Cited by 100Neurological disorders and treatmentsObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders

Loss of benefit in VIM thalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) for essential tremor (ET): How prevalent is it?

Shih, Ludy C., LaFaver, Kathrin, Lim, Chen, Papavassiliou, Efstathios, Tarsy, Daniel·2013·Parkinsonism & Related Disorders

Abstract

Ventralis intermedius (Vim) thalamic deep brain stimulation for medication-refractory essential tremor (ET) has been shown to significantly improve severity of limb tremor in several large case series with significant reduction in objective motor scores. A variable proportion of patients experience decline in benefit over time, however, most studies have not been designed to describe the phenomenon of waning benefit in terms that are helpful for patient counseling. In this retrospective single center study, we define waning benefit as a phenomenon that occurs after patients begin to require reprogramming visits to optimize DBS benefit on tremor. We employed a survival analysis with time to escape (TTE) as a quantitative measure of time elapsed between implantation and the need for subsequent reprogramming. In our cohort of ET patients operated on with Vim DBS from 1994 to 2009, among 45 subjects who met inclusion criteria, 73% reported waning benefit at some point during a mean follow-up period of 56 months (range 12-152 months). The mean TTE from implantation date was 18 months (range 3-75 months). We conclude that loss of benefit over time from Vim DBS for ET is more prevalent than previously published estimates have indicated and should be discussed during patient counseling regarding durability of expected benefit. In addition, this data suggests that a disease-based explanation rather than technical factors are more likely to explain the decline in benefit.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2013.03.006

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 24 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shih, L. C., LaFaver, K., Lim, C., Papavassiliou, E., & Tarsy, D.
Affiliations
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • New York Medical College (US)
Corresponding author
Shih, Ludy C.
Venue
Parkinsonism & Related Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-07
Volume
19
Issue
7
Pages
676-679
ISSN
1353-8020 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2050642306
Cited by
100
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7
FWCI
4.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Parkinsonism & Related Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Botulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Keywords
thalamic stimulation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Risk Assessment, Essential Tremor, Ventral Thalamic Nuclei, Deep Brain Stimulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review