ArticleeNeurologicalSci2024
Levodopa / opicapone as a complement to STN-DBS in clinical practice. A retrospective single-centre analysis.
Article in eNeurologicalSci, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus (STN-DBS) is a well-established treatment option in Parkinson's disease with motor and non-motor fluctuations allowing for postoperative reduction of dopaminergic medication. However, evidence is scarce on optimal medication adjustments following STN-DBS implantation. Opicapone allows for long-lasting inhibition of the catechol- Methods: A patient cohort treated with STN-DBS + levodopa + opicapone ( Results: Whilst the MDS-UPDRS III (median [min - max]) in patients with STN-DBS as well as anatomical electrode positions did not differ significantly between the opicapone 20 [4-40] and control cohort 14 [1-44], the patients selected for opicapone treatment showed a significantly higher degree of dyskinesias already preoperatively as reflected by a UPDRS-IV A subscore of 2 [0-4] compared to controls 0 [0-4]. Postoperatively, the opicapone cohort showed stronger motor fluctuations MDS-UPDRS IV 6 [0-14] compared to the controls 0 [0-10], albeit without statistical significance. Moreover, the opicapone cohort showed significantly less reduction of dopaminergic medication (-36.4 % vs. -46.2 % in the control cohort) following STN-DBS implantation independent from the intake of dopamine agonists. Conclusion: These results indicate a clinical phenotype characterised by more motor fluctuations requiring a more stable dopamine replacement therapy to address the patients' disease biology. In these cases, levodopa + COMT inhibition by opicapone represents a therapeutic approach but determination of the potential clinical benefit requires further prospective studies.
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.