Skip to main content
. 2023 Jun 23;46(1):145. doi: 10.1007/s10143-023-02037-w

Table 2.

Studies reporting cognitive results after capsulotomies

Authors Assessment times (months) Cognitive measures (score) Pre-score Post-score Cognitive outcome Significance
Attention
Kim et al. (2018) B, 6, 12, 24 Digit span test (forward)a 10.2 (2.3) 10.1 (2.5)b Not interpretable No sign. (p > 0.05)
Visuospatial abilities
Fodstad et al. (1982) B, 6

FITa

Kohs’ block testa

BVRT (number correct)a

BVRT (number error)a

Not reportedc Not reportedc Not interpretable Not reported
Oliver et al. (2003) B, 6, 12 TMT(A) 34.33 33.5b No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Csigó et al. (2010) B, 1, 6, 12, 24 TMT(A) 76.4 (45.08) 70.8 (72.42)e No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Batistuzzo et al. (2015) B, 24

TMT(A)

BJLOT

ROCFT (Copy)

54.56 (29.90)

24.08 (3.37)

31.82(3.79)

42.06 (19)

23.42 (3.12)

33.32 (8.19)

No changes except for TMT(A) – improvement No sign. (p > 0.05) except TMT(A)
Peker et al. (2020) B, 6 TMT(A) 28.5 (10.1) 24.4 (8.71) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Krámska et al. (2021) B, 6

ROCFT (copy)

TMT(A)

WAIS-III (block design subtest)

WAIS-III (picture completion subtest)

32 (2.19)

40.5 (17.57)

32.57 (13.84)

18.09 (3.81)

32.17 (2.95)

38.25 (13.37)

38.2 (12.66)

19.25 (2.96)

No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Memory (general)
Fodstad et al. (1982) B, 6

CMMT (object)a

CMMT (word-pair)a

CMMT (fig fact)a

Not reportedc Not reportedc Not interpretable Not reported
Rück et al. (2008) Not reported Subjective complaints: subjective reports Not applicable Not applicable Memory problems Not applicable
Jung et al. (2014) B, 6 RKMT (memory quotient)a 99.8 (4.9) 106 (10.9) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Zhan et al. (2014) Not reported Subjective complaints: subjective reports Not applicable Not applicable Impaired memory and confusion Not applicable
Batistuzzo et al. (2015) Not reported Subjective complaints: subjective reports Not applicable Not applicable Temporal and spatial disorientation Not applicable
Kim et al. (2018) B, 6, 12, 24 RKMT (memory quotient)a 94.1 (13.9) 103.3 (13.3)b Improvementd Sign. (p < 0.05)
Verbal memory
Batistuzzo et al. (2015) B, 24

HVLT-R (total recall)

HVLT-R (delayed recall)

HVLT-R (recognition hits)

HVLT-R (learning)

WMS-R (logical memory subtest, immediate recall)

WMS-R (logical memory subtest, delayed recall)

24.08 (5.89)

7.67 (3.06)

10.92 (1.31)

4 (1.86)

22.18 (7.59)

17.88 (7.66)

23.50 (4.62)

7.67 (3.17)

11.33 (1.07)

2.92 (3.06)

24.18 (7.33)

21.47 (8.86)

No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Gong et al. (2018) B, 1, 3, 6, 12

WMS-R (logical memory subtest, immediate recall)

WMS-R (logical memory subtest, delayed recall)

17.21 (5.62)

14.79 (6.10)

22.86 (5.52)e

20.00 (6.00)e

Improvementd Sign. (p < 0.05) except for delayed recall of WMS-R
Krámska et al. (2021) B, 6

RAVLT (trials 1–5)

RAVLT (long delay-free recall)

45.75 (12.7)

8.33 (3.52)

49.8 (12.12)

8.92 (3.55)

No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Visual memory
Fodstad et al. (1982) B, 6

BVRT (number correct)a

BVRT (number error)a

Not reportedc Not reportedc Not interpretable Not reported
Oliver et al. (2003) B, 6, 12

WMS-R (recent visual memory)

WMS-R (recall visual memory)

40.97

37.95

44.54e

37.53e

No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Batistuzzo et al. (2015) B, 24

ROCFT (delayed recall)

BVMT-R (total recall)

BVMT-R (delayed recall)

BVMT-R (discrimination index)

BVMT-R (learning)

