No abstract

BackgroundExperimental and clinical studies have shown that tonic spinal cord stimulation (SCS) releases gamma‐aminobutyric acid (GABA) in the spinal dorsal horn. Recently, it was suggested that burst SCS does not act via spinal GABAergic mechanisms. Therefore, we studied spinal GABA release during burst and tonic SCS, both anatomically and pharmacologically, in a well‐established chronic neuropathic pain model.MethodsAnimals underwent partial sciatic nerve ligation (PSNL). Quantitative immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis of intracellular GABA levels in the lumbar L4 to L6 dorsal spinal cord was performed after 60 minutes of burst, tonic, or sham SCS in rats that had undergone PSNL (n = 16). In a second pharmacological experiment, the effects of intrathecal administration of the GABAA antagonist bicuculline (5 μg) and the GABAB antagonist phaclofen (5 μg) were assessed. Paw withdrawal thresholds to von Frey filaments of rats that had undergone PSNL (n = 20) were tested during 60 minutes of burst and tonic SCS 30 minutes after intrathecal administration of the drugs.ResultsQuantitative IHC analysis of GABA immunoreactivity in spinal dorsal horn sections of animals that had received burst SCS (n = 5) showed significantly lower intracellular GABA levels when compared to sham SCS sections (n = 4; P = 0.0201) and tonic SCS sections (n = 7; P = 0.0077). Intrathecal application of the GABAA antagonist bicuculline (5 μg; n = 10) or the GABAB antagonist phaclofen (5 μg; n = 10) resulted in ablation of the analgesic effect for both burst SCS and tonic SCS.ConclusionsIn conclusion, our anatomical and pharmacological data demonstrate that, in this well‐established chronic neuropathic animal model, the analgesic effects of both burst SCS and tonic SCS are mediated via spinal GABAergic mechanisms.

Objectives To assess the supraspinal working mechanisms of the burst spinal cord stimulation (SCS) mode, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in chronic neuropathic rats. We hypothesized that active recharge burst SCS would induce a more profound blood oxygenation level–dependent (BOLD) signal increase in areas associated with cognitive‐emotional aspects of pain, as compared to tonic SCS. Methods Sprague Dawley rats (n = 17) underwent a unilateral partial sciatic nerve ligation, which resulted in chronic neuropathic pain. Quadripolar SCS electrodes were epidurally positioned on top of the dorsal columns at Th13. Isoflurane‐anesthetized (1.5%) rats received either tonic SCS (n = 8) or burst SCS (n = 9) at 66% of motor threshold. BOLD fMRI was conducted before, during, and after SCS using a 9.4‐T horizontal bore scanner. Results Overall, both tonic and burst SCS induced a significant increase of BOLD signal levels in areas associated with the location and intensity of pain, and areas associated with cognitive‐emotional aspects of pain. Additionally, burst SCS significantly increased BOLD signal levels in the raphe nuclei, nucleus accumbens, and caudate putamen. Tonic SCS did not induce a significant increase in BOLD signal levels in these areas. Conclusions In conclusion, active recharge burst and tonic SCS have different effects on the intensity and localization of SCS‐induced activation responses in the brain. This work demonstrates that active recharge burst is another waveform that can engage brain areas associated with cognitive‐emotional aspects of pain as well as areas associated with location and intensity of pain. Previous studies showing similar engagement used only passive recharge burst.