SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

The costs and benefits of deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease: a review and social network analysis.

Arq Neuropsiquiatr · 2025-07-17

DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1809996PMID: 40675615

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Parkinson's disease (PD) is the second most prevalent neurodegenerative disorder worldwide. Levodopa has been considered the best treatment option. However, deep brain stimulation (DBS) use has increased over time, mostly when levodopa-related complications arise.To review the current evidence regarding economic evaluations assessing costs and benefits comparing pharmacological versus surgical treatment among subjects with PD.We searched three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar) for studies comparing levodopa treatment and DBS among subjects with PD in terms of costs and benefits from therapy.Out of the 107 studies identified, 14 met the inclusion criteria. Most of the published studies were from Europe. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios have shown variable results, from -€979 to €6,729 per change of 1 point in the score on part III of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS III), while incremental cost-utility ratios depict values as low as €6,700 and as high as $704,906.03 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY).We observed a higher cost during the 1st year of DBS implantation due to the surgical procedure itself, subsequently, there was a trend for a lower cost over the following years, with no loss of benefit. Overall, the studies showed DBS as a cost-effective measure at 5-years after implantation.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.