9.82 (7.45)

17.82 (5.88)

7.27 (2.37)

4.45 (1.29)

4.36 (2.38)

14.5 (7.68)

21.45 (8.86)

8.36 (2.98)

4.91 (1.81)

3.64 (2.25)

No changes except ROCFT (delayed recall) – improvement No sign. (p > 0.05) except ROCFT – delayed recall
Gong et al. (2018) B, 1, 3, 6, 12

WMS-R (immediate visual reproduction)

WMS-R (delayed visual reproduction)

9.79 (3.89)

8.57 (3.69)

13.36 (0.63)e

12.21 (1.67)e

Improvementd Sign. (p < 0.05)
Krámska et al. (2021) B, 6

ROCFT (immediate recall)

ROCFT (delayed recall)

15.86 (5.26)

16.05 (5.44)

20.04 (7.12)

20.29 (7.12)

Improvement Sign. (p < 0.05)
Language
Batistuzzo et al. (2015) B, 24

BNT

WASI (vocabulary subtest)

WASI (similarities subtest)

53.36 (5.37)

46.47 (11.92)

32.31 (6.57)

54.42 (5.42)

53.53 (9.45)

34.82 (8.07)

No changes except WASI (vocabulary) – improvement No sign. (p > 0.05) except WASI (vocabulary)
Gong et al. (2018) B, 1, 3, 6, 12 WASI (similarities subtest) 17.57 (2.85) 17.35 (2.59)e No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Krámska et al. (2021) B, 6 WAIS-III (similarities subtest) 24.5 (5.14) 24.67 (4.48) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Working memory
Oliver et al. (2003) B, 6, 12 TMT(B) 35.94 40.43b No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Rück et al. (2008)f B, 129 WAIS – R NI—digit spana 47 (8.6) 41 (10.3) Not interpretable Not reported
Csigó et al. (2010) B, 1, 6, 12, 24

Corsi spatial working memory test

TMT(B)

3.4 (0.74)

229.4 (137.89)

3.2 (1.03)b

201.6 (100.33)b

No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Batistuzzo et al. (2015) B, 24

TMT(B)

TMT(B) (errors)

135.38 (76.6)

0.64 (1.03)

136.19 (79.3)

0.82 (0.87)

No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Peker et al. (2020) B, 6 TMT(B) 53.5 (14.4) 50.7 (12.4) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Krámska et al. (2021) B,6

TMT(B)

WAIS-III (arithmetic subtest)

WAIS-III (digit span subtest)

87.08 (40.54)

14.36 (3.64)

15.67 (4.44)

74.25 (43.62)

15 (3.59)

16.25 (4.27)

No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Executive functions
Rück et al. (2008)f

B, 129

Not reported

WCST

Subjective complaints: EAD scale and subjective reports

41 (9.9)

Not applicable

29 (13.9)

Not applicable

Not interpretable

Executive dysfunction, apathy, and disinhibition

Not reported

Not applicable

Csigó et al. (2010) B, 1, 6, 12, 24

CST-A (right concept)a

CST-B (perseverative errors)a

IGT (selection from disadvantageous desks)a

IGT (selection from advantageous desks)a

Stroop test (interference scale, time)a

3 (1.22)

3.6 (1.67)

57.4 (20.32)

42.6 (20.32)

39.6 (12.97)

5 (1)e

2.8 (1.3)e

50.6 (13.81)b

49.2 (13.71)b

35 (19.44)e

No changes except for CST-A (improvementd) and stroop test (interference scale, time) (not interpretable) No sign. (p > 0.05) except for CST-A (right concept) and stroop test (interference scale, time)
Jung et al. (2014) B, 6 Stroop test (numbers per second)a 0.87 (0.4) 0.91 (0.3) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Zhan et al. (2014) Not reported Subjective complaints: subjective reports Not applicable Not applicable Mild hypersexuality, apathy, initiative, and lack of interest-related problems Not applicable
Batistuzzo et al. (2015)

B, 24

Not reported

VST (stroop 1 – time)

VST (stroop 2 – time)

VST (stroop 3 – time)

VST (effect-time)

WCST (64 cards) (hits)

WCST (64 cards) (categories)

WCST (64 cards) (set-loss)

WCST (64 cards) (perseverative responses)

WCST (64 cards) (perseverative errors)

WCST (64 cards) (non-perseverative errors)

