Operative techniques and morbidity with subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation in 100 consecutive patients with advanced Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Subthalamic nucleus (STN) stimulation for patients with medically refractory Parkinson disease (PD) is expanding. Reported experience has provided some indication of techniques, efficacy, and morbidity, but few centres have reported more than 50 patients. To expand this knowledge, we reviewed our experience with a large series of consecutive patients. METHODS: From March 1999 to September 2003, 191 subthalamic stimulator devices (19 unilateral) were implanted in 100 patients with PD at New York Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center. Sixteen patients had undergone a prior surgery for PD (pallidotomy, thalamotomy, or fetal transplant). Microelectrode guided implantations were performed using techniques similar to those described previously. Electrode implantation occurred 1-2 weeks before outpatient pulse generator implantation. RESULTS: Reductions of dyskinesias and off severity/duration were similar to prior published reports. Morbidity included: 7 device infections (3.7%), 1 cerebral infarct, 1 intracerebral haematoma, 1 subdural haematoma, 1 air embolism, 2 wound haematomas requiring drainage (1.0%), 2 skin erosions over implanted hardware (1.0%), 3 periprocedural seizures (1.6%), 6 brain electrode revisions (3.1%), postoperative confusion in 13 patients (6.8%), and 16 battery failures (8.4%). Of the 100 patients, there were no surgical deaths or permanent new neurological deficits. The average hospital stay for all 100 patients was 3.1 days. CONCLUSION: Subthalamic stimulator implantation in a large consecutive series of patients with PD produced significant clinical improvement without mortality or major neurological morbidity. Morbidity primarily involved device infections and hardware/wound revisions.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".