Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29075183›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroanatomy2017

The Role of Functional Neuroanatomy of the Lumbar Spinal Cord in Effect of Epidural Stimulation.

Carlos A Cuellar, Aldo A Mendez, Riazul Islam, Jonathan S Calvert, Peter J Grahn, Bruce Knudsen, Tuan Pham, Kendall H Lee, Igor A Lavrov

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroanatomy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Spatiotemporal Distribution of Electrically Evoked Spinal Compound Action Potentials During Spinal Cord Stimulation.Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2023
    Article
  10. Transtraumatic Epidural Electrostimulation of the Spinal Cord in a Pig Model.Bulletin of experimental biology and medicine · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Carlos A CuellarDepartment of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo ClinicRochester, MN, United States.
Aldo A MendezDepartment of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo ClinicRochester, MN, United States.
Riazul IslamDepartment of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo ClinicRochester, MN, United States.
Jonathan S CalvertMayo Clinic Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Mayo ClinicRochester, MN, United States.
Peter J GrahnDepartment of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo ClinicRochester, MN, United States.
Bruce KnudsenDepartment of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo ClinicRochester, MN, United States.
Tuan PhamDepartment of Biological Sciences, Lehigh UniversityBethlehem, PA, United States.
Kendall H LeeDepartment of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo ClinicRochester, MN, United States.
Igor A LavrovDepartment of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo ClinicRochester, MN, United States.
WinnMed · USMayo Clinic · USLehigh University · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USMayo Clinic in Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, the neuroanatomy of the swine lumbar spinal cord, particularly the spatial orientation of dorsal roots was correlated to the anatomical landmarks of the lumbar spine and to the magnitude of motor evoked potentials during epidural electrical stimulation (EES). We found that the proximity of the stimulating electrode to the dorsal roots entry zone across spinal segments was a critical factor to evoke higher peak-to-peak motor responses. Positioning the electrode close to the dorsal roots produced a significantly higher impact on motor evoked responses than rostro-caudal shift of electrode from segment to segment. Based on anatomical measurements of the lumbar spine and spinal cord, significant differences were found between L1-L4 to L5-L6 segments in terms of spinal cord gross anatomy, dorsal roots and spine landmarks. Linear regression analysis between intersegmental landmarks was performed and L2 intervertebral spinous process length was selected as the anatomical reference in order to correlate vertebral landmarks and the spinal cord structures. These findings present for the first time, the influence of spinal cord anatomy on the effects of epidural stimulation and the role of specific orientation of electrodes on the dorsal surface of the dura mater in relation to the dorsal roots. These results are critical to consider as spinal cord neuromodulation strategies continue to evolve and novel spinal interfaces translate into clinical practice.

Indexed as

epidural stimulationfunctional neuroanatomyneuromodulationspinal cordswine

Identifiers

PMID29075183
PMCPMC5642185
OpenAlexW2760524288

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.