↓ Skip to main content

Outcomes of Interventional-MRI Versus Microelectrode Recording-Guided Subthalamic Deep Brain Stimulation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Outcomes of Interventional-MRI Versus Microelectrode Recording-Guided Subthalamic Deep Brain Stimulation
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, April 2018
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2018.00241
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philip S. Lee, Gregory M. Weiner, Danielle Corson, Jessica Kappel, Yue-Fang Chang, Valerie R. Suski, Sarah B. Berman, Houman Homayoun, Amber D. Van Laar, Donald J. Crammond, R. Mark Richardson

Abstract

In deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) for Parkinson's disease (PD), there is debate concerning the use of neuroimaging alone to confirm correct anatomic placement of the DBS lead into the STN, versus the use of microelectrode recording (MER) to confirm functional placement. We performed a retrospective study of a contemporaneous cohort of 45 consecutive patients who underwent either interventional-MRI (iMRI) or MER-guided DBS lead implantation. We compared radial lead error, motor and sensory side effect, and clinical benefit programming thresholds, and pre- and post-operative unified PD rating scale scores, and levodopa equivalent dosages. MER-guided surgery was associated with greater radial error compared to the intended target. In general, side effect thresholds during initial programming were slightly lower in the MER group, but clinical benefit thresholds were similar. No significant difference in the reduction of clinical symptoms or medication dosage was observed. In summary, iMRI lead implantation occurred with greater anatomic accuracy, in locations demonstrated to be the appropriate functional region of the STN, based on the observation of similar programming side effect and benefit thresholds obtained with MER. The production of equivalent clinical outcomes suggests that surgeon and patient preference can be used to guide the decision of whether to recommend iMRI or MER-guided DBS lead implantation to appropriate patients with PD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 16 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 16 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 21%
Engineering 8 11%
Psychology 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 24 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 April 2018.
All research outputs
#3,665,826
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#3,274
of 12,258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,154
of 329,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#48
of 280 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,258 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,993 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 280 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.