% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Barbe:849954,
      author       = {Barbe, Michael and Reker, Paul and Hamacher, Stefanie and
                      Franklin, Jeremy and Kraus, Daria and Dembek, Till A. and
                      Becker, Johannes and Steffen, Julia K. and Allert, Niels and
                      Wirths, Jochen and Dafsari, Haidar S. and Voges, Jürgen and
                      Fink, Gereon R. and Visser-Vandewalle, Veerle and
                      Timmermann, Lars},
      title        = {{DBS} of the {PSA} and the {VIM} in essential tremor},
      journal      = {Neurology},
      volume       = {91},
      number       = {6},
      issn         = {1526-632X},
      address      = {Philadelphia, Pa.},
      publisher    = {Wolters Kluwer},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2018-04049},
      pages        = {page 247},
      year         = {2018},
      abstract     = {Objective To evaluate deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the
                      posterior subthalamic area (PSA) in essential tremor (ET)
                      and compare it to the ventral intermediate nucleus of the
                      thalamus (VIM) in terms of stimulation efficacy, efficiency,
                      and side effects.Methods DBS leads were implanted such that
                      contacts were placed in the VIM, on the intercommissural
                      line, and in the PSA. Thirteen patients with ET entered a
                      randomized, double-blind crossover phase and completed a
                      1-year follow-up.Results PSA-DBS significantly reduced
                      tremor severity and improved quality of life. There were no
                      relevant differences in quality and frequency of stimulation
                      side effects between VIM and PSA, with a tendency toward
                      greater tremor improvement with PSA stimulation. Clinical
                      benefit was achieved at significantly lower stimulation
                      amplitudes in the PSA. The majority of patients remained
                      with PSA-DBS after 1 year.Conclusion In accordance with
                      previous retrospective investigations, our prospective data
                      suggest that PSA-DBS is at least equally effective as but
                      possibly more efficient than VIM-DBS.Classification of
                      evidence This study provides Class I evidence that for
                      patients with essential tremor, PSA-DBS is not significantly
                      different from VIM-DBS in suppressing tremor, but clinical
                      benefit from PSA-DBS is attained at lower stimulation
                      amplitudes.},
      cin          = {INM-3},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-3-20090406},
      pnm          = {572 - (Dys-)function and Plasticity (POF3-572)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-572},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:29970404},
      UT           = {WOS:000442266600006},
      doi          = {10.1212/WNL.0000000000005956},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/849954},
}