ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2024
Biophysics of Frequency-Dependent Variation in Paresthesia and Pain Relief during Spinal Cord Stimulation.
Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The optimization of neuroprosthetic interfaces relying on biophysical and surrogate digital twins.npj biomedical innovations · 2026Review
- Overlapping mechanisms of epidural spinal cord stimulation for pain control and movement recovery.Current opinion in neurology · 2025Review
- Mechanisms and clinical progress of spinal cord stimulation in refractory chronic pain: an overview.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
The neurophysiological effects of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for chronic pain are poorly understood, resulting in inefficient failure-prone programming protocols and inadequate pain relief. Nonetheless, novel stimulation patterns are regularly introduced and adopted clinically. Traditionally, paresthetic sensation is considered necessary for pain relief, although novel paradigms provide analgesia without paresthesia. However, like pain relief, the neurophysiological underpinnings of SCS-induced paresthesia are unknown. Here, we paired biophysical modeling with clinical paresthesia thresholds (of both sexes) to investigate how stimulation frequency affects the neural response to SCS relevant to paresthesia and analgesia. Specifically, we modeled the dorsal column (DC) axonal response, dorsal column nucleus (DCN) synaptic transmission, conduction failure within DC fiber collaterals, and dorsal horn network output. Importantly, we found that high-frequency stimulation reduces DC fiber activation thresholds, which in turn accurately predicts clinical paresthesia perception thresholds. Furthermore, we show that high-frequency SCS produces asynchronous DC fiber spiking and ultimately asynchronous DCN output, offering a plausible biophysical basis for why high-frequency SCS is less comfortable and produces qualitatively different sensation than low-frequency stimulation. Finally, we demonstrate that the model dorsal horn network output is sensitive to SCS-inherent variations in spike timing, which could contribute to heterogeneous pain relief across patients. Importantly, we show that model DC fiber collaterals cannot reliably follow high-frequency stimulation, strongly affecting the network output and typically producing antinociceptive effects at high frequencies. Altogether, these findings clarify how SCS affects the nervous system and provide insight into the biophysics of paresthesia generation and pain relief.
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.