ArticleBrain sciences2020
Can We Put Aside Microelectrode Recordings in Deep Brain Stimulation Surgery?
Article in Brain sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intraoperative physiology augments atlas-based data in awake deep brain stimulation.Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2023Article
- The Network Systems Underlying Emotions: The Rational Foundation of Deep Brain Stimulation Psychosurgery.Brain sciences · 2023Review
- [Towards a positive physiological definition of the deep brain nuclei in humans].Revista de neurologia · 2022Article
- Past, Present, and Future of Deep Brain Stimulation: Hardware, Software, Imaging, Physiology and Novel Approaches.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Review
- The Accuracy of Imaging Guided Targeting with Microelectrode Recoding in Subthalamic Nucleus for Parkinson's Disease: A Single-Center Experience.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2022Article
- Neurophysiological Characterization of Posteromedial Hypothalamus in Anaesthetized Patients.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Features of Action Potentials from Identified Thalamic Nuclei in Anesthetized Patients.Brain sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microelectrode recording (MER) in deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery has long been a recognized and efficient method for defining a target. However, in recent decades, imaging techniques, including DBS surgery, have experienced significant growth. There is convincing evidence that imaging-guided surgery can be helpful for targeting anatomically well-defined nuclei (e.g., subthalamic nucleus (STN) or internal globus pallidus (GPi)), and reductions in secondary effects have also been claimed. It has even been proposed that MER is not necessary to perform DBS, identifying in this way asleep surgery and imaging-guided DBS. However, there are several reasons why this is not the case. Neurophysiological techniques can efficiently and safely help to identify neural structures even in sleeping patients (e.g., different types of evoked potentials or motor stimulation). Deep nuclei are not homogeneous structures (even STN), so it is important to identify different places inside the putative target. Evidently, this is more relevant in the case of thalamic or hypothalamic surgery. Moreover, it is important to remember that the clinical and scientific knowledge acquired during DBS surgery can be important to gain further insight into pathologies and develop more effective treatments. Finally, the cost/efficiency of medical technology should be considered.
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.