Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35721356›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2022

Current Steering Using Multiple Independent Current Control Deep Brain Stimulation Technology Results in Distinct Neurophysiological Responses in Parkinson's Disease Patients.

Jana Peeters, Alexandra Boogers, Tine Van Bogaert, Robin Gransier, Jan Wouters, Bart Nuttin, Myles Mc Laughlin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jana PeetersExperimental Oto-rhino-laryngology, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Alexandra BoogersExperimental Oto-rhino-laryngology, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Tine Van BogaertExperimental Oto-rhino-laryngology, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Robin GransierExperimental Oto-rhino-laryngology, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Jan WoutersExperimental Oto-rhino-laryngology, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Bart NuttinExperimental Neurosurgery and Neuroanatomy, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Myles Mc LaughlinExperimental Oto-rhino-laryngology, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
VIB-KU Leuven Center for Brain & Disease Research · BEUniversitair Ziekenhuis Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is an effective neuromodulation therapy to treat people with medication-refractory Parkinson's disease (PD). However, the neural networks affected by DBS are not yet fully understood. Recent studies show that stimulating on different DBS-contacts using a single current source results in distinct EEG-based evoked potentials (EPs), with a peak at 3 ms (P3) associated with dorsolateral subthalamic nucleus stimulation and a peak at 10 ms associated with substantia nigra stimulation. Multiple independent current control (MICC) technology allows the center of the electric field to be moved in between two adjacent DBS-contacts, offering a potential advantage in spatial precision. Objective: Determine if MICC precision targeting results in distinct neurophysiological responses recorded Materials and Methods: We recorded cortical EPs in five hemispheres (four PD patients) using EEG whilst employing MICC to move the electric field from the most dorsal DBS-contact to the most ventral in 15 incremental steps. Results: The center of the electric field location had a significant effect on both the P3 and P10 amplitude in all hemispheres where a peak was detected (P3, detected in 4 of 5 hemispheres, Conclusion: Using MICC to incrementally move the center of the electric field to locations between adjacent DBS-contacts resulted in significantly different neurophysiological responses that may allow further precision of the programming of individual patients.

Indexed as

deep brain stimulationelectroencephalographyevoked potentialsmovement disordersmultiple independent current controlParkinson’s disease

Identifiers

PMID35721356
PMCPMC9203070
OpenAlexW4281850910

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.