Neurosurgery for intractable psychiatric conditions has seen a resurgence with the increasing use of deep brain stimulation (DBS). Although DBS promises reversible neuromodulation and has become more popular than older lesioning methods, lesioning might still be preferred in specific cases. Here, we review the evidence for DBS and lesions in the treatment of intractable neuropsychiatric conditions and consider the factors that favour the continued use of lesioning procedures in appropriately selected cases. Broadly, systemic factors including comparative effectiveness, cost, and ethical arguments support an ongoing role for lesioning. Such a role is also supported by practical considerations including patient experiences of this type of therapy, the relative intensity of follow-up care, access to sparse or specialised follow-up care, and relative infection risk. Overall, we argue that neurosurgical lesion procedures remain an important alternative to DBS and their continued availability is necessary to fulfil the imperatives of mental health parity and enhance access to effective mental health treatments. Nonetheless, the efficacy of DBS and recent advances in closed-loop stimulation and remote programming might provide solutions to some of the challenges associated with wider use of electrical neuromodulation. Concerns about the scarcity of high-level evidence for the efficacy of lesioning procedures as well as the potential irreversible adverse effects of lesioning remain to be addressed.
The focus of mental health research in emerging fields should be driven by the priorities of people with relevant lived experience. Autism and ADHD are childhood-onset neurodevelopmental conditions that are associated with a range of health inequalities, including increased risk for eating disorders. The evidence base for how best to support neurodivergent individuals who experience disordered eating is still in its infancy, but research suggests that existing clinical approaches are not currently fit for purpose. In this Personal View, through community consultation with autistic people and people with ADHD who have experienced disordered eating, we present a comprehensive ranked list of research topics that people with lived experience prioritise. These priorities could be clustered into two areas: improving outcomes and identifying causal mechanisms. Within the theme of improving disordered eating outcomes, priorities are the improvement of treatment, the need for neurodiversity training in clinical services, and the identification and minimisation of unintended adverse effects of psychological intervention. Within the theme of identifying causal mechanisms, priorities are the identification of risk factors and a better understanding of the effect of autistic or ADHD neurocognitive profiles as potential contributors to eating disorder vulnerability. The final top ten research priorities are contextualised in terms of how they compare to the existing literature on the overlap between autism or ADHD and eating disorders, and concrete suggestions are made for how to implement these research priorities as testable hypotheses. Research informed by these priorities will build necessary understanding of the reasons behind the increased risk for eating disorders in neurodivergent people, and how to best support people who are affected by disordered eating to live positive and fulfilling lives.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：