ArticleHealthcare technology letters2020
Hypothesis for the mechanism of action of ECAP-controlled closed-loop systems for spinal cord stimulation.
Article in Healthcare technology letters, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Neurophysiological outcomes that sustained clinically significant improvements over 3 years of physiologic ECAP-controlled closed-loop spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of chronic pain.Regional anesthesia and pain medicine · 2025Trial
- Electrophysiologic Characteristics of Epidural Spinal Signals in Preclinical Models of Spinal Cord Stimulation.Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2026Article
- Objective, Same-Day SCS Trials with ECAP-Controlled Closed-Loop Therapy: Depth of Response is Maintained from Trial to 12 months.Pain and therapy · 2026Article
- Article
- Electrophysiological Characteristics of Epidural Spinal Signals in Preclinical Models of Spinal Cord Stimulation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- First Objective Evidence Characterizing Differences in Cervical and Thoracic Spinal Cord Neurophysiology Using ECAP-Controlled Closed-Loop Technology.Pain and therapy · 2025Article
- First evidence of a biomarker-based dose-response relationship in chronic pain using physiological closed-loop spinal cord stimulation.Regional anesthesia and pain medicine · 2025Article
- Case report: Potential physiological sources of the late response in epidural spinal recordings induced by spinal cord stimulation during intraoperative neuromonitoring.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2025Article
- Identifying SCS Trial Responders Immediately After Postoperative Programming with ECAP Dose-Controlled Closed-Loop Therapy.Pain and therapy · 2024Article
- Durability of Evoked Compound Action Potential (ECAP)-Controlled, Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) in a Real-World European Chronic Pain Population.Pain and therapy · 2024Article
- Biophysics of Frequency-Dependent Variation in Paresthesia and Pain Relief during Spinal Cord Stimulation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
- Evoked compound action potential (ECAP)-controlled closed-loop spinal cord stimulation in an experimental model of neuropathic pain in rats.Bioelectronic medicine · 2024Article
- Pathophysiology of Pain and Mechanisms of Neuromodulation: A Narrative Review (A Neuron Project).Journal of pain research · 2024Review
- First Report on Real-World Outcomes with Evoked Compound Action Potential (ECAP)-Controlled Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation for Treatment of Chronic Pain.Pain and therapy · 2023Article
- Trial or not trial in the practice of spinal cord stimulation. That's the question.Interventional pain medicine · 2023Article
- Real World Clinical Utility of Neurophysiological Measurement Utilizing Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation in a Chronic Pain Population: The ECAP Study Protocol.Journal of pain research · 2023Article
- Advances in Pain Medicine: a Review of New Technologies.Current pain and headache reports · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advances in technology and improvement of efficacy for many neuromodulation applications have been achieved without understanding the relationship between the stimulation parameters and the neural activity which is generated in the nervous system. It is the neural activity that ultimately drives the therapeutic benefit and the advent of evoked compound action potential recording allows this activity to be directly measured and quantified. Closed-loop control adjusts the stimulation parameters to maintain a predetermined level of neural recruitment and has been shown to provide improved pain relief in individuals with spinal cord stimulators. However, no mechanism that relates more consistent neural recruitment to patient outcomes has been proposed. The authors propose a hypothesis that may explain the difference in efficacy between open- and closed-loop operational modes by considering the relationship between measured neural recruitment with hypothetical dose and side effect response curves. This provides a rational basis for directing clinical research and improving therapeutic systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.