Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32299006›Full record

ArticleClinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology2020

Latency of subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation-evoked cortical activity as a potential biomarker for postoperative motor side effects.

Zachary T Irwin, Mohammad Z Awad, Christopher L Gonzalez, Arie Nakhmani, J Nicole Bentley, Thomas A Moore, Kenneth G Smithson, Barton L Guthrie, Harrison C Walker

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Dysfunction of motor cortices in Parkinson's disease.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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.

Zachary T IrwinDepartment of Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. Electronic address: irwinz@uab.edu.
Mohammad Z AwadDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Christopher L GonzalezDepartment of Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Arie NakhmaniDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
J Nicole BentleyDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Thomas A MooreDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Kenneth G SmithsonDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Barton L GuthrieDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Harrison C WalkerDepartment of Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.

Funding

Noninvasive Biomarkers to Advance Emerging DBS Electrode Technologies in Parkinson's DiseaseUH3NS100553 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI WALKER, HARRISON CARROLL · 2016 to 2021
$7.3M
NINDS NIH HHS UH3 NS100553
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveHere, we investigate whether cortical activation predicts motor side effects of deep brain stimulation (DBS) and whether these potential biomarkers have utility under general anesthesia.

methodsWe recorded scalp potentials elicited by DBS during surgery (n = 11), both awake and under general anesthesia, and in an independent ambulatory cohort (n = 8). Across a range of stimulus configurations, we measured the amplitude and timing of short- and long-latency response components and linked them to motor side effects.

resultsRegardless of anesthesia state, in both cohorts, DBS settings with capsular side effects elicited early responses with peak latencies clustering at <1 ms. This early response was preserved under anesthesia in all participants (11/11). In contrast, the long-latency components were suppressed completely in 6/11 participants. Finally, the latency of the earliest response could predict the presence of postoperative motor side effects both awake and under general anesthesia (84.8% and 75.8% accuracy, awake and under anesthesia, respectively).

conclusionDBS elicits short-latency cortical activation, both awake and under general anesthesia, which appears to reveal interactions between the stimulus and the corticospinal tract. SIGNIFICANCE: Short-latency evoked cortical activity can potentially be used to aid both DBS lead placement and post-operative programming.

Indexed as

Deep Brain StimulationAgedBiomarkersElectroencephalographyElectromyographyEvoked PotentialsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotor CortexMuscle, SkeletalParkinson DiseasePostoperative ComplicationsSubthalamic NucleusTime FactorsBiomarkersAnesthesiaBiomarkerDeep brain stimulationEvoked potentials

Identifiers

PMID32299006
PMCPMC7214089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.