Bilateral deep sclerectomy

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

Patients receiving deep brain stimulation experienced significant improvements on the PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales compared with best medical therapy at 6 months.

Effect: improvement; Significant improvement on PDQ-39 summary measure and 7 of 8 subscales

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2

The overall incidence risk of experiencing a serious adverse event was 3.8 times higher in DBS patients than in BMT patients, with 49 DBS patients (40%) experiencing at least 1 serious adverse event c

Effect: adverse; Incidence risk ratio 3.8 (DBS vs BMT); 40% of DBS patients vs 11% of BMT patients experienced at least 1 serious adverse event; CI: 95% CI, 2