ROCFT (planning score)a

TMT (effect–time)

Subjective complaints

15.56 (3.09)

18.81 (5.26)

30.95 (7.75)

15.39 (6.13)

41.53 (8.64)

2.6 (1.18)

0.6 (0.63)

4.47 (9.99)

4.07 (8.96)

18.4 (8.54)

2.55 (1.44)

80.81 (56.90)

Not applicable

15.82 (3.29)

18.66 (4.32)

28.94 (6.48)

13.12 (3.77)

45.63 (7.34)

3.13 (1.36)

0.19 (0.4)

3.56 (6.97)

3.19 (6.02)

15.31 (6.57)

2.91 (1.81)

94.13 (69.30)

Not applicable

No changes except WCST (hits) and TMT (effect-time) – improvement

Disinhibition

No sign. (p > 0.05)

except WCST (hits) and TMT (effect-time)

Not applicable

Gong et al. (2018)

B, 1, 3, 6, 12

Not reported

WCST (correct)

WCST (errors)

WCST (perseverative errors)

WCST (non-perseverative errors)

WCST (categories)

Subjective complaints: subjective reports

24.93 (7.5)

23.07 (7.5)

16.86 (9.53)

6.21 (2.36)

3.86 (1.56)

Not applicable

33.29 (5.7)e

14.71 (5.7)e

6.86 (5.86)e

7.86 (1.96)e

5.14 (0.95)e

Not applicable

Improvementd

except for WCST – (non-perseverative errors) – no changesd

Childish behavior, sexual disinhibition, lack of interest, decreased motivation, inappropriate laughter

Sign. (p < 0.05) except in WCST (non-perseverative errors)

Not applicable

Kim et al. (2018) B, 6, 12, 24 KCWST (mean reaction time for correct trials)a 1.25 (0.32) 1.30 (0.48)b No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Peker et al. (2020) B, 6

Stroop test (word score)

Stroop test (color score)

Stroop test (color-word score)

81.2 (8.83)

51.6 (7.91)

35.4 (4.71)

82.2 (7.72)

52.2 (6.73)

36.9 (8.11)

No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Kassell et al. (2022) B, 6, 12, 24–48, ≥ 60

WCST (128 cards) (perseverative errors)

WCST (128 cards) (learning to learn)

FrSBe (self-score) (item 13)

FrSBe (family score) (item 13)

21.94

2.77

Not reportedc

Not reportedc

20.30b

4.15b

Not reportedc

Not reportedc

Not interpretable

No changesd

Not reported

No sign. (p > 0.05)

Verbal fluency
Csigó et al. (2010) B, 1, 6, 12, 24

Verbal fluency test (number of words)a

Verbal fluency test (perseverative errors)a

Category fluency test (intrusion errors)a

32.4 (3.78)

1 (1)

0.6 (0.89)

46.4 (10.73)e

1.8 (4.02)e

2.6 (2.51)e

Improvementd in VFT – (number of words)

No changesd in VFT – (pers.errors)

Worseningd in CFT-(intrusion errors)

Sign. (p < 0.05) except in VFT (pers. errors)
Jung et al. (2014) B, 6

COWAT (phonemic portion)

COWAT (semantic portion)

38 (16.8)

19.3 (6.8)

37 (16.3)

20.3 (3.3)

No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Kim et al. (2018) B, 6, 12, 24

COWAT (phonemic)

COWAT (semantic)

35.5 (15)

19.5 (6.4)

38.2 (20.6)b

18.3 (5.8)b

No changesd

No changesd

No sign. (p > 0.05)
Krámska et al. (2021) B, 6 COWAT (phonemic fluency) 37.58 (11.79) 36.75 (9.95) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Information processing speed
Krámska et al. (2021) B, 6 Digit symbol from WAIS-III 47 (13.08) 53.25 (15.05) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Intelligence
Fodstad et al. (1982) B, 6

SRB-Test – synonymsa

SRB-Test – reasoninga

Not reportedc Not reportedc Not interpretable Not reported
Oliver et al. (2003) B, 6, 12

Koh’s cubes

WAIS (IQ)

44.83

98.88

41e

93.77e

No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Csigó et al. (2010) B, 1, 6, 12, 24 MAWI (Weshcler intelligence quotient)a 91.8 (10.94) 107.8 (7.04)e Improvementd Sign. (p < 0.05)
Jung et al. (2014) B, 6 K-WAIS 97.8 (21.7) 101 (23.8) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Zhan et al. (2014) B, 2w, 12, 36, 60 WAIS Not reported Not reported No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Batistuzzo et al. (2015) B, 24

