ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2026
Silent Twiddler syndrome despite dual-anchor fixation in deep brain stimulation: two case reports.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2026. 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
Background: Twiddler syndrome (TS) is a rare hardware-related complication in which manipulation or excessive mobility of an implanted pacemaker or implantable pulse generator (IPG) results in device malfunction. Traditionally, TS is diagnosed only after lead coiling, fracture, displacement, or loss of therapeutic efficacy, suggesting that it represents a late-stage manifestation of the condition. Cases: We report 2 patients with deep brain stimulation (DBS) systems who presented with a subjective sensation of increased IPG mobility during changes in body position. Neither patient demonstrated mechanical failure, lead displacement, or deterioration of DBS clinical benefit, and both IPGs had been implanted with two anchoring sutures fixed to the fascia. Furthermore, neither patient reported intentional manipulation of the device. Because of persistent discomfort and abnormal mobility, revision surgery was performed. Intraoperative findings confirmed early-stage TS in both cases. The IPGs were reimplanted into tailored subpectoral pockets and firmly secured to the fascia. Following revision, both patients experienced complete resolution of symptoms and maintained sustained therapeutic benefit from DBS. Conclusion: These cases suggest that a subjective perception of increased IPG mobility may represent a distinct pre-Twiddler clinical syndrome that precedes the development of classic TS and overt hardware failure. Early recognition of this underrecognized presentation and timely surgical intervention through pocket revision and device immobilization may prevent progression to lead damage, device malfunction, and serious neurological adverse events, while ensuring uninterrupted neuromodulation therapy.
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.