Transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation increases corticospinal transmission and enhances voluntary motor output in humans

What Else Can Be Done by the Spinal Cord? A Review on the Effectiveness of Transpinal Direct Current Stimulation (tsDCS) in Stroke Recovery

Since the spinal cord has traditionally been considered a bundle of long fibers connecting the brain to all parts of the body, the study of its role has long been limited to peripheral sensory and motor control. However, in recent years, new studies have challenged this view pointing to the spinal cord's involvement not only in the acquisition and maintenance of new motor skills but also in the modulation of motor and cognitive functions dependent on cortical motor regions. Indeed, several reports to date, which have combined neurophysiological techniques with transpinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS), have shown that tsDCS is effective in promoting local and cortical neuroplasticity changes in animals and humans through the activation of ascending corticospinal pathways that modulate the sensorimotor cortical networks. The aim of this paper is first to report the most prominent tsDCS studies on neuroplasticity and its influence at the cortical level. Then, a comprehensive review of tsDCS literature on motor improvement in animals and healthy subjects and on motor and cognitive recovery in post-stroke populations is presented. We believe that these findings might have an important impact in the future making tsDCS a potential suitable adjunctive approach for post-stroke recovery.

Combined neuromuscular electrical stimulation and transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation increases motor cortical plasticity in healthy humans

Introduction

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) induces neural plasticity of the central nervous system (CNS) and improves motor function in patients with CNS lesions. However, the extended stimulus duration of NMES reduces its clinical applicability. Transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS), which increases afferent input, may enhance the effects and reduce the stimulus duration of NMES. This study investigated the excitability of the motor cortex, somatosensory cortex, and spinal motor neurons after the combined stimulation of NMES and tsDCS.

Methods

Among the 55 participants in this study, 24 were allocated to experiment 1, 15 to experiment 2, and 16 to experiment 3. They received intervention for 20 min on different days: (1) NMES combined with tsDCS (NMES + tsDCS), (2) NMES combined with sham tsDCS (NMES + sham tsDCS), and (3) sham NMES combined with tsDCS (sham NMES + tsDCS). NMES was delivered to the right common peroneal nerve at 25 Hz with the intensity at 120% of the motor threshold. For tsDCS, the cathodal electrode was positioned on the thoracic 10th–12th vertebral levels, and the anodal electrode was located on the right shoulder. The stimulus intensity was 2.5 mA. In experiment 1, motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and short-latency intracortical inhibition (SICI) were measured by transcranial magnetic stimulation up to 60 min after stimulation. The spinal motor neurons’ excitability was assessed by recording the posterior root muscle reflex (PRMR) induced via transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation in experiment 2, and the primary somatosensory cortex excitability was evaluated by recording the somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) in experiment 3 up to 15 min after stimulation.

Results

Compared to before the stimulation, NMES + tsDCS significantly increased MEP for 60 min or more, and significantly decreased SICI immediately after. Conversely contrast, the PRMR significantly decreased immediately after, and SEPs were unchanged.

Discussion

These results suggest that simultaneous afferent inputs from different stimulus positions critically induce primary motor cortex plasticity. The combined stimulation of NMES with tsDCS may facilitate the development of a new neurorehabilitation technique.

Dynamic motor practice improves movement accuracy, force control and leads to increased corticospinal excitability compared to isometric motor practice

