Using evoked compound action potentials to quantify differential neural activation with burst and conventional, 40 Hz spinal cord stimulation in ovines.

IF 3.4 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Pain Reports Pub Date : 2022-11-11 eCollection Date: 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1097/PR9.0000000000001047
David A Dinsmoor, Joshua O Usoro, Noah D Barka, Tina M Billstrom, Leonid M Litvak, Lawrence R Poree
{"title":"Using evoked compound action potentials to quantify differential neural activation with burst and conventional, 40 Hz spinal cord stimulation in ovines.","authors":"David A Dinsmoor,&nbsp;Joshua O Usoro,&nbsp;Noah D Barka,&nbsp;Tina M Billstrom,&nbsp;Leonid M Litvak,&nbsp;Lawrence R Poree","doi":"10.1097/PR9.0000000000001047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Unlike conventional dorsal spinal cord stimulation (SCS)-which uses single pulses at a fixed rate-burst SCS uses a fixed-rate, five-pulse stimuli cluster as a treatment for chronic pain; mechanistic explanations suggest burst SCS differentially modulate the medial and lateral pain pathways vs conventional SCS. Neural activation differences between burst and conventional SCS are quantifiable with the spinal-evoked compound action potential (ECAP), an electrical measure of synchronous neural activation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We implanted 7 sheep with a dorsal stimulation lead at T9/T10, a dorsal ECAP sensing lead at T6/T7, and a lead also at T9/T10 but adjacent to the anterolateral system (ALS). Both burst and conventional SCS with stimulation amplitudes up to the visual motor threshold (vMT) were delivered to 3 different dorsal spinal locations, and ECAP thresholds (ECAPTs) were calculated for all combinations. Then, changes in ALS activation were assessed with both types of SCS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Evoked compound action potential thresholds and vMTs were significantly higher (<i>P</i> < 0.05) with conventional vs burst SCS, with no statistical difference (<i>P</i> > 0.05) among stimulation sites. However, the vMT-ECAPT window (a proxy for the useable therapeutic dosing range) was significantly wider (<i>P</i> < 0.05) with conventional vs burst SCS. No significant difference (<i>P</i> > 0.05) in ALS activation was noted between conventional and burst SCS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When dosed equivalently, no differentially unique change in ALS activation results with burst SCS vs conventional SCS; in addition, sub-ECAPT burst SCS results in no discernable excitability changes in the neural pathways feeding pain relevant supraspinal sites.</p>","PeriodicalId":52189,"journal":{"name":"Pain Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/a9/45/painreports-7-e1047.PMC9663139.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PR9.0000000000001047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Unlike conventional dorsal spinal cord stimulation (SCS)-which uses single pulses at a fixed rate-burst SCS uses a fixed-rate, five-pulse stimuli cluster as a treatment for chronic pain; mechanistic explanations suggest burst SCS differentially modulate the medial and lateral pain pathways vs conventional SCS. Neural activation differences between burst and conventional SCS are quantifiable with the spinal-evoked compound action potential (ECAP), an electrical measure of synchronous neural activation.

Methods: We implanted 7 sheep with a dorsal stimulation lead at T9/T10, a dorsal ECAP sensing lead at T6/T7, and a lead also at T9/T10 but adjacent to the anterolateral system (ALS). Both burst and conventional SCS with stimulation amplitudes up to the visual motor threshold (vMT) were delivered to 3 different dorsal spinal locations, and ECAP thresholds (ECAPTs) were calculated for all combinations. Then, changes in ALS activation were assessed with both types of SCS.

Results: Evoked compound action potential thresholds and vMTs were significantly higher (P < 0.05) with conventional vs burst SCS, with no statistical difference (P > 0.05) among stimulation sites. However, the vMT-ECAPT window (a proxy for the useable therapeutic dosing range) was significantly wider (P < 0.05) with conventional vs burst SCS. No significant difference (P > 0.05) in ALS activation was noted between conventional and burst SCS.

Conclusion: When dosed equivalently, no differentially unique change in ALS activation results with burst SCS vs conventional SCS; in addition, sub-ECAPT burst SCS results in no discernable excitability changes in the neural pathways feeding pain relevant supraspinal sites.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

利用诱发复合动作电位定量测定绵羊脊髓脉冲和常规40赫兹刺激下的差异神经激活。
与传统的脊髓背刺激(SCS)不同,它使用固定速率的单脉冲,burst SCS使用固定速率的五脉冲刺激簇作为慢性疼痛的治疗;机制解释表明,与常规SCS相比,破裂SCS对内侧和外侧疼痛通路的调节是不同的。脊髓诱发复合动作电位(ECAP)是一种同步神经激活的电测量方法,可以量化突发和常规SCS之间的神经激活差异。方法:在7只羊的T9/T10处植入背侧刺激导线,在T6/T7处植入背侧ECAP感应导线,在T9/T10处植入靠近前外侧系统(ALS)的导线。将刺激幅度高达视觉运动阈值(vMT)的爆发和常规SCS传递到3个不同的脊髓背侧位置,并计算所有组合的ECAP阈值(ECAPTs)。然后,用两种类型的SCS评估ALS激活的变化。结果:常规刺激组与突发刺激组的诱发复合动作电位阈值和vmt均显著高于常规刺激组(P < 0.05),刺激部位间差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。然而,vMT-ECAPT窗口(可用治疗剂量范围的代理)在常规和突发SCS中明显更宽(P < 0.05)。常规SCS与破裂SCS在ALS激活方面无显著差异(P > 0.05)。结论:当剂量相等时,破裂SCS与常规SCS在ALS激活结果上没有差异。此外,亚ecapt爆发的SCS在与疼痛相关的棘上部位的神经通路中没有明显的兴奋性变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pain Reports
Pain Reports Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
2.10%
发文量
93
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信