No abstract

Aggressive behavior in patients with intellectual disability can be resistant to pharmacological treatment and have detrimental consequences to themselves, family members, and caregivers. Hypothalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) has been used to improve this type of behavior in severe and refractory cases. Here, we present the description and analysis of DBS of the posteromedial hypothalamus (PMH) and its long-term impact as treatment to improve severe and refractory aggressive behaviors, even with previous bilateral hypothalamotomy without improvement in patients with intellectual disability. Eleven patients underwent bilateral DBS of the PMH. Their medical records were reviewed, and the impact on behavior was measured using preoperative and postoperative Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS) during the last follow-up medical visit. Nine of 11 patients presented a significant decrease in the severity of aggressive behavior, with a preoperative and postoperative MOAS average value of 50.5 and 18.7, respectively. An overall improvement of 63% was seen with a mean follow-up time of 4 years. A patient who previously underwent a bilateral hypothalamotomy via radiofrequency was included in this group. During follow-up, 3 patients presented deterioration of symptoms subsequent to pulse generator depletion but made a full clinical recovery after battery replacement. We posit that DBS of the PMH may be a safe and effective in improving severe and refractory aggressive behavior in patients with long-term intellectual disability.

BACKGROUND The setting of a randomized trial can determine whether its findings are generalizable and can therefore apply to different settings. The contribution of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to neurosurgical randomized trials has not been systematically described before. OBJECTIVE To perform a systematic analysis of design characteristics and methodology, funding source, and interventions studied between trials led by and/or conducted in high-income countries (HICs) vs LMICs. METHODS From January 2003 to July 2016, English-language trials with >5 patients assessing any one neurosurgical procedure against another procedure, nonsurgical treatment, or no treatment were retrieved from MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Income classification for each country was assessed using the World Bank Atlas method. RESULTS A total of 73.3% of the 397 studies that met inclusion criteria were led by HICs, whereas 26.7% were led by LMICs. Of the 106 LMIC-led studies, 71 were led by China. If China is excluded, only 8.8% were led by LMICs. HIC-led trials enrolled a median of 92 patients vs a median of 65 patients in LMIC-led trials. HIC-led trials enrolled from 7.6 sites vs 1.8 sites in LMIC-led studies. Over half of LMIC-led trials were institutionally funded (54.7%). The majority of both HIC- and LMIC-led trials evaluated spinal neurosurgery, 68% and 71.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION We have established that there is a substantial disparity between HICs and LMICs in the number of published neurosurgical trials. A concerted effort to invest in research capacity building in LMICs is an essential step towards ensuring context- and resource-specific high-quality evidence is generated.

No abstract