The central nervous system has a remarkable ability to plan motor actions, to predict and monitor the sensory consequences during and following motor actions and integrate these into future actions. Numerous studies investigating human motor learning have employed tasks involving either force control during isometric contractions or position control during dynamic tasks. To our knowledge, it remains to be elucidated how motor practice with an emphasis on position control influences force control and vice versa. Furthermore, it remains unexplored whether these distinct types of motor practice are accompanied by differential effects on corticospinal excitability. In this study, we tested motor accuracy and effects of motor practice in a force or position control task allowing wrist flexions of the non-dominant hand in the absence of online visual feedback. For each trial, motor performance was quantified as errors (pixels) between the displayed target and the movement endpoint. In the main experiment, 46 young adults were randomized into three groups: position control motor practice (PC), force control motor practice (FC), and a resting control group (CON). Following assessment of baseline motor performance in the position and force control tasks, intervention groups performed motor practice with, augmented visual feedback on performance. Motor performance in both tasks was assessed following motor practice. In a supplementary experiment, measures of corticospinal excitability were obtained in twenty additional participants by application of transcranial magnetic stimulation to the primary motor cortex hot spot of the flexor carpi radialis muscle before and following either position or force control motor practice. Following motor practice, accuracy in the position task improved significantly more for PC compared to FC and CON. For the force control task, both the PC and FC group improved more compared to CON. The two types of motor practice thus led to distinct effects including positive between-task transfer accompanying dynamic motor practice The results of the supplementary study demonstrated an increase in corticospinal excitability following dynamic motor practice compared to isometric motor practice. In conclusion, dynamic motor practice improves movement accuracy, and force control and leads to increased corticospinal excitability compared to isometric motor practice.

Motor Neuroplastic Effects of a Novel Paired Stimulation Technology in an Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury Animal Model

Paired stimulation of the brain and spinal cord can remodel the central nervous tissue circuitry in an animal model to induce motor neuroplasticity. The effects of simultaneous stimulation vary according to the extent and severity of spinal cord injury. Therefore, our study aimed to determine the significant effects on an incomplete SCI rat brain and spinal cord through 3 min and 20 min stimulations after 4 weeks of intervention. Thirty-three Sprague Dawley rats were classified into six groups: (1) normal, (2) sham, (3) iTBS/tsDCS, (4) iTBS/ts-iTBS, (5) rTMS/tsDCS, and (6) rTMS/ts-iTBS. Paired stimulation of the brain cortex and spinal cord thoracic (T10) level was applied simultaneously for 3−20 min. The motor evoked potential (MEP) and Basso, Beattie, and Bresnahan (BBB) scores were recorded after every week of intervention for four weeks along with wheel training for 20 min. Three-minute stimulation with the iTBS/tsDCS intervention induced a significant (p < 0.050 *) increase in MEP after week 2 and week 4 treatments, while 3 min iTBS/ts-iTBS significantly improved MEP (p < 0.050 *) only after the week 3 intervention. The 20 min rTMS/ts-iTBS intervention showed a significant change only in post_5 min after week 4. The BBB score also changed significantly in all groups except for the 20 min rTMS/tsDCS intervention. iTBS/tsDCS and rTMS/ts-iTBS interventions induce neuroplasticity in an incomplete SCI animal model by significantly changing electrophysiological (MEP) and locomotion (BBB) outcomes.

Transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) does not affect postural sway of young and healthy subjects during quiet upright standing

Transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) is an effective non-invasive spinal cord electrical stimulation technique to induce neuromodulation of local and distal neural circuits of the central nervous system (CNS). Applied to the spinal cord lumbosacral region, tsDCS changes electrophysiological responses of the motor, proprioceptive and nociceptive pathways, alters the performance of some lower limb motor tasks and can even modulate the behavior of supramedullary neuronal networks. In this study an experimental protocol was conducted to verify if tsDCS (5 mA, 20 minutes) of two different polarizations, applied over the lumbosacral region (tenth thoracic vertebrae (T10)), can induce changes in postural sway oscillations of young healthy individuals during quiet standing. A novel initialization of the electrical stimulation was developed to improve subject blinding to the different stimulus conditions including the sham trials. Measures of postural sway, both global and structural, were computed before, during and following the DC stimulation period. The results indicated that, for the adopted conditions, tsDCS did not induce statistically significant changes in postural sway of young healthy individuals during quiet standing.

