Choice of Implantable Pulse Generators for Deep Brain Stimulation: An Overview of Clinical Practice.

INTRODUCTION: The success of deep brain stimulation (DBS) treatment depends on several factors, including proper patient selection, accurate electrode placement, and adequate stimulation settings. Another factor that may impact long-term satisfaction and therapy outcomes is the type of implantable pulse generator (IPG) used: rechargeable or non-rechargeable. However, there are currently no guidelines on the choice of IPG type. The present study investigates the current practices, opinions, and factors DBS clinicians consider when choosing an IPG for their patients. METHODS: Between December 2021 and June 2022, we sent a structured questionnaire with 42 questions to DBS experts of two international, functional neurosurgery societies. The questionnaire included a rating scale where participants could rate the factors influencing their choice of IPG type and their satisfaction with certain IPG aspects. Additionally, we presented four clinical case scenarios to assess preference of choice of IPG-type in each case. RESULTS: Eighty-seven participants from 30 different countries completed the questionnaire. The three most relevant factors for IPG choice were "existing social support," "cognitive status," and "patient age." Most participants believed that patients valued avoiding repetitive replacement surgeries more than the burden of regularly recharging the IPG. Participants reported that they implanted the same amount of rechargeable as non-rechargeable IPGs for primary DBS insertions and 20% converted non-rechargeable to rechargeable IPGs during IPG replacements. Most participants estimated that rechargeable was the more cost-effective option. CONCLUSION: This present study shows that the decision-making of the choice of IPG is very individualized. We identified the key factors influencing the physician's choice of IPG. Compared to patient-centric studies, clinicians may value different aspects. Therefore, clinicians should rely not only on their opinion but also counsel patients on different types of IPGs and consider the patient's preferences. Uniform global guidelines on IPG choice may not represent regional or national differences in the healthcare systems.

Mortality Reduction of Acute Surgery in Traumatic Acute Subdural Hematoma since the 19th Century: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Dramatic Effect: Is Surgery the Obvious Parachute?

The rationale of performing surgery for acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) to reduce mortality is often compared with the self-evident effectiveness of a parachute when skydiving. Nevertheless, it is of clinical relevance to estimate the magnitude of the effectiveness of surgery. The aim of this study is to determine whether surgery reduces mortality in traumatic ASDH compared with initial conservative treatment. A systematic search was performed in the databases IndexCAT, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, CENTRAL, Academic Search Premier, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and CINAHL for studies investigating ASDH treated conservatively and surgically, without restriction to publication date, describing the mortality. Cohort studies or trials with at least five patients with ASDH, clearly describing surgical, conservative treatment, or both, with the mortality at discharge, reported in English or Dutch, were eligible. The search yielded 2025 reports of which 282 were considered for full-text review. After risk of bias assessment, we included 102 studies comprising 12,287 patients. The data were synthesized using meta-analysis of absolute risks; this was conducted in random-effects models, with dramatic effect estimation in subgroups. Overall mortality in surgically treated ASDH is 48% (95% confidence interval [CI] 44-53%). Mortality after surgery for comatose patients (Glasgow Coma Scale ≤8) is 41% (95% CI 31-51%) in contemporary series (after 2000). Mortality after surgery for non-comatose ASDH is 12% (95% CI 4-23%). Conservative treatment is associated with an overall mortality of 35% (95% CI 22-48%) and 81% (95% CI 56-98%) when restricting to comatose patients. The absolute risk reduction is 40% (95% CI 35-45%), with a number needed to treat of 2.5 (95% CI 2.2-2.9) to prevent one death in comatose ASDH. Thus, surgery is effective to reduce mortality among comatose patients with ASDH. The magnitude of the effect is large, although the effect size may not be sufficient to overcome any bias.