Skip to main content
. 2024 Apr 18;102(3):141–155. doi: 10.1159/000536310

Table 1.

A summary of prior systematic review and meta-analysis comparing asleep versus awake DBS surgery for PD

Author Ho et al. [7] Sheshadri et al. [12] Liu et al. [10]
Year published 2018 2017 2020
Journal Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry The Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery
Systematic review and meta-analysis Systematic review and meta-analysis Systematic review and meta-analysis
Date of inclusion 2004–2015 2007–2015 2004–2019
No. of studies 145 6 14
Retrospective cohort studies 70 6 14
Case series, cohort studies 79 0 0
Randomized controlled trial 1 0 0
Patients, n 8,382 455 1,523
Asleep 7,771 194 967
Awake 671 261 556
Results
UPDRS III improvement No difference Data suggest a trend toward improved UPDRS III score under awake technique, though statistically insignificant No difference
Postoperative LEDD No difference No difference No difference
Adverse events Not reported No difference No difference
Adverse effects – related to stimulation Stimulation-related effects less in awake versus asleep No difference No difference
Adverse effects – intracranial hemorrhage Rate of intracranial hemorrhage was lower in asleep group Not reported No difference
Adverse effects – speech disturbances Not reported Not reported No difference
Operating time No difference Not reported No difference
Stimulation intensity Not reported Not reported Comparable between awake and asleep groups
Postoperative clinical outcomes Not reported Not reported No difference
Perioperative complications Asleep group had lower risk of infection compared to awake group No difference No difference
Other findings Asleep group required fewer passes per lead compared to awake group Not reported Intracranial air lower in asleep compared to the awake group

ICH, intracranial hemorrhage; LEDD, Levadopa equivalent daily dose; UPDRS III, Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale Part III.