Spinal cord associative plasticity improves forelimb sensorimotor function after cervical injury

Intraspinal microstimulation of the ventral horn has therapeutically relevant cross-modal effects on nociception

Electrical stimulation of spinal networks below a spinal cord injury is a promising approach to restore functions compromised by inadequate and/or inappropriate neural drive. The most translationally successful examples are paradigms intended to increase neural transmission in weakened yet spared descending motor pathways and spinal motoneurons rendered dormant after being severed from their inputs by lesion. Less well understood is whether spinal stimulation is also capable of reducing neural transmission in pathways made pathologically overactive by spinal cord injury. Debilitating spasms, spasticity and neuropathic pain are all common manifestations of hyperexcitable spinal responses to sensory feedback. Whereas spasms and spasticity can often be managed pharmacologically, spinal cord injury-related neuropathic pain is notoriously medically refractory. Interestingly, however, spinal stimulation is a clinically available option for ameliorating neuropathic pain arising from aetiologies other than spinal cord injury, and the limited evidence available to date suggests that it holds considerable promise for reducing spinal cord injury-related neuropathic pain, as well. Spinal stimulation for pain amelioration has traditionally been assumed to modulate sensorimotor networks overlapping with those engaged by spinal stimulation for rehabilitation of movement impairments. Thus, we hypothesize that spinal stimulation intended to increase the ability to move voluntarily may simultaneously reduce transmission in spinal pain pathways. To test this hypothesis, we coupled a rat model of incomplete thoracic spinal cord injury, which results in moderate to severe bilateral movement impairments and spinal cord injury-related neuropathic pain, with in vivo electrophysiological measures of neural transmission in networks of spinal neurons integral to the development and persistence of the neuropathic pain state. We find that when intraspinal microstimulation is delivered to the ventral horn with the intent of enhancing voluntary movement, transmission through nociceptive specific and wide dynamic range neurons is significantly depressed in response to pain-related sensory feedback. By comparison, spinal responsiveness to non-pain-related sensory feedback is largely preserved. These results suggest that spinal stimulation paradigms could be intentionally designed to afford multi-modal therapeutic benefits, directly addressing the diverse, intersectional rehabilitation goals of people living with spinal cord injury.

Timing-dependent synergies between motor cortex and posterior spinal stimulation in humans

Volitional movement requires descending input from the motor cortex and sensory feedback through the spinal cord. We previously developed a paired brain and spinal electrical stimulation approach in rats that relies on convergence of the descending motor and spinal sensory stimuli in the cervical cord. This approach strengthened sensorimotor circuits and improved volitional movement through associative plasticity. In humans, it is not known whether posterior epidural spinal cord stimulation targeted at the sensorimotor interface or anterior epidural spinal cord stimulation targeted within the motor system is effective at facilitating brain evoked responses. In 59 individuals undergoing elective cervical spine decompression surgery, the motor cortex was stimulated with scalp electrodes and the spinal cord was stimulated with epidural electrodes, with muscle responses being recorded in arm and leg muscles. Spinal electrodes were placed either posteriorly or anteriorly, and the interval between cortex and spinal cord stimulation was varied. Pairing stimulation between the motor cortex and spinal sensory (posterior) but not spinal motor (anterior) stimulation produced motor evoked potentials that were over five times larger than brain stimulation alone. This strong augmentation occurred only when descending motor and spinal afferent stimuli were timed to converge in the spinal cord. Paired stimulation also increased the selectivity of muscle responses relative to unpaired brain or spinal cord stimulation. Finally, clinical signs suggest that facilitation was observed in both injured and uninjured segments of the spinal cord. The large effect size of this paired stimulation makes it a promising candidate for therapeutic neuromodulation. KEY POINTS: Pairs of stimuli designed to alter nervous system function typically target the motor system, or one targets the sensory system and the other targets the motor system for convergence in cortex. In humans undergoing clinically indicated surgery, we tested paired brain and spinal cord stimulation that we developed in rats aiming to target sensorimotor convergence in the cervical cord. Arm and hand muscle responses to paired sensorimotor stimulation were more than five times larger than brain or spinal cord stimulation alone when applied to the posterior but not anterior spinal cord. Arm and hand muscle responses to paired stimulation were more selective for targeted muscles than the brain- or spinal-only conditions, especially at latencies that produced the strongest effects of paired stimulation. Measures of clinical evidence of compression were only weakly related to the paired stimulation effect, suggesting that it could be applied as therapy in people affected by disorders of the central nervous system.

Timing dependent synergies between motor cortex and posterior spinal stimulation in humans

Volitional movement requires descending input from motor cortex and sensory feedback through the spinal cord. We previously developed a paired brain and spinal electrical stimulation approach in rats that relies on convergence of the descending motor and spinal sensory stimuli in the cervical cord. This approach strengthened sensorimotor circuits and improved volitional movement through associative plasticity. In humans it is not known whether dorsal epidural SCS targeted at the sensorimotor interface or anterior epidural SCS targeted within the motor system is effective at facilitating brain evoked responses. In 59 individuals undergoing elective cervical spine decompression surgery, the motor cortex was stimulated with scalp electrodes and the spinal cord with epidural electrodes while muscle responses were recorded in arm and leg muscles. Spinal electrodes were placed either posteriorly or anteriorly, and the interval between cortex and spinal cord stimulation was varied. Pairing stimulation between the motor cortex and spinal sensory (posterior) but not spinal motor (anterior) stimulation produced motor evoked potentials that were over five times larger than brain stimulation alone. This strong augmentation occurred only when descending motor and spinal afferent stimuli were timed to converge in the spinal cord. Paired stimulation also increased the selectivity of muscle responses relative to unpaired brain or spinal cord stimulation. Finally, paired stimulation effects were present regardless of the severity of myelopathy as measured by clinical signs or spinal cord imaging. The large effect size of this paired stimulation makes it a promising candidate for therapeutic neuromodulation.

