Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34583022›Full record

ArticleThe journal of pain2022

Neural Recruitment During Conventional, Burst, and 10-kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation for Pain.

Evan R Rogers, Hans J Zander, Scott F Lempka

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of pain, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Computational Optimization of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Dorsal Horn Interneuron Polarization.Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 · 2024
    Article
  9. Mapping the Iceberg of Autonomic Recovery: Mechanistic Underpinnings of Neuromodulation following Spinal Cord Injury.The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Evan R RogersDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Hans J ZanderDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Scott F LempkaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Biointerfaces Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: lempka@umich.edu.
University of Michigan · US

Funding

Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Novel Method to Restore Breathing in Spinal Cord InjuryR01NS105785 · NINDS · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI DIMARCO, ANTHONY F. · 2018 to 2022
$2.8M
CRCNS: Model-Based Characterization of spinal cord stimulation for painR01AT010817 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI LEMPKA, SCOTT F · 2019 to 2023
$1.6M
NCCIH NIH HHS R01 AT010817NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS105785
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a popular neurostimulation therapy for severe chronic pain. To improve stimulation efficacy, multiple modes are now used clinically, including conventional, burst, and 10-kHz SCS. Clinical observations have produced speculation that these modes target different neural elements and/or work via distinct mechanisms of action. However, in humans, these hypotheses cannot be conclusively answered via experimental methods. Therefore, we utilized computational modeling to assess the response of primary afferents, interneurons, and projection neurons to conventional, burst, and 10-kHz SCS. We found that local cell thresholds were always higher than afferent thresholds, arguing against direct recruitment of these local cells. Furthermore, although we observed relative threshold differences between conventional, burst, and 10-kHz SCS, the recruitment order was the same. Finally, contrary to previous reports, axon collateralization produced complex changes in activation thresholds of primary afferents. These results motivate future work to contextualize clinical observations across SCS paradigms. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the first computational modeling study to investigate neural recruitment during conventional, burst, and 10-kilohertz spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain within a single modeling framework. The results provide insight into these treatments' unknown mechanisms of action and offer context to interpreting clinical observations.

Indexed as

Chronic PainSpinal Cord StimulationAxonsHumansPain ManagementSpinal Cordchronic paincomputer simulationelectric stimulationneuromodulationSpinal cord stimulation

Identifiers

PMID34583022
PMCPMC8925309
OpenAlexW3202803450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.