Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39654645›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2024

Restoration of natural somatic sensations to the amputees: finding the right combination of neurostimulation methods.

Gurgen Soghoyan, Artur R Biktimirov, Nikita S Piliugin, Yury Matvienko, Alexander Y Kaplan, Mikhail Y Sintsov, Mikhail A Lebedev

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05650931 (Peripheral Nerve Stimulation and Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients With Phantom Limb Pain After Upper Limb Amputation for Phantom Limb Pain Suppression and Development of the Biomarkers), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05650931 naunknown statusnot on this map

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation and Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients With Phantom Limb Pain After Upper Limb Amputation for Phantom Limb Pain Suppression and Development of the Biomarkers

TypeinterventionalSponsorArtur BiktimirovRan2021 to 2025Enrolled10ConditionsPhantom Limb Pain, Phantom Pain, AmputationArmsImplantation of PNS electrodes during surgery, mapping to select sites with the best effect and pain modulation., SCS electrode implantation at surgery, mapping to select sites with the best effect and pain modulation., EEG to search for phantom pain biomarkers
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

7 authors.

Gurgen SoghoyanVladimir Zelman Center for Neurobiology and Brain Rehabilitation, Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Moscow, Russia.
Artur R BiktimirovLaboratory of Experimental and Translational Medicine, School of Biomedicine, Far Eastern Federal University, Vladivostok, Russia.
Nikita S PiliuginVladimir Zelman Center for Neurobiology and Brain Rehabilitation, Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Moscow, Russia.
Yury MatvienkoMotorica Research Center, Moscow, Russia.
Alexander Y KaplanVladimir Zelman Center for Neurobiology and Brain Rehabilitation, Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Moscow, Russia.
Mikhail Y SintsovMotorica Research Center, Moscow, Russia.
Mikhail A LebedevFaculty of Mechanics and Mathematics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Limb amputation results in such devastating consequences as loss of motor and sensory functions and phantom limb pain (PLP). Neurostimulation-based approaches have been developed to treat this condition, which provide artificial somatosensory feedback such as peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS), spinal cord stimulation (SCS), and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS). Yet, the effectiveness of different neurostimulation methods has been rarely tested in the same participants. Meanwhile, such tests would help to select the most effective method or a combination of methods and could contribute to the development of multisensory limb prostheses. In this study, two transhumeral amputees were implanted with stimulating electrodes placed in the medial nerve and over the spinal cord epidurally. PNS and SCS were tested in each participant as approaches to enable tactile and proprioceptive sensations and suppress PLP. Both PNS and SCS induced sensation in different parts of the phantom hand, which correlated with cortical responses detected with electroencephalographic (EEG) recordings. The sensations produced by PNS more often felt natural compared to those produced by SCS. Еvoked response potentials (ERPs) were more lateralized and adapted faster for PNS compared to SCS. In the tasks performed with the bionic hand, neurostimulation-induced sensations enabled discrimination of object size. As the participants practiced with neurostimulation, they improved on the object-size discrimination task and their sensations became more natural. А combination of PNS and TENS enabled sensations that utilized both tactile and proprioceptive information. This combination was effective to convey the perception of object softness. In addition to enabling sensations, neurostimulation led to a decrease in PLP. Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier, #NCT05650931.

Indexed as

EEGembodimentneuromodulationneuroprostheticsperipheral nerve stimulationsensory feedbacksensory restorationspinal cord stimulation (SCS)

Identifiers

PMID39654645
PMCPMC11626906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.