MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407124553 · doi:10.1007/s00701-025-06430-w

Deep brain stimulation of the hypothalamic region: a systematic review

2025· review· en· W4407124553 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Mofatteh, Abdulkadir Mohamed, Mohammad Sadegh Mashayekhi, Georgios P. Skandalakis, Clemens Neudorfer, Saman Arfaie, ArunSundar MohanaSundaram, Mohammadmahdi Sabahi, Ayush Anand, Rabii Aboulhosn, Xuxing Liao, Andreas Horn, Keyoumars Ashkan

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Neurochirurgica · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityWestern UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeep brain stimulationMedicineNeurologyHeadachesCluster headacheDiseasePediatricsInternal medicineParkinson's diseasePsychiatryMigraine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been successfully used for the treatment of circuitopathies including movement, anxiety, and behavioral disorders. The hypothalamus is a crucial integration center for many peripheral and central pathways relating to cardiovascular, metabolic, and behavioral functions and constitutes a potential target for neuromodulation in treatment-refractory conditions. To conduct a systematic review, investigating hypothalamic targets in DBS, their indications, and the primary clinical findings. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched in accordance with the PRISMA guideline to identify papers published in English studying DBS of the hypothalamus in humans. RESULTS: After screening 3,148 papers, 34 studies consisting of 412 patients published over two decades were included in the final review. Hypothalamic DBS was indicated in refractory headaches (n = 238, 57.8%), aggressive behavior (n = 100, 24.3%), mild Alzheimer's disease (n = 58, 14.1%), trigeminal neuralgia in multiple sclerosis (n = 5, 1.2%), Prader-Willi syndrome (n = 4, 0.97%), and atypical facial pain (n = 3, 0.73%). The posterior hypothalamus was the most common DBS target site across 30 studies (88.2%). 262 (63.6%) participants were males, and 110 (26.7%) were females. 303 (73.5%) patients were adults whereas 33 (8.0%) were pediatrics. The lowest mean age of participants was 15.25 ± 4.6 years for chronic refractory aggressiveness, and the highest was 68.5 ± 7.9 years in Alzheimer's disease patients. The mean duration of the disease ranged from 2.2 ± 1.7 (mild Alzheimer's disease) to 19.8 ± 10.1 years (refractory headaches). 213 (51.7%) patients across 29 studies (85.3%) reported symptom improvements which ranged from 23.1% to 100%. 25 (73.5%) studies reported complications, most of which were associated with higher voltage stimulations. CONCLUSIONS: DBS of the hypothalamus is feasible in selected patients with various refractory conditions ranging from headaches to aggression in both pediatric and adult populations. Future large-scale studies with long-term follow-up are required to validate the safety and efficacy data and extend these findings.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.907

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa NeurochirurgicaSame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207