MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596106690 · doi:10.3171/2016.10.jns161025

The effect of unilateral thalamic deep brain stimulation on the vocal dysfunction in a patient with spasmodic dysphonia: interrogating cerebellar and pallidal neural circuits

2017· article· en· W2596106690 on OpenAlexafffund
Anujan Poologaindran, Zurab Ivanishvili, Murray Morrison, Linda Rammage, Mini K. Sandhu, Nancy E. Polyhronopoulos, Christopher R. Honey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of neurosurgery · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver General Hospital
FundersRare Disease FoundationBC Children's HospitalChildren's Hospital Foundation
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationMedicineSpasmodic dysphoniaDystoniaEssential tremorThalamusStimulationNeurological disorderAudiologyBotulinum toxinAnesthesiaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationCentral nervous system diseaseSurgeryParkinson's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spasmodic dysphonia (SD) is a neurological disorder of the voice where a patient's ability to speak is compromised due to involuntary contractions of the intrinsic laryngeal muscles. Since the 1980s, SD has been treated with botulinum toxin A (BTX) injections into the throat. This therapy is limited by the delayed-onset of benefits, wearing-off effects, and repeated injections required every 3 months. In a patient with essential tremor (ET) and coincident SD, the authors set out to quantify the effects of thalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) on vocal function while investigating the underlying motor thalamic circuitry. A 79-year-old right-handed woman with ET and coincident adductor SD was referred to our neurosurgical team. While primarily treating her limb tremor, the authors studied the effects of unilateral, thalamic DBS on vocal function using the Unified Spasmodic Dysphonia Rating Scale (USDRS) and voice-related quality of life (VRQOL). Since dystonia is increasingly being considered a multinodal network disorder, an anterior trajectory into the left thalamus was deliberately chosen such that the proximal contacts of the electrode were in the ventral oralis anterior (Voa) nucleus (pallidal outflow) and the distal contacts were in the ventral intermediate (Vim) nucleus (cerebellar outflow). In addition to assessing on/off unilateral thalamic Vim stimulation on voice, the authors experimentally assessed low-voltage unilateral Vim, Voa, or multitarget stimulation in a prospective, randomized, doubled-blinded manner. The evaluators were experienced at rating SD and were familiar with the vocal tremor of ET. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to study the pre- and posttreatment effect of DBS on voice. Unilateral left thalamic Vim stimulation (DBS on) significantly improved SD vocal dysfunction compared with no stimulation (DBS off), as measured by the USDRS (p < 0.01) and VRQOL (p < 0.01). In the experimental interrogation, both low-voltage Vim (p < 0.01) and multitarget Vim + Voa (p < 0.01) stimulation were significantly superior to low-voltage Voa stimulation. For the first time, the effects of high-frequency stimulation of different neural circuits in SD have been quantified. Unexpectedly, focused Voa (pallidal outflow) stimulation was inferior to Vim (cerebellar outflow) stimulation despite the classification of SD as a dystonia. While only a single case, scattered reports exist on the positive effects of thalamic DBS on dysphonia. A Phase 1 pilot trial (DEBUSSY; clinical trial no. NCT02558634, clinicaltrials.gov) is underway at the authors' center to evaluate the safety and preliminary efficacy of DBS in SD. The authors hope that this current report stimulates neurosurgeons to investigate this new indication for DBS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of neurosurgerySame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207