ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Low-Frequency Adaptive Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson's Disease.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Freezing of gait (FOG) is a debilitating symptom of Parkinson's disease (PD) that often worsens with disease progression. Adaptive deep brain stimulation (aDBS) may better target symptom fluctuations and gait impairment, yet most studies have focused on high-frequency stimulation. Low-frequency stimulation may offer additional gait benefits in moderate-to-advanced PD. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of 60 Hz continuous DBS (cDBS) and the safety, tolerability and feasibility of 60 Hz aDBS. Methods: Eight individuals with PD were implanted with bilateral leads in the subthalamic nucleus and the investigational Summit RC+S system (Medtronic, Inc.). 60 Hz aDBS was calibrated to adjust stimulation amplitude based on prolonged beta bursts. Participants completed blinded, randomized testing during a validated FOG-eliciting stepping-in-place task under OFF DBS, 60 Hz cDBS, and 60 Hz aDBS. Cardinal motor signs were assessed using MDS-UPDRS III in each condition, and under clinical 140 Hz cDBS. Results: 60 Hz cDBS was tolerated acutely by 6 of 8 participants and showed significant shortening of beta burst duration, a pathological neural biomarker of FOG. 60 Hz aDBS was deemed safe and tolerable in this cohort. In participants who demonstrated FOG at baseline, gait improved ON both 60 Hz aDBS and cDBS. However, overall motor symptoms, including tremor, improved only with clinical 140 Hz cDBS. Conclusion: 60 Hz aDBS and cDBS benefit individuals with baseline FOG but may not achieve broad motor symptom relief of clinically optimized HFS. Identifying individuals most likely to benefit from LFS could enable more personalized DBS programming.
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.