Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025
Optimizing transcutaneous spinal stimulation: excitability of evoked spinal reflexes is dependent on electrode montage.
Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04243044 (Neuromodulation of Spinal Circuits), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
Neuromodulation of Spinal Circuits: Effects on Spasticity, Nociception, and Motor Activation
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Excitability of posterior root reflex evoked by transcutaneous spinal stimulation is distinct from the H-reflex in the soleus muscle: a pulse duration study.Journal of neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Grid electrode technology: electrophysiological tool for cavernous nerve mapping.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Neural mechanisms underlying leg muscle responses during cervical transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation.Journal of neural engineering · 2026Article
- Characteristics of posterior root reflexes evoked by transcutaneous spinal stimulation with various pulse durations.Journal of neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Immediate Effects of Transcutaneous Spinal Stimulation on Stretch-Induced Spasticity in Persons with Spinal Cord Injury.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Transcutaneous Spinal Stimulation Modulates Spinal Reflex Circuit Excitability in Persons with Spinal Cord Injury.Biomedicines · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is growing interest in use of transcutaneous spinal stimulation (TSS) for people with neurologic conditions both to augment volitional control (by facilitating motoneuron excitability), and to decrease spasticity (by activating inhibitory networks). Various electrode montages are used during TSS, with little understanding of how electrode position influences spinal circuit activation. We sought to identify the thoracolumbar electrode montage associated with the most robust activation of spinal circuits by comparing posterior root-muscle reflexes (PRM reflexes) elicited by 6 montages. Additionally, we assessed tolerability of the stimulation during PRM reflex testing.
methodsFifteen adults with intact neurological systems participated in this randomized crossover study. PRM reflexes were evoked transcutaneously using electrode montages with dorsal-ventral (DV) or dorsal-midline (DM) current flow. DV montages included: [1] cathode over T11/T12, anodes over iliac crests (DV-I), [2] cathode over T11/T12, anodes over umbilicus (DV-U), [3] dual paraspinal cathodes at T11/12, anodes over iliac crests (DV-PI), and [4] dual paraspinal cathodes at T11/12, anodes over umbilicus (DV-PU). DM montages included: [5] cathode over T11/12, anode 5 cm caudal (DM-C), and [6] cathode over T11/12, anode 5 cm rostral (DM-R). PRM reflex recruitment curves were obtained in the soleus muscle of both lower extremities.
resultsLower reflex thresholds (mA) for dominant (D) and nondominant (ND) soleus muscles were elicited in DV-U (D: 46.7[33.9, 59.4], ND: 45.4[32.5, 58.2]) and DV-I (D: 48.1[35.3, 60.8], ND: 45.4[32.5, 58.2]) montages compared to DV-PU (D: 64.3[51.4, 77.1], ND:61.7[48.8, 74.6]), DV-PI (D:64.9[52.1, 77.7], ND:61.4[48.5, 75.5]), DM-C(D:60.0[46.9, 73.1], ND:63.6[50.8, 76.5]), and DM-R(D:63.1[50.3, 76.0], ND:62.6[49.8, 75.5]). DV-U and DV-I montages demonstrated larger recruitment curve area than other montages. There were no differences in response amplitude at 120% of RT(1.2xRT) or tolerability among montages.
conclusionsDifferences in spinal circuit recruitment are reflected in the response amplitude of the PRM reflexes. DV-I and DV-U montages were associated with lower reflex thresholds, indicating that motor responses can be evoked with lower stimulation intensity. DV-I and DV-U montages therefore have the potential for lower and more tolerable interventional stimulation intensities. Our findings optimize electrode placement for interventional TSS and PRM reflex assessments. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT04243044.
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.