SynthesisNeurosurgical review2023
Spinal cord stimulation and deep brain stimulation for disorders of consciousness: a systematic review and individual patient data analysis of 608 cases.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of device-based neuromodulation on the motor recovery of patients with spinal cord injury.Spinal cord · 2025Pooled it
- Dynamic Global and Local Enhancement of Theta-Band Functional Networks as Neural Markers of Spinal Cord Stimulation Efficacy in Disorders of Consciousness.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026Article
- Transnasal Ventral Brainstem Epidural Electrical Stimulation Enhances Consciousness in Anesthetized Sheep: A Feasibility Study.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026Article
- Article
- Long-term outcomes and age-dependent recovery trajectories following short-term spinal cord stimulation in patients with disorders of consciousness.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Graph-Theoretical Signature from Neural and Vascular Signals Reveals Spinal Cord Stimulation Frequency-Specific Brain Network in Disorders of Consciousness Patients.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Advances in understanding and treating disorders of consciousness caused by brainstem injury.Chinese neurosurgical journal · 2025Review
- Electroencephalogram prediction of propofol effects on neuromodulation in disorders of consciousness.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Spinal Cord Stimulation for Prolonged Disorders of Consciousness: A Study on Scalp Electroencephalography.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2024Article
- Clinical Outcome After Epidural Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.Cureus · 2024Article
- Anatomical-related factors and outcome of percutaneous short-term spinal cord stimulation electrode shift in patients with disorders of consciousness: a retrospective study.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The application of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) for disorders of consciousness (DoC) has been increasingly reported. However, there is no sufficient evidence to determine how effective and safe SCS and DBS are for DoC owing to various methodological limitations. We conducted a systematic review to elucidate the safety and efficacy of SCS and DBS for DoC by systematically reviewing related literature by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library. Twenty eligible studies with 608 patients were included in this study. Ten studies with 508 patients reported the efficacy of SCS for DoC, and the estimated overall effectiveness rate was 37%. Five studies with 343 patients reported the efficacy of SCS for VS, and the estimated effectiveness rate was 30%. Three studies with 53 patients reported the efficacy of SCS for MCS, and the estimated effectiveness rate was 63%. Five studies with 92 patients reported the efficacy of DBS for DoC, and the estimated overall effectiveness rate was 40%. Four studies with 63 patients reported the efficacy of DBS for VS, and the estimated effectiveness rate was 26%. Three studies with 19 patients reported the efficacy of DBS for MCS, and the estimated effectiveness rate was 74%. The adverse event rate of DoC was 8.1% and 18.2% after SCS and DBS, respectively. These results suggest that SCS and DBS can be considered reasonable treatments for DoC with considerable efficacy and safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37578633What 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.