Summary Background Repeated periods of stimulation of the spinal cord and training seems to have amplified the ability to consciously control movement. Methods An individual three years post C7-T1 subluxation presented with a complete loss of clinically detectable voluntary motor function and partial preservation of sensation below the T1 cord segment. Following 170 locomotor training sessions, a 16-electrode array was surgically placed on the dura (L1-S1 cord segments) to allow for chronic electrical stimulation. After implantation and throughout stand retraining with epidural stimulation, 29 experiments were performed. Extensive stimulation combinations and parameters were tested to achieve standing and stepping. Findings Epidural stimulation enabled the human lumbosacral spinal circuitry to dynamically elicit full weight-bearing standing with assistance provided only for balance for 4·25 minutes in a subject with a clinically motor complete SCI. This occurred when using stimulation at parameters optimized for standing while providing bilateral load-bearing proprioceptive input. Locomotor-like patterns were also observed when stimulation parameters were optimized for stepping. In addition, seven months after implantation, the subject recovered supraspinal control of certain leg movements, but only during epidural stimulation. Interpretation Even after a severe low cervical spinal injury, the neural networks remaining within the lumbosacral segments can be reactivated into functional states so that it can recognize specific details of ensembles of sensory input to the extent that it can serve as the source of neural control. In addition, newly formed supraspinal input to this same lumbosacral segments can re-emerge as another source of control. Task specific training with epidural stimulation may have reactivated previously silent spared neural circuits or promoted plasticity. This suggests that these interventions could be a viable clinical approach for functional recovery after severe paralysis. Funding National Institutes of Health and Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation.

The International Campaign for Cures of Spinal Cord Injury Paralysis (ICCP) supported an international panel tasked with reviewing the methodology for clinical trials in spinal cord injury (SCI), and making recommendations on the conduct of future trials. This is the first of four papers. Here, we examine the spontaneous rate of recovery after SCI and resulting consequences for achieving statistically significant results in clinical trials. We have reanalysed data from the Sygen trial to provide some of this information. Almost all people living with SCI show some recovery of motor function below the initial spinal injury level. While the spontaneous recovery of motor function in patients with motor-complete SCI is fairly limited and predictable, recovery in incomplete SCI patients (American spinal injury Association impairment scale (AIS) C and AIS D) is both more substantial and highly variable. With motor complete lesions (AIS A/AIS B) the majority of functional return is within the zone of partial preservation, and may be sufficient to reclassify the injury level to a lower spinal level. The vast majority of recovery occurs in the first 3 months, but a small amount can persist for up to18 months or longer. Some sensory recovery occurs after SCI, on roughly the same time course as motor recovery. Based on previous data of the magnitude of spontaneous recovery after SCI, as measured by changes in ASIA motor scores, power calculations suggest that the number of subjects required to achieve a significant result from a trial declines considerably as the start of the study is delayed after SCI. Trials of treatments that are most efficacious when given soon after injury will therefore, require larger patient numbers than trials of treatments that are effective at later time points. As AIS B patients show greater spontaneous recovery than AIS A patients, the number of AIS A patients requiring to be enrolled into a trial is lower. This factor will have to be balanced against the possibility that some treatments will be more effective in incomplete patients. Trials involving motor incomplete SCI patients, or trials where an accurate assessment of AIS grade cannot be made before the start of the trial, will require large subject numbers and/or better objective assessment methods.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains a major public health problem globally. In the United States the incidence of closed head injuries admitted to hospitals is conservatively estimated to be 200 per 100,000 population, and the incidence of penetrating head injury is estimated to be 12 per 100,000, the highest of any developed country in the world. This yields an approximate number of 500,000 new cases each year, a sizeable proportion of which demonstrate signficant long-term disabilities. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of proven therapies for this disease. For a variety of reasons, clinical trials for this condition have been difficult to design and perform. Despite promising pre-clinical data, most of the trials that have been performed in recent years have failed to demonstrate any significant improvement in outcomes. The reasons for these failures have not always been apparent and any insights gained were not always shared. It was therefore feared that we were running the risk of repeating our mistakes. Recognizing the importance of TBI, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) sponsored a workshop that brought together experts from clinical, research, and pharmaceutical backgrounds. This workshop proved to be very informative and yielded many insights into previous and future TBI trials. This paper is an attempt to summarize the key points made at the workshop. It is hoped that these lessons will enhance the planning and design of future efforts in this important field of research.