Trial reportSpinal cord series and cases2026
Postural changes and motor evoked potentials following percutaneous spinal cord epidural stimulation in spinal cord injury.
Trial report in Spinal cord series and cases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionPercutaneous spinal cord epidural stimulation (pSCES) is an effective modality for managing pain. However, the use of pSCES in restoration of motor control after SCI is still under research exploration. Today, the effects of postural changes on pSCES-motor control are still controversial. CASE PRESENTATION: Two participants with complete SCI underwent implantation of pSCES. The motor recruitment curves of motor units of two different agonist-antagonist muscle groups were captured in a supine position and in a standing position using a standing frame. The amplitudes of the motor evoked response were presented in absolute or relative to the maximum response. Both narrow and wide field pSCES configurations elicited intensity-dependent EMG responses across lower-limb muscles, with substantially greater amplitudes in supine compared to standing. Transitioning to standing produced marked bilateral attenuation of raw responses across muscles and configurations, although relative recruitment patterns were partially preserved following EMG normalization. Increasing pulse duration broadened relative muscle recruitment and enhanced distal muscle activation, but posture remained the dominant determinant of overall response magnitude. DISCUSSION: Standing posture was associated with substantial attenuation of pSCES-evoked responses across muscles and stimulation parameters, indicating posture-dependent modulation of evoked muscle activation following pSCES implantation in persons with SCI.
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.