The plasticity of nerve fibers: the prolonged effects of polarization of afferent fibers

The review surveys various aspects of the plasticity of nerve fibers, in particular the prolonged increase in their excitability evoked by polarization, focusing on a long-lasting increase in the excitability of myelinated afferent fibers traversing the dorsal columns of the spinal cord. We review the evidence that increased axonal excitability 1) follows epidurally applied direct current (DC) as well as relatively short (5 or 10 ms) current pulses and synaptically evoked intrinsic field potentials; 2) critically depends on the polarization of branching regions of afferent fibers at the sites where they bifurcate and give off axon collaterals entering the spinal gray matter in conjunction with actions of extrasynaptic GABA_A membrane receptors; and 3) shares the feature of being activity-independent with the short-lasting effects of polarization of peripheral nerve fibers. A comparison between the polarization evoked sustained increase in the excitability of dorsal column fibers and spinal motoneurons (plateau potentials) indicates the possibility that they are mediated by partly similar membrane channels (including noninactivating type L Cav⁺⁺ 1.3 but not Na⁺ channels) and partly different mechanisms. We finally consider under which conditions transspinally applied DC (tsDCS) might reproduce the effects of epidural polarization on dorsal column fibers and the possible advantages of increased excitability of afferent fibers for the rehabilitation of motor and sensory functions after spinal cord injuries.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This review supplements previous reviews of properties of nerve fibers by surveying recent experimental evidence for their long-term plasticity. It also extends recent descriptions of spinal effects of DC by reviewing effects of polarization of afferent nerve fibers within the dorsal columns, the mechanisms most likely underlying the long-lasting increase in their excitability and possible clinical implications.

The effect of cathodal transspinal direct current stimulation on tibialis anterior stretch reflex components in humans

Spinal DC stimulation (tsDCS) shows promise as a technique for the facilitation of functional recovery of motor function following central nervous system (CNS) lesion. However, the network mechanisms that are responsible for the effects of tsDCS are still uncertain. Here, in a series of experiments, we tested the hypothesis that tsDCS increases the excitability of the long-latency stretch reflex, leading to increased excitability of corticospinal neurons in the primary motor cortex. Experiments were performed in 33 adult human subjects (mean age 28 ± 7 years/14 females). Subjects were seated in a reclining armchair with the right leg attached to a footplate, which could be quickly plantarflexed (100 deg/s; 6 deg amplitude) to induce stretch reflexes in the tibialis anterior (TA) muscle at short (45 ms) and longer latencies (90-95 ms). This setup also enabled measuring motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and cervicomedullary evoked potentials (cMEPs) from TA evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and electrical stimulation at the cervical junction, respectively. Cathodal tsDCS at 2.5 and 4 mA was found to increase the long-latency reflex without any significant effect on the short-latency reflex. Furthermore, TA MEPs, but not cMEPs, were increased following tsDCS. We conclude that cathodal tsDCS over lumbar segments may facilitate proprioceptive transcortical reflexes in the TA muscle, and we suggest that the most likely explanation of this facilitation is an effect on ascending fibers in the dorsal columns.

Repetitive Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation of Wrist Extensors Enhances Cortical Excitability and Motor Performance in Healthy Individuals

Repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) may improve motor function following central nervous system lesions, but the optimal parameters of rPMS to induce neural plasticity and mechanisms underlying its action remain unclear. We examined the effects of rPMS over wrist extensor muscles on neural plasticity and motor performance in 26 healthy volunteers. In separate experiments, the effects of rPMS on motor evoked potentials (MEPs), short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), intracortical facilitation (ICF), direct motor response (M-wave), Hoffmann-reflex, and ballistic wrist extension movements were assessed before and after rPMS. First, to examine the effects of stimulus frequency, rPMS was applied at 50, 25, and 10 Hz by setting a fixed total number of stimuli. A significant increase in MEPs of wrist extensors was observed following 50 and 25 Hz rPMS, but not 10 Hz rPMS. Next, we examined the time required to induce plasticity by increasing the number of stimuli, and found that at least 15 min of 50 and 25 Hz rPMS was required. Based on these parameters, lasting effects were evaluated following 15 min of 50 or 25 Hz rPMS. A significant increase in MEP was observed up to 60 min following 50 and 25 Hz rPMS; similarly, an attenuation of SICI and enhancement of ICF were also observed. The maximal M-wave and Hoffmann-reflex did not change, suggesting that the increase in MEP was due to plastic changes at the motor cortex. This was accompanied by increasing force and electromyograms during wrist ballistic extension movements following 50 and 25 Hz rPMS. These findings suggest that 15 min of rPMS with 25 Hz or more induces an increase in cortical excitability of the relevant area rather than altering the excitability of spinal circuits, and has the potential to improve motor output.