Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38707711›Full record

ReviewBrain communications2024

Insertional effect following electrode implantation: an underreported but important phenomenon.

Clement Hamani, Benjamin Davidson, Nir Lipsman, Agessandro Abrahao, Sean M Nestor, Jennifer S Rabin, Peter Giacobbe, Rosana L Pagano, Ana Carolina P Campos

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Change in brain molecular landscapes following electrical stimulation of the nucleus accumbens.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Neuroplasticity in Parkinson's disease.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. 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

9 authors.

Clement HamaniSunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7586-2487
Benjamin DavidsonSunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Nir LipsmanSunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Agessandro AbrahaoSunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1142-2842
Sean M NestorSunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Jennifer S RabinSunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4754-2221
Peter GiacobbeSunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
Rosana L PaganoLaboratory of Neuroscience, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo, SP CEP 01308-060, Brazil.
Ana Carolina P CamposSunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep brain stimulation has revolutionized the treatment of movement disorders and is gaining momentum in the treatment of several other neuropsychiatric disorders. In almost all applications of this therapy, the insertion of electrodes into the target has been shown to induce some degree of clinical improvement prior to stimulation onset. Disregarding this phenomenon, commonly referred to as 'insertional effect', can lead to biased results in clinical trials, as patients receiving sham stimulation may still experience some degree of symptom amelioration. Similar to the clinical scenario, an improvement in behavioural performance following electrode implantation has also been reported in preclinical models. From a neurohistopathologic perspective, the insertion of electrodes into the brain causes an initial trauma and inflammatory response, the activation of astrocytes, a focal release of gliotransmitters, the hyperexcitability of neurons in the vicinity of the implants, as well as neuroplastic and circuitry changes at a distance from the target. Taken together, it would appear that electrode insertion is not an inert process, but rather triggers a cascade of biological processes, and, as such, should be considered alongside the active delivery of stimulation as an active part of the deep brain stimulation therapy.

Indexed as

deep brain stimulationelectrodegliainsertional effectmicrothalamotomy

Identifiers

PMID38707711
PMCPMC11069120

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.