| Literature DB >> 31068784 |
Vijai S Krishnan1,2,3,4, Samuel S Shin3, Visar Belegu5,6, Pablo Celnik7, Mark Reimers1,2, Kylie R Smith1,2, Galit Pelled1,2,3,4,8.
Abstract
Introduction: Spinal cord injury (SCI) causes partial or complete damage to sensory and motor pathways and induces immediate changes in cortical function. Current rehabilitative strategies do not address this early alteration, therefore impacting the degree of neuroplasticity and subsequent recovery. The following study aims to test if a non-invasive brain stimulation technique such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is effective in promoting plasticity and rehabilitation, and can be used as an early intervention strategy in a rat model of SCI.Entities:
Keywords: behavior; functional magnetic resonance imaging; plasticity; spinal cord injury; transcranial magnetic stimulation
Year: 2019 PMID: 31068784 PMCID: PMC6491761 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2019.00387
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurosci ISSN: 1662-453X Impact factor: 4.677
FIGURE 1Graph showing effects of TMS treatment on SCI rats assessed by BBB scores over 9 weeks. BBB scores were assessed on a 21-point score (21 being a normal motor function). The scores show that the acute-TMS group (n = 4) showed significant improvement in scores over chronic (p = 0.004, n = 4) and no-TMS (p = 0.0015, n = 3) groups. The chronic-TMS group did not show significant improvement over the no-TMS group. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA involving multiple comparisons.
FIGURE 2(A) Line graph showing mean gridwalk scores measured in terms of percent footfall errors across a period of 9 weeks for each animal across all groups. The acute-TMS group had the lowest percent footfall errors compared to the chronic and no-TMS group. (B) One-way ANOVA with multiple comparison analyses show significant improvement in percentage of footfall errors measured in acute (n = 4) vs chronic (n = 4, p = 0.0009) and acute vs no-TMS groups (n = 3, p = 0.0015). No significant differences were found between the chronic vs no-TMS groups across 9 weeks.
FIGURE 3MEP responses recorded from the forepaws evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) pulses. (A) Representative MEP trace showing the distance in time between consecutive maximal peaks defined as inter-peak latency. (B) Data summary show a significant increase in inter-peak latency in rats treated with acute-TMS vs the no-TMS group (p = 0.018, denoted by ∗). The chronic vs. no-TMS group did not show significant differences in inter-peak latencies.
FIGURE 4(A) fMRI measurements: were obtained 10 weeks after SCI. Individual fMRI cross-correlation statistical maps demonstrate increases in fMRI responses (in red) to contralateral stimulation of hindlimbs in the acute-TMS (n = 7) and chronic-TMS (n = 5) treatment groups, but not in the no- TMS group (n = 5). (B) Show sensory responses to stimulation of forepaws. (C) Data plots shows that the acute-TMS group demonstrated the greatest sensory responses to right and left hindlimb (LHL) stimulation compared to chronic-TMS and no-TMS groups. Statistical significance was determined by one-way ANOVA [F(5,28) = 3.554, p = 0.01)].