{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.044444444444444446, 'fraction_numerical': 0.028888888888888888, 'mean_word_length': 5.435714285714286, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Microelectrode Recording for Pallidotomy: Mandatory, Beneficial or Dangerous?

There is an active debate regarding whether pallidotomy should be performed with microelectrode recording or macroelectrode stimulation. A meta-analysis was performed on the published reports (1992–2000) of unilateral pallidotomy for Parkinson’s disease to determine if the outcome or complications of this procedure significantly differed between these two techniques. Papers were excluded if they followed a cohort of less than ten patients, had follow-up less than three months, or included previously reported patients. There were no significant differences between the two techniques in improvement of dyskinesia (p = 0.66) or UPDRS motor score (p = 0.62). Microelectrode recording had a significantly higher (p = 0.012) intracerebral hemorrhage rate (1.3 ± 0.4%) compared to macroelectrode stimulation (0.2 ± 0.2%).