SynthesisNeurosurgical review2022
A systematic review of Twiddler's syndrome: a hardware-related complication of deep brain stimulation.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep brain stimulation for chorea-acanthocytosis: a systematic review.Neurosurgical review · 2022Pooled it
- Charging failure due to pulse generator rotation after deep brain stimulation: a case report.Oxford medical case reports · 2026Article
- Impedance Problems and Their Causes-A Single-Center Analysis of 601 Patients with De Novo Deep Brain Stimulation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Silent Twiddler syndrome despite dual-anchor fixation in deep brain stimulation: two case reports.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Asymptomatic cable twisting in a patient with impending Twiddler syndrome detected during deep brain stimulation surgery for Parkinson's disease: A case report.Surgical neurology international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Twiddler's syndrome (TS) is a hardware-related complication of deep brain stimulation which has not been well documented and is probably underreported. The objective of this study is to comprehensively describe TS by systematically reviewing the related literature. The methods include selecting the eligible studies based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data about studies and TS were collected. A descriptive statistical analysis of the extracted data was performed. We found 18 eligible studies describing 23 patients with TS. The mean age of the 23 patients was 61.4 ± 15.9 years (range, 16-79 years.). The percentage of TS in the female population was 91.3% (females: 21/23). The incidence of postoperative TS was 1.4% (6 out of 437) per patient and 1.1% (8 out of 709) per extension wire. The mean time to clinical presentation was 9.9 ± 10.3 months (range, 0.5-36 months). Nineteen of the twenty-three patients presented with a rebound of previous symptoms. Twelve of the twenty-three patients had high impedance at the postoperative checkup of the DBS system. A plain X-ray indicated twisted extension wires in almost all these patients. All patients meeting the definition of postoperative device-related TS underwent revision surgery. TS is more prevalent in females. Based on the typical clinical symptoms (rebound of the previous symptoms, high impedance, and X-ray demonstration), the differential diagnosis can often be straightforward. TS should thus be taken into consideration when attempting to explain or rule out hardware malfunction. The timely recognition and proper revision of TS can prevent further serious damage.
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.