ArticleCureus2024
Clinical Outcome After Epidural Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Spinal cord stimulation for concurrent improvement of consciousness and spasticity following severe traumatic brain injury: a case study.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Effects of Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients with Small Fiber and Associated Comorbidities from Neuropathy After Multiple Etiologies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The awakening effect of hyperbaric oxygen therapy combined with systematic auditory stimulation in comatose patients with craniocerebral injury and its influence on serum biomarkers.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEpidural spinal cord stimulation is a minimally invasive procedure with a growing list of indications. It has a good safety profile and analgesic effect, reduces the severity of spasticity, and activates various brain regions. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical outcome of epidural spinal cord stimulation in patients with spastic syndrome and chronic disorders of consciousness resulting from severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI).
methodsBetween 2021 and 2023, an epidural spinal cord stimulation test was performed in 34 patients with central paresis, severe hypertonia, and chronically altered consciousness following sTBI. The severity of spastic syndrome was assessed using a modified Ashworth scale. All patients underwent implantation of a cylindrical eight-contact test epidural electrode at C3-C5 cervical level, followed by neurostimulation and selection of individual modes. Tonic stimulation at a frequency of 60 Hz, "burst" mode, or a combination of the two was used.
resultsEpidural spinal cord stimulation was administered for an average of 4 ± 1.5 days, with tonic stimulation mode applied in 15 (44.1%) patients, "burst" mode in 10 (29.4%), and a combination of two in nine (26.5%) patients. A reduction in spasticity with clinical improvement was observed in 21 patients (61.8%). The Ashworth scale scores for distal and proximal upper extremities decreased from 3 points to 2.5 points and from 3 points to 2 points, respectively. This was significant in the right upper limbs (p = 0.0152 distally and p = 0.0164 proximally). Significant improvements were also seen in the lower extremities. Active movements in paretic limbs increased or appeared in 12 patients (35.3%), while a heightened level of consciousness was observed in six patients (17.6%). Permanent neurostimulator implantation was performed in 12 patients (35.3%), with no reported surgical complications.
conclusionEpidural spinal cord stimulation shows promise as an invasive rehabilitation method for patients with sTBI sequelae. Its use reduced the severity of spastic syndrome in over half of patients and increased active movements in paretic limbs in over a third. Notably, neuromodulation at the cervical level yielded pronounced effects on the upper extremities, both proximally and distally. Findings regarding consciousness level improvement are particularly intriguing but warrant further validation through randomized trials.
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.