Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34866345›Full record

SynthesisCNS neuroscience & therapeutics2022

Loss of long-term benefit from VIM-DBS in essential tremor: A secondary analysis of repeated measurements.

Yutong Bai, Zixiao Yin, Yu Diao, Tianqi Hu, Anchao Yang, Fangang Meng, Jianguo Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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.

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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Natural disease progression vs. DBS-related worsening in essential tremor.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yutong BaiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Zixiao YinDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yu DiaoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Tianqi HuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Anchao YangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Fangang MengDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Jianguo ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0009-0574
Capital Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsDeep brain stimulation (DBS) in the ventral intermediate nucleus (Vim-DBS) is the preferred surgical therapy for essential tremor (ET). Tolerance and disease progression are considered to be the two main reasons underlying the loss of long-term efficacy of Vim-DBS. This study aimed to explore whether Vim-DBS shows long-term loss of efficacy and to evaluate the reasons for this diminished efficacy from different aspects.

methodsIn a repeated-measures meta-analysis of 533 patients from 18 studies, Vim-DBS efficacy was evaluated at ≤6 months, 7-12 months, 1-3 years, and ≥4 years. The primary outcomes were the score changes in different components of the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor Rating Scale (TRS; total score, motor score, hand-function score, and activities of daily living [ADL] score). Secondary outcomes were the long-term predictive factors.

resultsThe TRS total, motor, and ADL scores showed significant deterioration with disease progression (p = 0.002, p = 0.047, and p < 0.001, respectively), while the TRS total (p < 0.001), hand-function (p = 0.036), and ADL (p = 0.004) scores indicated a significant long-term reduction in DBS efficacy, although the motor subscore indicated no loss of efficacy. Hand-function (p < 0.001) and ADL (p = 0.028) scores indicated DBS tolerance, while the TRS total and motor scores did not. Stimulation frequency and preoperative score were predictive factors for long-term results.

conclusionThis study provides level 3a evidence that long-term Vim-DBS is effective in controlling motor symptoms without waning benefits. The efficacy reduction for hand function was caused by DBS tolerance, while that for ADL was caused by DBS tolerance and disease progression. More attention should be given to actual functional recovery rather than changes in motor scores in patients with ET.

Indexed as

Deep Brain StimulationOutcome Assessment, Health CareVentral Thalamic NucleiEssential TremorHumansTime Factorsdeep brain stimulationessential tremorlong-term effectsmeta-analysispredictive factorsventral intermediate nucleus

Identifiers

PMID34866345
PMCPMC8739044
OpenAlexW4200342102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.