperative patient for intraoperative macrostimulation testing continue to be the challenge for the anesthesiologist. Intracranial hemorrhage, seizures, and venous air embolism are the important perioperative complications needing urgent care. There are reports of increased incidence of postoperative behavioral and cognitive problems after DBS insertion. SUMMARY: There will continue to be an increase in the use of DBS for many neurological and functional disorders, especially in the aging baby boomer population. Anesthetic technique will vary depending on the prevalent practice in individual institutions and requirements of the specific surgical procedure.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 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".