ArticleNeuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society2025
Computational Optimization of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Dorsal Horn Interneuron Polarization.
Article in Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The optimization of neuroprosthetic interfaces relying on biophysical and surrogate digital twins.npj biomedical innovations · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe proposed mechanisms of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) follow the polarization of dorsal column axons; however, the development of subparesthesia SCS has encouraged the consideration of different targets. Given their relative proximity to the stimulation electrodes and their role in pain processing (eg, synaptic processing and gate control theory), spinal cord dorsal horn interneurons may be attractive stimulation targets. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe developed a computational modeling pipeline termed "quasiuniform-mirror assumption" and applied it to predict polarization of dorsal horn interneuron cell types (islet type, central type, stellate/radial, vertical-like) to SCS. The quasiuniform-mirror assumption allows the prediction of the peak and directional axes of dendrite polarization for each cell type and location in the dorsal horn, in addition to the impact of the stimulation pulse width and electrode configuration.
resultsFor long pulses, the peak polarization per milliampere of SCS with a spaced bipolar configuration was islet type 3.5mV, central type 1.3mV, stellate/radial 1.4mV, and vertical-like 1.6mV. For stellate/radial, the peak dendrite polarization was dorsal-ventral, and for islet-type, the peak dendrite polarization was in the rostral-caudal axis. For islet type and central type cells, peak dendrite polarization was between stimulation electrodes, whereas for stellate/radial and vertical-like cells, peak dendrite polarization was under the stimulation electrodes. The impact of the pulse width depends on the membrane time constants. Assuming a 1-millisecond time constant, for a 1-millisecond or 100-μs pulse width, the peak dendrite polarization decreases (from direct current values) by approximately 33% and approximately 88%, respectively. Increasing the interelectrode distance beyond approximately 3 cm did not significantly increase the peak polarization but expanded the region of interneuron polarization.
conclusionsPredicted maximum polarization of islet-cells in the superficial dorsal horn at locations between electrodes is 4.6mV for 2 mA, 1-millisecond pulse SCS. A polarization of a few millivolts is sufficient to modulate synaptic processing through subthreshold mechanisms. Our simulations provide support for SCS approaches optimized to modulate the dendrites of dorsal horn neurons.
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.