MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225407798 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2022.837023

Efficacy and Safety of Zolpidem for Focal Dystonia After Neurosurgical Treatments: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2022· article· en· W4225407798 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shiro Horisawa, Kotaro Kohara, Hiroki Ebise, Masahiko Nishitani, Takakazu Kawamata, Takaomi Taira

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsDystoniaBlepharospasmCervical dystoniaSpasmodic TorticollisZolpidemMedicineFocal dystoniaAnesthesiaMovement disordersSpasmodic dysphoniaRating scaleAdverse effectDeep brain stimulationBotulinum toxinPsychologyInternal medicinePsychiatryInsomniaParkinson's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although there are several reports of the significant efficacy of zolpidem for treating dystonia, zolpidem is still considered an anecdotal treatment. Here, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of zolpidem for treating residual dystonia in patients who previously received various neurosurgical treatments majorly including deep brain stimulation and radiofrequency ablation. We retrospectively reviewed medical records from January 2021 to September 2021 to identify patients with dystonia who had been prescribed zolpidem after undergoing neurosurgery. Twenty patients were enrolled in this study, including those with blepharospasm (two), tongue dystonia (four), mouth dystonia (one), spasmodic dysphonia (two), cervical dystonia (six), focal hand dystonia (three), hemidystonia (two), blepharospasm with cervical dystonia (one), and mouth dystonia with cervical dystonia (one). Single doses of zolpidem ranged between 2.5 and 10 mg, while daily dosages ranged from 10 to 30 mg. The zolpidem dose prescribed was 5–10 mg, with single and daily doses of 7 ± 2.9 and 14.5 ± 6.0 mg, respectively. With zolpidem administration, the participants' Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale-Movement Scale score significantly improved from 8.1 ± 6.7 to 3.7 ± 2.5 (50.6% improvement, p < 0.0001). Improvements in arm dystonia, blepharospasm, and spasmodic dysphonia were observed using the Arm Dystonia Disability Scale, Jankovic Rating Scale, and Voice Handicap Index, respectively. No improvements were observed in cervical dystonia on the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale. Drowsiness, including three cases each of mild and moderate drowsiness, was the most frequent adverse effect (30%), which persisted for 2–3 h. Transient amnesia and rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder occurred in two patients and one patient, respectively. Although our findings suggest that zolpidem can be a valuable treatment option for patients with residual dystonia after neurosurgical treatments, the beneficial effects for cervical dystonia were limited.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207