帕金森病患者清醒与睡眠状态下接受脑深部刺激后用药量减少和运动效果的 Meta 分析。

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurosurgery Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-28 DOI:10.1227/neu.0000000000003138
Luyuan Li, Ali I Rae, Kim J Burchiel
{"title":"帕金森病患者清醒与睡眠状态下接受脑深部刺激后用药量减少和运动效果的 Meta 分析。","authors":"Luyuan Li, Ali I Rae, Kim J Burchiel","doi":"10.1227/neu.0000000000003138","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>There remains significant debate regarding the performance of deep brain stimulation (DBS) procedures for Parkinson disease (PD) under local or general anesthesia. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes between \"asleep\" DBS (general anesthesia) and \"awake\" DBS (local anesthesia) for PD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a comprehensive literature review of all published studies on DBS for PD following PRISMA guideline on PubMed and Cochrane library from January 2004 to April 2023. Inclusion criteria included cohort ≥15 patients, clinical outcomes data which included Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score and levodopa equivalent daily dosage (LEDD), and ≥3 months of follow-up. Analysis was conducted using Stata software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 18 articles that met inclusion criteria. On meta-analysis, there were no significant differences between awake or asleep DBS with regard to percent change in UPDRS III \"off\" med/\"on\" DBS condition ( P = .6) and LEDD score ( P = .99). On subgroup analysis, we found that the choice of target had no significant effect on improvement of UPDRS III ( P = 1.0) or LEDD ( P = .99) change for the asleep vs awake operative approach. There were also no statistically significant differences between microelectrode recording (MER) use and no MER use in postoperative UPDRS III ( P = 1.0) or LEDD improvement ( P = .90) between awake and asleep surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was no significant difference in the primary motor outcomes and LEDD improvement between asleep vs awake DBS. The variables of target selection and MER use had no statistically significant impact on outcome. We find that asleep techniques are both safe and effective compared with the awake technique.</p>","PeriodicalId":19276,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"481-493"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Meta-Analysis of Medication Reduction and Motor Outcomes After Awake Versus Asleep Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson Disease.\",\"authors\":\"Luyuan Li, Ali I Rae, Kim J Burchiel\",\"doi\":\"10.1227/neu.0000000000003138\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>There remains significant debate regarding the performance of deep brain stimulation (DBS) procedures for Parkinson disease (PD) under local or general anesthesia. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes between \\\"asleep\\\" DBS (general anesthesia) and \\\"awake\\\" DBS (local anesthesia) for PD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a comprehensive literature review of all published studies on DBS for PD following PRISMA guideline on PubMed and Cochrane library from January 2004 to April 2023. Inclusion criteria included cohort ≥15 patients, clinical outcomes data which included Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score and levodopa equivalent daily dosage (LEDD), and ≥3 months of follow-up. Analysis was conducted using Stata software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 18 articles that met inclusion criteria. On meta-analysis, there were no significant differences between awake or asleep DBS with regard to percent change in UPDRS III \\\"off\\\" med/\\\"on\\\" DBS condition ( P = .6) and LEDD score ( P = .99). On subgroup analysis, we found that the choice of target had no significant effect on improvement of UPDRS III ( P = 1.0) or LEDD ( P = .99) change for the asleep vs awake operative approach. There were also no statistically significant differences between microelectrode recording (MER) use and no MER use in postoperative UPDRS III ( P = 1.0) or LEDD improvement ( P = .90) between awake and asleep surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was no significant difference in the primary motor outcomes and LEDD improvement between asleep vs awake DBS. The variables of target selection and MER use had no statistically significant impact on outcome. We find that asleep techniques are both safe and effective compared with the awake technique.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19276,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurosurgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"481-493\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurosurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000003138\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000003138","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:关于在局部或全身麻醉下进行帕金森病(PD)的脑深部刺激(DBS)手术,目前仍存在很大争议。本荟萃分析旨在比较 "睡眠 "DBS(全身麻醉)和 "清醒 "DBS(局部麻醉)治疗帕金森病的临床效果:我们按照PRISMA指南,对2004年1月至2023年4月期间在PubMed和Cochrane图书馆发表的所有有关DBS治疗PD的研究进行了全面的文献综述。纳入标准包括队列≥15名患者、临床结果数据(包括统一帕金森病评分量表(UPDRS)评分和左旋多巴等效日剂量(LEDD))以及≥3个月的随访。分析采用Stata软件进行:共有 18 篇文章符合纳入标准。在荟萃分析中,就UPDRS III "关闭 "药物/"开启 "DBS条件下的百分比变化(P = .6)和LEDD评分(P = .99)而言,清醒或睡眠状态下的DBS没有显著差异。在亚组分析中,我们发现在睡眠与清醒手术方式中,目标选择对UPDRS III(P = 1.0)或LEDD(P = 0.99)的改善没有显著影响。在术后UPDRS III(P = 1.0)或LEDD改善(P = .90)方面,使用微电极记录(MER)与不使用MER在清醒手术与睡眠手术之间也没有统计学意义上的显著差异:结论:睡眠与清醒 DBS 在主要运动结果和 LEDD 改善方面没有明显差异。目标选择和 MER 使用等变量对结果没有统计学意义。我们发现,与清醒技术相比,睡眠技术既安全又有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Meta-Analysis of Medication Reduction and Motor Outcomes After Awake Versus Asleep Deep Brain Stimulation for Parkinson Disease.

Background and objectives: There remains significant debate regarding the performance of deep brain stimulation (DBS) procedures for Parkinson disease (PD) under local or general anesthesia. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes between "asleep" DBS (general anesthesia) and "awake" DBS (local anesthesia) for PD.

Methods: We conducted a comprehensive literature review of all published studies on DBS for PD following PRISMA guideline on PubMed and Cochrane library from January 2004 to April 2023. Inclusion criteria included cohort ≥15 patients, clinical outcomes data which included Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score and levodopa equivalent daily dosage (LEDD), and ≥3 months of follow-up. Analysis was conducted using Stata software.

Results: There were 18 articles that met inclusion criteria. On meta-analysis, there were no significant differences between awake or asleep DBS with regard to percent change in UPDRS III "off" med/"on" DBS condition ( P = .6) and LEDD score ( P = .99). On subgroup analysis, we found that the choice of target had no significant effect on improvement of UPDRS III ( P = 1.0) or LEDD ( P = .99) change for the asleep vs awake operative approach. There were also no statistically significant differences between microelectrode recording (MER) use and no MER use in postoperative UPDRS III ( P = 1.0) or LEDD improvement ( P = .90) between awake and asleep surgery.

Conclusion: There was no significant difference in the primary motor outcomes and LEDD improvement between asleep vs awake DBS. The variables of target selection and MER use had no statistically significant impact on outcome. We find that asleep techniques are both safe and effective compared with the awake technique.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neurosurgery
Neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
898
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurosurgery, the official journal of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, publishes research on clinical and experimental neurosurgery covering the very latest developments in science, technology, and medicine. For professionals aware of the rapid pace of developments in the field, this journal is nothing short of indispensable as the most complete window on the contemporary field of neurosurgery. Neurosurgery is the fastest-growing journal in the field, with a worldwide reputation for reliable coverage delivered with a fresh and dynamic outlook.
期刊最新文献
Clinical Neurosurgery Editors-in-Chief. Congress of Neurological Surgeons Past Presidents. 2024 Neurosurgery Paper of the Year. Honored Guest of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2024 Annual Meeting: Henry Brem, MD. Honored Guest of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2024 Annual Meeting: Steven L. Giannotta, MD.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1