Invasive and non-invasive brain stimulation for treatment of neuropathic pain in patients with spinal cord injury: A review

Nardone, Raffaele; Höller, Yvonne; Leis, Stefan; Höller, Peter; Thon, Natasha; Thomschewski, Aljoscha; Golaszewski, Stefan; Brigo, Francesco; Trinka, Eugen

doi:10.1179/2045772313y.0000000140

Cited by 69 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Alternating current stimulation-induced after effects are assumed to arise from synaptic-level processes (26), this long-lasting effect persists up to 1 h (8). In our patient, the adverse effects were reported at the first month of follow-up.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation: A Potential Risk for Genetic Generalized Epilepsy Patients (Study Case)

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) is a re-emergent neuromodulation technique that consists in the external application of oscillating electrical currents that induces changes in cortical excitability. We present the case of a 16-year-old female with pharmaco-resistant juvenile myoclonic epilepsy to 3 antiepileptic’s drugs characterized by 4 myoclonic and 20 absence seizures monthly. She received tACS at 1 mA at 3 Hz pulse train during 60 min over Fp1–Fp2 (10–20 EEG international system position) during 4 consecutive days using an Endeavor™ IOM Systems device® (Natus Medical Incorporated, Middleton, WI, USA). At the 1-month follow-up, she reported a 75% increase in seizures frequency (only myoclonic and tonic–clonic events) and developed a 24-h myoclonic status epilepticus that resolved with oral clonazepam and intravenous valproate. At the 2-month follow-up, the patient reported a 15-day seizure-free period.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation: A Potential Risk for Genetic Generalized Epilepsy Patients (Study Case)

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Epidural spinal cord stimulation has long been used to treat intractable pain in patients (29,111,116,145,146,149,177,183,188,227,230). Sayenko et al (220) showed that lumbosacral epidural stimulation activated widespread rostral and caudal areas of the lumbar spinal cord, involving afferent and efferent pathways, in a patient with chronic SCI.…”

Section: Epidural Spinal Cord Stimulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Motor cortex stimulation has long been used to treat pain (31, 177,183,273 (256) showed that weak electrical stimulation of rat sensorimotor cortex causes long-term changes in spinal H-reflexes and motoneuron g-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors. Within weeks of initiating stimulation, the numbers and sizes of GABAergic spinal interneurons increased, while GABA A and GABA B receptor labeling on soleus motoneurons decreased.…”

Section: Motor Cortex Stimulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The motor cortex can be readily activated with epidural electrodes or transcranial electrical currents or magnetic fields. Subthreshold motor cortex stimuli are not particularly uncomfortable or painful but can activate the motor cortex without overt movements.Motor cortex stimulation has long been used to treat pain (31,177,183,273 (256) showed that weak electrical stimulation of rat sensorimotor cortex causes long-term changes in spinal H-reflexes and motoneuron g-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors. Within weeks of initiating stimulation, the numbers and sizes of GABAergic spinal interneurons increased, while GABA A and GABA B receptor labeling on soleus motoneurons decreased.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Electrical Stimulation and Motor Recovery

Young

2015

Cell Transplant

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, several investigators have successfully regenerated axons in animal spinal cords without locomotor recovery. One explanation is that the animals were not trained to use the regenerated connections. Intensive locomotor training improves walking recovery after spinal cord injury (SCI) in people, and >90% of people with incomplete SCI recover walking with training. Although the optimal timing, duration, intensity, and type of locomotor training are still controversial, many investigators have reported beneficial effects of training on locomotor function. The mechanisms by which training improves recovery are not clear, but an attractive theory is available. In 1949, Donald Hebb proposed a famous rule that has been paraphrased as "neurons that fire together, wire together." This rule provided a theoretical basis for a widely accepted theory that homosynaptic and heterosynaptic activity facilitate synaptic formation and consolidation. In addition, the lumbar spinal cord has a locomotor center, called the central pattern generator (CPG), which can be activated nonspecifically with electrical stimulation or neurotransmitters to produce walking. The CPG is an obvious target to reconnect after SCI. Stimulating motor cortex, spinal cord, or peripheral nerves can modulate lumbar spinal cord excitability. Motor cortex stimulation causes long-term changes in spinal reflexes and synapses, increases sprouting of the corticospinal tract, and restores skilled forelimb function in rats. Long used to treat chronic pain, motor cortex stimuli modify lumbar spinal network excitability and improve lower extremity motor scores in humans. Similarly, epidural spinal cord stimulation has long been used to treat pain and spasticity. Subthreshold epidural stimulation reduces the threshold for locomotor activity. In 2011, Harkema et al. reported lumbosacral epidural stimulation restores motor control in chronic motor complete patients. Peripheral nerve or functional electrical stimulation (FES) has long been used to activate sacral nerves to treat bladder and pelvic dysfunction and to augment motor function. In theory, FES should facilitate synaptic formation and motor recovery after regenerative therapies. Upcoming clinical trials provide unique opportunities to test the theory. INTRODUCTIONIn the past decade, several prominent laboratories have shown axonal regeneration in animal spinal cord injury (SCI) models, but locomotor recovery did not follow regeneration (277). For example Lu et al. (159,160) and He's group (156,282) regenerated many axons that synapsed with neurons in the lower spinal cord, but the animals did not recover walking. To explain the lack of locomotor recovery, the investigators assume that insufficient numbers of regenerated axons have formed synapses with appropriate neurons in the lower spinal cord to support locomotion. Another explanation for the lack of locomotor recovery after complete SCI and regeneration is that the animals did not learn to use their newly regrown connections.Regenerated fibe...

show abstract

“…It is a noninvasive brain stimulation prescriptive medical treatment. 24 CES was first cleared for interstate marketing and export by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of anxiety, depression, and insomnia in 1979. We have therefore assessed the effect of CES combined with BFT in patients with FC, which included bowel symptoms, psychological status, and anorectal function.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation Combined with Biofeedback Therapy in Patients with Functional Constipation

Gong

Hong

Zang

et al. 2016

J Neurogastroenterol Motil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/AimsA large number of studies have shown that function constipation (FC) has an extremely high incidence of mental and psychological disorders. Cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) was applied to the treatment of psychological disorders such as anxiety and depression. We explored the effects of CES combined with biofeedback therapy (BFT) on the psychological state, clinical symptoms, and anorectal function in patients with FC. MethodsA total of 74 patients with FC were randomly divided into 2 groups. The control group received BFT. CES combined with BFT was carried out in the experiment group. All patients were assessed using the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS), self-rating depression scale (SDS), and Wexner constipation score at baseline and the end of each course. Anorectal manometry and balloon expulsion tests were performed before and after treatment. ResultsAfter treatment, the participants in the experiment group had significantly lower score SAS, SDS, and Wexner constipation scores than the control group (all P < 0.05). The number of successful expulsion in the experiment group was larger than the control group (P = 0.016). Conclusions

show abstract

Invasive and non-invasive brain stimulation for treatment of neuropathic pain in patients with spinal cord injury: A review

Cited by 69 publications

References 93 publications

Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation: A Potential Risk for Genetic Generalized Epilepsy Patients (Study Case)

Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation: A Potential Risk for Genetic Generalized Epilepsy Patients (Study Case)

Electrical Stimulation and Motor Recovery

Efficacy of Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation Combined with Biofeedback Therapy in Patients with Functional Constipation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About