David A Dinsmoor, Joshua O Usoro, Noah D Barka, Tina M Billstrom, Leonid M Litvak, Lawrence R Poree
{"title":"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。","authors":"David A Dinsmoor, Joshua O Usoro, Noah D Barka, Tina M Billstrom, Leonid M Litvak, 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":"{\"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, Joshua O Usoro, Noah D Barka, Tina M Billstrom, Leonid M Litvak, 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}","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}
Using evoked compound action potentials to quantify differential neural activation with burst and conventional, 40 Hz spinal cord stimulation in ovines.
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.