WASI (verbal IQ)

WASI (performance IQ)

WASI (total IQ)

WASI (block design subtest)

WASI (matrix reasoning subtest)

91.38 (16.76)

89 (9.93)

90.74 (13.83)

29.31 (13.33)

20.41 (7.45)

97.41 (15.93)

93.25 (11.48)

94.13 (13.74)

31.38 (4.25)

21.82 (10.84)

Improvement for WASI (performance IQ, total IQ), and block Design subtest

No changes for WASI (verbal IQ) and matrix reasoning subtest

Sign. (p < 0.05) except for WASI verbal IQ and matrix reasoning
Gong et al. (2018) B, 1, 3, 6, 12 WASI (block design subtest) 31.50 (10.76) 40.36 (9.57)e Improvementd Sign. (p < 0.05)
Kim et al. (2018) B, 6, 12, 24 K-WAISa 90.0 (19.3) 93.5 (19.7)b No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Krámska et al. (2021) B, 6 WAIS-III (full-scale intelligence quotient) 101.82 (11.17) 102.83 (11.13) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Motor functioning
Fodstad et al. (1982) B, 6 Zeal testa Not reportedc Not reportedc Not interpretable Not reported
Batistuzzo et al. (2015) B, 24

GPT – dominant hand – time

GPT – dominant hand – errors

GPT – non-dominant hand – time

GPT – non-dominant hand—errors

HFTT – dominant hand

HFTT – non-dominant hand

HD – dominant hand

HD – non-dominant hand

87.39 (17.25)

0.45 (0.52)

95.24 (19.5)

0.55 (0.82)

47.79 (9.48)

43.66 (7.09)

28.85 (8)

25.72 (8.39)

79.27 (18.89)

0.36 (0.67)

97.91 (32.05)

0.55 (0.69)

48.06 (9.06)

44.58 (6.17)

28.8 (8.19)

28.88 (8.42)

No changes except for

GPT (dominant hand – time), and HD (non-dominant hand scores) – improvement

No sign. (p > 0.05) except GPT (dominant hand – time), and HD (non-dominant hand scores)
Overall cognitive functioning
Zhan et al. (2014) B, 2w, 12, 36, 60 MMSE Not reported Not reported No changesd No sign. (p > 0.05)
Batistuzzo et al. (2015) B, 24 MMSE 91.94 (6.23) 92.69 (7.20) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)
Peker et al. (2020) B, 6 ACER (total score) 82.4 (7.2) 84.8 (8.6) No changes No sign. (p > 0.05)

B, baseline; FIT, figure identification test; BVRT, Benton’s visual retention test; TMT, trail making test; BJLOT, Benton judgement of line orientation test; ROCFT, Rey-Osterrieth complex figure test; WAIS-III, Weschler adult intelligence scale 3rd revision; CMMT, Cronholm-Molander memory test; RKMT, Rey-Kim memory test; HVLT-R, Hopkins verbal learning test-revised; WMS-R, Weschler memory scale-revised; RAVLT, Rey auditory verbal learning test; BVMT-R, brief visuospatial memory test-revised; BNT, Boston naming test; WASI, Weschler abbreviated scale of intelligence; WAIS-R NI, Weschler adult intelligence scale-revised as a neuropsychological instrument; WCST, Wisconsin card sorting test; EAD, execution, apathy and disinhibition scale; CST, California sorting test; IGT, Iowa gambling test; VST, Victoria stroop test; KCWST, Korean colour word stroop test; FrSBe, frontal systems behavior scale; COWAT, controlled association word association test; WAIS, Weschler adult intelligence scale; MAWI, Hungarian version of the Weschler intelligence test; K-WAIS, Weschler adult intelligence scale – Korean version; GPT, grooved pegboard test; HFTT, Halstead finger tapping test; HD, hand dynamometer; MMSE, mini mental state examination; ACER, Addenbrooke cognitive examination revised

aAs the authors reported in the original article

bPost-score at the first post-assessment date

cNot results of the group; individual data is reported

dConsidering all post-assessments reported in the article

ePost-score at the last post-assessment date

fResults of a subsample, n = 7