Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37238953›Full record

ReviewBiomedicines2023

Modeling Electric Fields in Transcutaneous Spinal Direct Current Stimulation: A Clinical Perspective.

Matteo Guidetti, Stefano Giannoni-Luza, Tommaso Bocci, Kevin Pacheco-Barrios, Anna Maria Bianchi, Marta Parazzini, Silvio Ionta, Roberta Ferrucci, Natale Vincenzo Maiorana, Federico Verde and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomedicines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Effects of transcutaneous spinal stimulation with gait training on walking-related outcomes in stroke survivors: a systematic review.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Matteo GuidettiAldo Ravelli Research Center for Neurotechnology and Experimental Neurotherapeutics, Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, 20142 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4562-009X
Stefano Giannoni-LuzaSensory-Motor Lab (SeMoLa), Department of Ophthalmology-University of Lausanne, Jules Gonin Eye Hospital/Fondation Asile des Aveugles, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7413-4501
Tommaso BocciAldo Ravelli Research Center for Neurotechnology and Experimental Neurotherapeutics, Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, 20142 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8874-1070
Kevin Pacheco-BarriosNeuromodulation Center and Center for Clinical Research Learning, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02129, USA.
Anna Maria BianchiDepartment of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8290-7460
Marta ParazziniIstituto di Elettronica e di Ingegneria Dell'Informazione e delle Telecomunicazioni (IEIIT), Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), 10129 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9008-7530
Silvio IontaSensory-Motor Lab (SeMoLa), Department of Ophthalmology-University of Lausanne, Jules Gonin Eye Hospital/Fondation Asile des Aveugles, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-2078-4861
Roberta FerrucciIII Neurology Clinic, ASST-Santi Paolo e Carlo University Hospital, 20142 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5109-9483
Natale Vincenzo MaioranaAldo Ravelli Research Center for Neurotechnology and Experimental Neurotherapeutics, Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, 20142 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6547-6304
Federico VerdeDepartment of Neurology, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, 20149 Milan, Italy.
Nicola TicozziDepartment of Neurology, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, 20149 Milan, Italy.
Vincenzo SilaniDepartment of Neurology, Istituto Auxologico Italiano IRCCS, 20149 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7698-3854
Alberto PrioriAldo Ravelli Research Center for Neurotechnology and Experimental Neurotherapeutics, Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, 20142 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1549-3851
University of Milan · ITFondation Asile des Aveugles · CHInstitute of Electronics, Computer and Telecommunication Engineering · ITPolitecnico di Milano · ITUniversidad San Ignacio de Loyola · PE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical findings suggest that transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) can modulate ascending sensitive, descending corticospinal, and segmental pathways in the spinal cord (SC). However, several aspects of the stimulation have not been completely understood, and realistic computational models based on MRI are the gold standard to predict the interaction between tsDCS-induced electric fields and anatomy. Here, we review the electric fields distribution in the SC during tsDCS as predicted by MRI-based realistic models, compare such knowledge with clinical findings, and define the role of computational knowledge in optimizing tsDCS protocols. tsDCS-induced electric fields are predicted to be safe and induce both transient and neuroplastic changes. This could support the possibility to explore new clinical applications, such as spinal cord injury. For the most applied protocol (2-3 mA for 20-30 min, active electrode over T10-T12 and the reference on the right shoulder), similar electric field intensities are generated in both ventral and dorsal horns of the SC at the same height. This was confirmed by human studies, in which both motor and sensitive effects were found. Lastly, electric fields are strongly dependent on anatomy and electrodes' placement. Regardless of the montage, inter-individual hotspots of higher values of electric fields were predicted, which could change when the subjects move from a position to another (e.g., from the supine to the lateral position). These characteristics underlines the need for individualized and patient-tailored MRI-based computational models to optimize the stimulation protocol. A detailed modeling approach of the electric field distribution might contribute to optimizing stimulation protocols, tailoring electrodes' configuration, intensities, and duration to the clinical outcome.

Indexed as

clinical studycomputational modelselectric fieldsneuromodulationnon-invasive brain stimulationtranscutaneous spinal direct current stimulation

Identifiers

PMID37238953
PMCPMC10216237
OpenAlexW4367182710

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.