Literature DB >> 31086274

The effect of paired corticospinal-motoneuronal stimulation on maximal voluntary elbow flexion in cervical spinal cord injury: an experimental study.

Siobhan C Dongés1, Claire L Boswell-Ruys1,2,3, Jane E Butler1,2, Janet L Taylor4,5,6.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Randomised, controlled, crossover study.
OBJECTIVES: Paired corticospinal-motoneuronal stimulation (PCMS) involves repeatedly pairing stimuli to corticospinal neurones and motoneurones to induce changes in corticospinal transmission. Here, we examined whether PCMS could enhance maximal voluntary elbow flexion in people with cervical spinal cord injury.
SETTING: Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.
METHODS: PCMS comprised 100 pairs of transcranial magnetic and electrical peripheral nerve stimulation (0.1 Hz), timed so corticospinal potentials arrived at corticospinal-motoneuronal synapses 1.5 ms before antidromic motoneuronal potentials. On two separate days, sets of five maximal elbow flexions were performed by 11 individuals with weak elbow flexors post C4 or C5 spinal cord injury before and after PCMS or control (100 peripheral nerve stimuli) conditioning. During contractions, supramaximal biceps brachii stimulation elicited superimposed twitches, which were expressed as a proportion of resting twitches to give maximal voluntary activation. Maximal torque and electromyographic activity were also assessed.
RESULTS: Baseline median (range) maximal torque was 11 Nm (6-41 Nm) and voluntary activation was 92% (62-99%). Linear mixed modelling revealed no significant differences between PCMS and control protocols after conditioning (maximal torque: p = 0.87, superimposed twitch: p = 0.87, resting twitch: p = 0.44, voluntary activation: p = 0.36, biceps EMG: p = 0.25, brachioradialis EMG: 0.67).
CONCLUSIONS: Possible explanations for the lack of effect include a potential ceiling effect for voluntary activation, or that PCMS may be less effective for elbow flexors than distal muscles. Despite results, previous studies suggest that PCMS is worthy of further investigation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31086274     DOI: 10.1038/s41393-019-0291-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spinal Cord        ISSN: 1362-4393            Impact factor:   2.772


  38 in total

1.  Voluntary strength and fatigue.

Authors:  P A MERTON
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1954-03-29       Impact factor: 5.182

2.  Magnetic versus electrical stimulation in the interpolation twitch technique of elbow flexors.

Authors:  Sofia I Lampropoulou; Alexander V Nowicky; Louise Marston
Journal:  J Sports Sci Med       Date:  2012-12-01       Impact factor: 2.988

3.  Corticospinal projections to upper limb motoneurones in humans.

Authors:  E Palmer; P Ashby
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 5.182

4.  Muscle activation in unilateral and bilateral efforts assessed by motor nerve and cortical stimulation.

Authors:  R D Herbert; S C Gandevia
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  1996-04

5.  Reliability of measurements of muscle strength and voluntary activation using twitch interpolation.

Authors:  G M Allen; S C Gandevia; D K McKenzie
Journal:  Muscle Nerve       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 3.217

6.  Intermuscle differences in activation.

Authors:  D G Behm; J Whittle; D Button; K Power
Journal:  Muscle Nerve       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.217

7.  Involvement of N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors in plasticity induced by paired corticospinal-motoneuronal stimulation in humans.

Authors:  Siobhan C Dongés; Jessica M D'Amico; Jane E Butler; Janet L Taylor
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Motoneuron Death after Human Spinal Cord Injury.

Authors:  Robert M Grumbles; Christine K Thomas
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2016-08-25       Impact factor: 5.269

9.  Muscle performance, voluntary activation and perceived effort in normal subjects and patients with prior poliomyelitis.

Authors:  G M Allen; S C Gandevia; I R Neering; I Hickie; R Jones; J Middleton
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 13.501

10.  Aberrant crossed corticospinal facilitation in muscles distant from a spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Karen L Bunday; Martin Oudega; Monica A Perez
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  6 in total

1.  The Potential of Corticospinal-Motoneuronal Plasticity for Recovery after Spinal Cord Injury.

Authors:  Hang Jin Jo; Michael S A Richardson; Martin Oudega; Monica A Perez
Journal:  Curr Phys Med Rehabil Rep       Date:  2020-08-04

2.  Motor Point Stimulation in Spinal Paired Associative Stimulation can Facilitate Spinal Cord Excitability.

Authors:  Kai Lon Fok; Naotsugu Kaneko; Atsushi Sasaki; Kento Nakagawa; Kimitaka Nakazawa; Kei Masani
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 3.169

Review 3.  Electrode Size and Placement for Surface EMG Bipolar Detection from the Brachioradialis Muscle: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Andrea Merlo; Maria Chiara Bò; Isabella Campanini
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-03       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 4.  Paired corticospinal-motoneuronal stimulation and exercise after spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Hang Jin Jo; Michael S A Richardson; Martin Oudega; Monica A Perez
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2021       Impact factor: 1.985

5.  Corticospinal-motor neuronal plasticity promotes exercise-mediated recovery in humans with spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Hang Jin Jo; Monica A Perez
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 13.501

6.  Acute intermittent hypoxia boosts spinal plasticity in humans with tetraplegia.

Authors:  Lasse Christiansen; Bing Chen; Yuming Lei; M A Urbin; Michael S A Richardson; Martin Oudega; Milap Sandhu; W Zev Rymer; Randy D Trumbower; Gordon S Mitchell; Monica A Perez
Journal:  Exp Neurol       Date:  2020-09-25       Impact factor: 5.620

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.