LAUSR

We congratulate Brodsky et al.1 for the well-designed study, despite its limitations that the authors clearly stated in the article's discussion. The article adds further support to existing data2 on the validity of image-guided deep brain stimulation surgery as an emerging, and probably more advantageous, approach to the standard microelectrode recording (MER)-guided surgery. It would be helpful if the authors provided data on the comparative targeting accuracy of the 2 approaches, taking into account the 2 different targets as well as stimulation measures. The authors also did not specify whether or not the raters of the motor scoring were blinded. Moreover, the asleep group was more shifted towards internal globus pallidus (GPi) as a target compared to the awake cohort. Could the authors provide a comment on this?