Motor-targeted spinal stimulation promotes concurrent rebalancing of pathologic nociceptive transmission in chronic spinal cord injury

Electrical stimulation of spinal networks below a spinal cord injury (SCI) is a promising approach to restore functions compromised by inadequate excitatory neural drive. The most translationally successful examples are paradigms intended to increase neural transmission in weakened yet spared motor pathways and spinal motor networks rendered dormant after being severed from their inputs by lesion. Less well understood is whether spinal stimulation is also capable of reducing neural transmission in pathways made pathologically overactive by SCI. Debilitating spasms, spasticity, and neuropathic pain are all common manifestations of hyperexcitable spinal responses to sensory feedback. But whereas spasms and spasticity can often be managed pharmacologically, SCI-related neuropathic pain is notoriously medically refractory. Interestingly, however, spinal stimulation is a clinically available option for ameliorating neuropathic pain arising from etiologies other than SCI, and it has traditionally been assumed to modulate sensorimotor networks overlapping with those engaged by spinal stimulation for motor rehabilitation. Thus, we reasoned that spinal stimulation intended to increase transmission in motor pathways may simultaneously reduce transmission in spinal pain pathways. Using a well-validated pre-clinical model of SCI that results in severe bilateral motor impairments and SCI-related neuropathic pain, we show that the responsiveness of neurons integral to the development and persistence of the neuropathic pain state can be enduringly reduced by motor-targeted spinal stimulation while preserving spinal responses to non-pain-related sensory feedback. These results suggest that spinal stimulation paradigms could be intentionally designed to afford multi-modal therapeutic benefits, directly addressing the diverse, intersectional rehabilitation goals of people living with SCI.

Diaphragm stimulation elicits phrenic afferent-induced neuromuscular plasticity

We hypothesized that activation of phrenic afferents induces diaphragm motor plasticity. In anesthetized and spontaneously breathing rats we delivered 40 Hz, low threshold (twitch and 1.5X twitch threshold), inspiratory-triggered stimulation to the left hemidiaphragm for 30 min to activate ipsilateral phrenic afferents. Diaphragm amplitude ipsilateral and contralateral to stimulation were increased for 60 min following both currents compared to time controls not receiving stimulation. Diaphragm stimulation was repeated in laminectomy controls or following a unilateral C3-C6 dorsal rhizotomy to eliminate phrenic afferent volleys. Laminectomy controls expressed neuromuscular plasticity post-stimulation. In contrast, ipsilateral and contralateral diaphragm amplitude following dorsal rhizotomy was lower than laminectomy controls and no different than time controls, suggesting diaphragm motor plasticity was not induced post-rhizotomy. Our results indicate that diaphragm stimulation induces a novel form of plasticity in the phrenic motor system which requires phrenic afferent activation. Respiratory motor plasticity elicited by diaphragm stimulation may have value as a therapeutic strategy to improve diaphragm output in neuromuscular conditions.

Intraoperative electrical stimulation of the human dorsal spinal cord reveals a map of arm and hand muscle responses

Although epidural stimulation of the lumbar spinal cord has emerged as a powerful modality for recovery of movement, how it should be targeted to the cervical spinal cord to activate arm and hand muscles is not well understood, particularly in humans. We sought to map muscle responses to posterior epidural cervical spinal cord stimulation in humans. We hypothesized that lateral stimulation over the dorsal root entry zone would be most effective and responses would be strongest in the muscles innervated by the stimulated segment. Twenty-six people undergoing clinically indicated cervical spine surgery consented to mapping of motor responses. During surgery, stimulation was performed in midline and lateral positions at multiple exposed segments; six arm and three leg muscles were recorded on each side of the body. Across all segments and muscles tested, lateral stimulation produced stronger muscle responses than midline despite similar latency and shape of responses. Muscles innervated at a cervical segment had the largest responses from stimulation at that segment, but responses were also observed in muscles innervated at other cervical segments and in leg muscles. The cervical responses were clustered in rostral (C4-C6) and caudal (C7-T1) cervical segments. Strong responses to lateral stimulation are likely due to the proximity of stimulation to afferent axons. Small changes in response sizes to stimulation of adjacent cervical segments argue for local circuit integration, and distant muscle responses suggest activation of long propriospinal connections. This map can help guide cervical stimulation to improve arm and hand function.NEW & NOTEWORTHY A map of muscle responses to cervical epidural stimulation during clinically indicated surgery revealed strongest activation when stimulating laterally compared to midline and revealed differences to be weaker than expected across different segments. In contrast, waveform shapes and latencies were most similar when stimulating midline and laterally, indicating activation of overlapping circuitry. Thus, a map of the cervical spinal cord reveals organization and may help guide stimulation to activate arm and hand muscles strongly and selectively.