Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30987170›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2019

High Cervical Spinal Cord Stimulation: A One Year Follow-Up Study on Motor and Non-Motor Functions in Parkinson's Disease.

Paolo Mazzone, Fabio Viselli, Stefano Ferraina, Margherita Giamundo, Massimo Marano, Marco Paoloni, Francesco Masedu, Annamaria Capozzo, Eugenio Scarnati

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05148468 (Effects of Spinal Cord Stimulation on Gait in Patients With Parkinson´s Disease; a Randomized, Crossover, Double Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05148468 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Spinal Cord Stimulation on Gait in Patients With Parkinson´s Disease; a Randomized, Crossover, Double Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Sao Paulo General HospitalRan2021 to 2024Enrolled8ConditionsParkinson Disease, Gait Disorders, NeurologicArmsActive spinal cord stimulation, Sham spinal cord stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Clinical neurophysiology in the treatment of movement disorders: IFCN handbook chapter.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Freezing of Gait in Parkinson's Disease: Invasive and Noninvasive Neuromodulation.Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2021
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Paolo MazzoneFunctional Neurosurgery and DBS, Centro Chirurgico Toscano, 52100 Arezzo, Italy. stereomaz@libero.it.
Fabio ViselliDepartment of Neurology, St John the Baptist Hospital, ACISMOM, 00148 Rome, Italy. f.viselli@acismom.it.
Stefano FerrainaDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology "Vittorio Erspamer" University of Rome La Sapienza, 00185 Rome, Italy. stefano.ferraina@uniroma1.it.ORCID 0000-0001-6100-2438
Margherita GiamundoDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology "Vittorio Erspamer" University of Rome La Sapienza, 00185 Rome, Italy. margherita.giamundo@uniroma1.it.
Massimo MaranoUnit of Neurology, Neurophysiology and Neurobiology, Department of Medicine, Campus Bio-Medico University, 00128 Rome, Italy. m.marano@unicampus.it.
Marco PaoloniDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Rome La Sapienza, 00185 Rome, Italy. marco.paoloni@uniroma1.it.ORCID 0000-0002-0947-9711
Francesco MaseduDepartment of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences (DISCAB), University of L'Aquila, 67100 L'Aquila, Italy. Francesco.Masedu@univaq.it.ORCID 0000-0003-0290-5324
Annamaria CapozzoDepartment of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences (DISCAB), University of L'Aquila, 67100 L'Aquila, Italy. capozzo@univaq.it.
Eugenio ScarnatiDepartment of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences (DISCAB), University of L'Aquila, 67100 L'Aquila, Italy. scarnati@univaq.it.ORCID 0000-0002-8960-3689
University of L'Aquila · ITSapienza University of Rome · ITUniversità Campus Bio-Medico · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe present study investigated the effectiveness of stimulation applied at cervical levels on pain and Parkinson's disease (PD) symptoms using either tonic or burst stimulation mode.

methodsTonic high cervical spinal cord stimulation (T-HCSCS) was applied on six PD patients suffering from low back pain and failed back surgery syndrome, while burst HCSCS (B-HCSCS) was applied in twelve PD patients to treat primarily motor deficits. Stimulation was applied percutaneously with quadripolar or octapolar electrodes. Clinical evaluation was assessed by the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) and the Hoehn and Yahr (H&Y) scale. Pain was evaluated by a visual analog scale. Evaluations of gait and of performance in a cognitive motor task were performed in some patients subjected to B-HCSCS. One patient who also suffered from severe autonomic cardiovascular dysfunction was investigated to evaluate the effectiveness of B-HCSCS on autonomic functions.

resultsB-HCSCS was more effective and had more consistent effects than T-HCSCS in reducing pain. In addition, B-HCSCS improved UPDRS scores, including motor sub-items and tremor and H&Y score. Motor benefits appeared quickly after the beginning of B-HCSCS, in contrast to long latency improvements induced by T-HCSCS. A slight decrease of effectiveness was observed 12 months after implantation. B-HCSCS also improved gait and ability of patients to correctly perform a cognitive-motor task requiring inhibition of a prepared movement. Finally, B-HCSCS ameliorated autonomic control in the investigated patient.

conclusionsThe results support a better usefulness of B-HCSCS compared to T-HCSCS in controlling pain and specific aspects of PD motor and non-motor deficits for at least one year.

Indexed as

burst stimulationcervical spinal cord stimulationgaitParkinson’s diseasereaction timetonic stimulationValsava maneuver

Identifiers

PMID30987170
PMCPMC6523357
OpenAlexW2929132096

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.