ArticleArtificial organs2025
The Neurophysiological Effects of Cervical Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation With and Without a High Frequency Carrier in Able-Bodied Adults.
Article in Artificial organs, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07208188 (Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation for Rehabilitation of Upper Limbs in Early Spinal Cord Injury), which is not on this 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.
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation for Rehabilitation of Upper Limbs in Early Spinal Cord Injury: Randomised Feasibility Study
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Multi-system benefits of non-invasive spinal cord stimulation following cervical spinal cord injury: a case study.Bioelectronic medicine · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTranscutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) is a promising avenue in spinal cord injury (SCI) rehabilitation; however, high currents are required to excite afferents in the spinal cord roots, which patients may not tolerate. Modulating tSCS pulses with a kHz carrier frequency (kHz-tSCS) may be used to reduce discomfort; however, the way that kHz-tSCS interacts with neural networks, compared to unmodulated pulses (conv-tSCS), is largely unknown.
methodTen able-bodied participants received conv-tSCS, kHz-tSCS, and sham interventions for 20 min over the C7/T1 vertebrae. Charge delivery of both waveforms was measured. Posterior root reflexes (PRRs) and motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) were recorded from the Flexor Carpi Radialis (FCR), Extensor Carpi Radialis Longus (ECRL), Flexor Carpi Ulnaris (FCU), and Brachioradialis (BR). PRR and MEP peak-peak amplitudes were measured at baseline, 0-, 15-, and 30-min post-intervention.
resultsThe charge required to activate posterior roots with kHz-tSCS was 3.8 times higher than with conv-tSCS (p < 0.001). Differences in PRR amplitude were found in the FCR between conv-tSCS and kHz-tSCS at 0- and 15-min post-intervention (p < 0.028). PRR inhibition was found in the FCR between baseline and 30-min post-intervention with conv-tSCS and the sham intervention (p < 0.037). No change in PRR amplitudes was found for kHz-tSCS. No other muscle showed any differences in PRR responses between intervention groups. Neither intervention caused any effect in MEP responses across time or between intervention groups.
conclusionskHz-tSCS was a less efficient waveform for stimulation. Differences in effects on spinal excitability were found to be inconclusive, and conv-tSCS and kHz-tSCS had no effect on corticospinal excitability. Significant PRR inhibition in the FCR was found with this experimental setup even when no stimulation was applied, suggesting a natural reduction in spinal excitability caused by participants laying supine for an extended period. Future research should consider how participant positioning could affect neural excitability.
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.