ArticleHeliyon2024
Pallidal versus subthalamic deep brain stimulation for Meige syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reviving Hope: Overcoming Deep Brain Stimulation Failure With Partial Cranial Nerve Radiofrequency Ablation in Primary Meige Syndrome.Brain and behavior · 2026Article
- Putaminal-cortical circuits predict response of bilateral deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in the primary Meige syndrome after 5 years.Brain communications · 2025Article
- Deep brain stimulation for Meige syndrome.Surgical neurology international · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Dilemma: Unraveling Meige Disorder Mistaken for Functional Neurological Disorder.Cureus · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Globus pallidus internus (GPi) and subthalamic nucleus (STN) are two common deep brain stimulation (DBS) targets. This meta-analysis was to compared the efficacy and safety of these two DBS targets for the treatment of Meige syndrome (MS). Methods: A systematic search was performed using EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify DBS trials for MS. Review Manager 5.3 was used to perform meta-analysis and the mean difference (MD) was analyzed and calculated with a random effect model. Pearson's correlation coefficients and meta-regression analyses were utilized to identify relevant predictive markers. Results: Twenty trials involving 188 participants with GPi-DBS and 110 individuals with STN-DBS were eligible. Both groups showed improvement of the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia Rating Scale-Movement (BFMDRS-M) and Disability (BFMDRS-D) scores (BFMDRS-M: MD = 10.57 [7.74-13.41] for GPi-DBS, and MD = 8.59 [4.08-13.11] for STN-DBS; BFMDRS-D: MD = 5.96 [3.15-8.77] for GPi-DBS, and MD = 4.71 [1.38-8.04] for STN-DBS; all Conclusion: Both GPi-DBS and STN-DBS are effective MS therapies, with no differences in efficacy or the frequency of stimulation-related problems. Higher preoperative scores and longer disease duration probably predict greater improvement.
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.