The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Chronic stimulation of subthalamic nucleus improves levodopa-induced dyskinesias in Parkinson's disease
Open accessAbstract
Ventroposterior pallidotomy, and pallidal and subthalamic nucleus (STN) stimulation, are proposed to treat severe Parkinson’s disease (PD) with levodopa-induced motor complications. Pallidal surgery decreases levodopa-induced dyskinesias (LID). Parkinsonism evaluated by the motor part of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) improves by about 30% after unilateral pallidotomy. STN stimulation can greatly improve parkinsonian disability, but its effects on LID are unknown because the first patients treated with STN stimulation were selected with mild or absent LID since spontaneous STN lesions can induce hemiballism. However, our initial experience with STN stimulation showed that stimulation-induced abnormal movements could be controlled by setting the stimulation voltage below the dyskinesia threshold. Moreover, the substantial decrease in levodopa dosage, which was made possible by the antiparkinsonian benefit, allowed a decrease in LID in the long-term. Thus, STN stimulation was also proposed for patients with severe LID. We selected all consecutive patients with young-onset PD, since this population is generally levodopa-sensitive and prone to develop severe LID. Eight patients with a mean age of 51 (SD 10) years and a mean disease duration of 16 (5) years were operated on bilaterally in the STN because of severe motor fluctuations (motor score on the UPDRS 57·5 [14·5] off-drug and 18·2 [10·6] on-drug). The study was approved by the Grenoble University ethical committee and all patients gave their written, informed consent. The surgical procedure has been described previously. 6 months after surgery, the motor score of the UPDRS improved from 58 (16) to 17 (8) (–71%) in the off-drug condition when stimulation was switched on. This improvement was seen in all the major parkinsonian symptoms. The dyskinesia score (six body parts, each scored 0–4, maximum score 24), assessed during the maximum motor response of a levodopa test with the same dose as preoperatively (early morning +50–100 mg), decreased from 11·4 (6·6) preoperatively to 6·8 (4·3) postoperatively onstimulation. Dyskinesia duration and disability (UPDRS items 32+33), which assess LID during activities of daily living under chronic stimulation, decreased from 4·0 (1·9) to 1·4 (0·9) (–65%). The antiparkinsonian drug dosage calculated as levodopa equivalent decreased from 1560 (930) to 680 (420) mg daily (–56%). With chronic STN stimulation, LID were greatly improved, in a similar percentage as with bilateral globus-pallidusinternus stimulation. With unilateral pallidotomy, contralateral LID are substantially improved although a big reduction of levodopa is not possible. Targeting the STN instead of the globus pallidus internus has the advantage of inducing a more pronounced antiakinetic effect. The decrease in LID induced by STN stimulation can be explained mainly by the decrease in levodopa dosage. This is why the improvement in dyskinesias is more obvious in activities of daily living than during the levodopa test with a dose identical to that given before surgery. Moreover, as highfrequency stimulation is supposed to act through neuroinhibition, the chronic inhibition of STN neurons can change the dyskinesia threshold with time, in the same way as the progressive abatement of hemiballism after a vascular lesion of the STN. Replacing the pulsatile levodopa-induced decrease of STN activity by a chronic stable decrease seems to improve dyskinesias. After 4 years of experience of STN stimulation, this surgical treatment improves LID with time, contrary to our initial fears. As the improvement in all the main parkinsonian motor symptoms is substantial in patients with a good levodopa response, the STN is suggested as the target of choice for the neurosurgical treatment of PD, even in patients with severe LID. However, randomised studies comparing different surgical procedures are required to better understand their respective value.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Krack, P., Batir, A., Van Blercom, N., Chabardes, S., Fraix, V., Ardouin, C., Koudsie, A., Limousin, P. D., Benazzouz, A., LeBas, J. F., et al. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa035275 · Cited by 2,249
Self-citationDeep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus for the treatment of Parkinson's disease
Benabid, A. L., Chabardes, S., Mitrofanis, J., & Pollak, P. (2009) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(08)70291-6 · Cited by 1,285
Self-citationSaint-Cyr, J. A. (2000) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/123.10.2091 · Cited by 554
Pallidal vs Subthalamic Nucleus Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson Disease
Anderson, V. C., Burchiel, K. J., Hogarth, P., Favre, J., & Hammerstad, J. P. (2005) · Archives of Neurology · doi:10.1001/archneur.62.4.554 · Cited by 537
History, Applications, and Mechanisms of Deep Brain Stimulation
Miocinovic, S., Somayajula, S., Chitnis, S., & Vitek, J. L. (2013) · JAMA Neurology · doi:10.1001/2013.jamaneurol.45 · Cited by 496
Metadata
- Authors
- Krack, P., Limousin, P., Benabid, A., & Pollak, P.
- Venue
- The Lancet
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1997-12
- Volume
- 350
- Issue
- 9092
- Pages
- 1676
- ISSN
- 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
- 0140-6736
- OpenAlex
- W2034879520
- Cited by
- 165
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Chronic stimulation of subthalamic nucleus improves levodopa-induced dyskinesias in Parkinson's disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)64273-0
- The paper
- Krack, P., Limousin, P., Benabid, A., & Pollak, P. (1997). Chronic stimulation of subthalamic nucleus improves levodopa-induced dyskinesias in Parkinson's disease. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)64273-0
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.