SynthesisBMC neurology2019
Motor cortex stimulation: a systematic literature-based analysis of effectiveness and case series experience.
Synthesis in BMC neurology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Opioid- and NMDA-receptor-dependent neural plasticity mediates long-term analgesia from motor cortical stimulation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- [Central invasive neuromodulation for the treatment of chronic pain : Epidural motor cortex stimulation and deep brain stimulation].Schmerz (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Review
- Electromagnetic neuromodulation for chronic pain: historical context, contemporary modalities, and evidence gaps.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Pathophysiology and Management of Refractory Trigeminal Neuralgia.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024Review
- Graph theory analysis reveals an assortative pain network vulnerable to attacks.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Application of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Neuropathic Pain: A Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The Concept, Development, and Application of a Home-Based High-Definition tDCS for Bilateral Motor Cortex Modulation in Migraine and Pain.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Article
- MRI-Compatible and Conformal Electrocorticography Grids for Translational Research.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2021Article
- Case Study: Mapping Evoked Fields in Primary Motor and Sensory AreasFrontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Supraspinal Mechanisms Underlying Ocular Pain.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
- The Cerebral Localization of Pain: Anatomical and Functional Considerations for Targeted Electrical Therapies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Updates in the Treatment of Post-Stroke Pain.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2019Review
- Article
- Neuromodulation approaches and applications in the management of post-stroke pain: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAim to quantitatively analyze the clinical effectiveness for motor cortex stimulation (MCS) to refractory pain.
methodsThe literatures were systematically searched in database of Cocharane library, Embase and PubMed, using relevant strategies. Data were extracted from eligible articles and pooled as mean with standard deviation (SD). Comparative analysis was measured by non-parametric t test and linear regression model.
resultsThe pooled effect estimate from 12 trials (n = 198) elucidated that MCS shown the positive effect on refractory pain, and the total percentage improvement was 35.2% in post-stroke pain and 46.5% in trigeminal neuropathic pain. There is no statistical differences between stroke involved thalamus or non-thalamus. The improvement of plexus avulsion (29.8%) and phantom pain (34.1%) was similar. The highest improvement rate was seen in post-radicular plexopathy (65.1%) and MCS may aggravate the pain induced by spinal cord injury, confirmed by small sample size. Concurrently, Both the duration of disease (r = 0.233, p = 0.019*) and the time of follow-up (r = 0.196, p = 0.016*) had small predicative value, while age (p = 0.125) had no correlation to post-operative pain relief.
conclusionsMCS is conducive to the patients with refractory pain. The duration of disease and the time of follow-up can be regarded as predictive factor. Meanwhile, further studies are needed to reveal the mechanism of MCS and to reevaluate the cost-benefit aspect with better-designed clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.