High frequency oscillations (HFOs) are estimated as a potential marker for epileptogenicity. Current research strives for valid evidence that these HFOs could aid the delineation of the to-be resected area in patients with refractory epilepsy and improve surgical outcomes. In the present meta-analysis, we evaluated the relation between resection of regions from which HFOs can be detected and outcome after epilepsy surgery. We conducted a systematic review of all studies that related the resection of HFO-generating areas to postsurgical outcome. We related the outcome (seizure freedom) to resection ratio, that is, the ratio between the number of channels on which HFOs were detected and, among these, the number of channels that were inside the resected area. We compared the resection ratio between seizure free and not seizure free patients. In total, 11 studies were included. In 10 studies, ripples (80–200 Hz) were analyzed, and in 7 studies, fast ripples (>200 Hz) were studied. We found comparable differences (dif) and largely overlapping confidence intervals (CI) in resection ratios between outcome groups for ripples (dif = 0.18; CI: 0.10–0.27) and fast ripples (dif = 0.17; CI: 0.01–0.33). Subgroup analysis showed that automated detection (dif = 0.22; CI: 0.03–0.41) was comparable to visual detection (dif = 0.17; CI: 0.08–0.27). Considering frequency of HFOs (dif = 0.24; CI: 0.09–0.38) was related more strongly to outcome than considering each electrode that was showing HFOs (dif = 0.15; CI = 0.03–0.27). The effect sizes found in the meta-analysis are small but significant. Automated detection and application of a detection threshold in order to detect channels with a frequent occurrence of HFOs is important to yield a marker that could be useful in presurgical evaluation. In order to compare studies with different methodological approaches, detailed and standardized reporting is warranted.

No abstract

Context: Past evidence has shown that invasive and non-invasive brain stimulation may be effective for relieving central pain.Objective: To perform a topical review of the literature on brain neurostimulation techniques in patients with chronic neuropathic pain due to traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) and to assess the current evidence for their therapeutic efficacy. Methods: A MEDLINE search was performed using following terms: "Spinal cord injury", "Neuropathic pain", "Brain stimulation", "Deep brain stimulation" (DBS), "Motor cortex stimulation" (MCS), "Transcranial magnetic stimulation" (TMS), "Transcranial direct current stimulation" (tDCS), "Cranial electrotherapy stimulation" (CES). Results: Invasive neurostimulation therapies, in particular DBS and epidural MCS, have shown promise as treatments for neuropathic and phantom limb pain. However, the long-term efficacy of DBS is low, while MCS has a relatively higher potential with lesser complications that DBS. Among the non-invasive techniques, there is accumulating evidence that repetitive TMS can produce analgesic effects in healthy subjects undergoing laboratory-induced pain and in chronic pain conditions of various etiologies, at least partially and transiently. Another very safe technique of non-invasive brain stimulation -tDCS -applied over the sensorymotor cortex has been reported to decrease pain sensation and increase pain threshold in healthy subjects. CES has also proved to be effective in managing some types of pain, including neuropathic pain in subjects with SCI. Conclusion: A number of studies have begun to use non-invasive neuromodulatory techniques therapeutically to relieve neuropathic pain and phantom phenomena in patients with SCI. However, further studies are warranted to corroborate the early findings and confirm different targets and stimulation paradigms. The utility of these protocols in combination with pharmacological approaches should also be explored.

Study design: Randomized, double-blind, crossover, sham-controlled trial. Objectives: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) leads to a significant reduction of spasticity in subjects with spinal cord injury (SCI), but the physiological basis of this effect is still not well understood. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the disynaptic reciprocal Ia inhibition of soleus motoneurons in SCI patients. Setting: Department of Neurology, Merano, Italy and TMS Laboratory, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria. Methods: Nine subjects with incomplete cervical or thoracic SCI received 5 days of daily sessions of real or sham rTMS applied over the contralateral M1. We compared the reciprocal inhibition, the Modified Ashworth Scale and the Spinal Cord Injury Assessment Tool for Spasticity at baseline, after the last session and 1 week later in the real rTMS and sham stimulation groups. Results: We found that real rTMS significantly reduced lower limb spasticity and restored the impaired excitability in the disynaptic reciprocal inhibitory pathway. Conclusions: In a small proof-of-concept study, rTMS strengthened descending projections between the motor cortex and inhibitory spinal interneuronal circuits. This reversed a defect in reciprocal inhibition after SCI, and reduced leg spasticity.

No abstract