Giuliano Taccola1,2, Sean Barber3, Phillip J Horner3, Humberto A Cerrel Bazo4,5, Dimitry Sayenko6. 1. Neuroscience Department, International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA), Bonomea 265, Trieste, Italy. taccola@sissa.it. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Center for Neuroregeneration, Houston Methodist Research Institute, Houston, TX, USA. taccola@sissa.it. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Center for Neuroregeneration, Houston Methodist Research Institute, Houston, TX, USA. 4. Ospedale Riabilitativo di Alta Specializzazione (ORAS)-ULSS 2 TV, Motta di Livenza, TV, Italy. 5. Department of Neuroscience-Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Padova, Medical School, Padova, Italy. 6. Department of Neurosurgery, Center for Neuroregeneration, Houston Methodist Research Institute, Houston, TX, USA. dgsayenko@houstonmethodist.org.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVES: Over the past decade, an increasing number of studies have demonstrated that epidural spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can successfully assist with neurorehabilitation following spinal cord injury (SCI). This approach is quickly garnering the attention of clinicians. Therefore, the potential benefits of individuals undergoing epidural SCS therapy to regain sensorimotor and autonomic control, must be considered along with the lessons learned from other studies on the risks associated with implantable systems. METHODS: Systematic analysis of literature, as well as preclinical and clinical reports. RESULTS: The use of SCS for neuropathic pain management has revealed that epidural electrodes can lose their therapeutic effects over time and lead to complications, such as electrode migration, infection, foreign body reactions, and even SCI. Several authors have also described the formation of a mass composed of glia, collagen, and fibrosis around epidural electrodes. Clinically, this mass can cause myelopathy and spinal compression, and it is only treatable by surgically removing both the electrode and scar tissue. CONCLUSIONS: In order to reduce the risk of encapsulation, many innovative efforts focus on technological improvements of electrode biocompatibility; however, they require time and resources to develop and confirm safety and efficiency. Alternatively, some studies have demonstrated similar outcomes of non-invasive, transcutaneous SCS following SCI to those seen with epidural SCS, without the complications associated with implanted electrodes. Thus, transcutaneous SCS can be proposed as a promising candidate for a safer and more accessible SCS modality for some individuals with SCI.
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVES: Over the past decade, an increasing number of studies have demonstrated that epidural spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can successfully assist with neurorehabilitation following spinal cord injury (SCI). This approach is quickly garnering the attention of clinicians. Therefore, the potential benefits of individuals undergoing epidural SCS therapy to regain sensorimotor and autonomic control, must be considered along with the lessons learned from other studies on the risks associated with implantable systems. METHODS: Systematic analysis of literature, as well as preclinical and clinical reports. RESULTS: The use of SCS for neuropathic pain management has revealed that epidural electrodes can lose their therapeutic effects over time and lead to complications, such as electrode migration, infection, foreign body reactions, and even SCI. Several authors have also described the formation of a mass composed of glia, collagen, and fibrosis around epidural electrodes. Clinically, this mass can cause myelopathy and spinal compression, and it is only treatable by surgically removing both the electrode and scar tissue. CONCLUSIONS: In order to reduce the risk of encapsulation, many innovative efforts focus on technological improvements of electrode biocompatibility; however, they require time and resources to develop and confirm safety and efficiency. Alternatively, some studies have demonstrated similar outcomes of non-invasive, transcutaneous SCS following SCI to those seen with epidural SCS, without the complications associated with implanted electrodes. Thus, transcutaneous SCS can be proposed as a promising candidate for a safer and more accessible SCS modality for some individuals with SCI.
Authors: Rod S Taylor; James Ryan; Ruairi O'Donnell; Sam Eldabe; Krishna Kumar; Richard B North Journal: Clin J Pain Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 3.442
Authors: Peter J Grahn; Igor A Lavrov; Dimitry G Sayenko; Meegan G Van Straaten; Megan L Gill; Jeffrey A Strommen; Jonathan S Calvert; Dina I Drubach; Lisa A Beck; Margaux B Linde; Andrew R Thoreson; Cesar Lopez; Aldo A Mendez; Parag N Gad; Yury P Gerasimenko; V Reggie Edgerton; Kristin D Zhao; Kendall H Lee Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Daniel C Lu; V Reggie Edgerton; Morteza Modaber; Nicholas AuYong; Erika Morikawa; Sharon Zdunowski; Melanie E Sarino; Majid Sarrafzadeh; Marc R Nuwer; Roland R Roy; Yury Gerasimenko Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Megan L Gill; Peter J Grahn; Jonathan S Calvert; Margaux B Linde; Igor A Lavrov; Jeffrey A Strommen; Lisa A Beck; Dimitry G Sayenko; Meegan G Van Straaten; Dina I Drubach; Daniel D Veith; Andrew R Thoreson; Cesar Lopez; Yury P Gerasimenko; V Reggie Edgerton; Kendall H Lee; Kristin D Zhao Journal: Nat Med Date: 2018-09-24 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Fabien B Wagner; Jean-Baptiste Mignardot; Camille G Le Goff-Mignardot; Karen Minassian; Jocelyne Bloch; Grégoire Courtine; Robin Demesmaeker; Salif Komi; Marco Capogrosso; Andreas Rowald; Ismael Seáñez; Miroslav Caban; Elvira Pirondini; Molywan Vat; Laura A McCracken; Roman Heimgartner; Isabelle Fodor; Anne Watrin; Perrine Seguin; Edoardo Paoles; Katrien Van Den Keybus; Grégoire Eberle; Brigitte Schurch; Etienne Pralong; Fabio Becce; John Prior; Nicholas Buse; Rik Buschman; Esra Neufeld; Niels Kuster; Stefano Carda; Joachim von Zitzewitz; Vincent Delattre; Tim Denison; Hendrik Lambert Journal: Nature Date: 2018-10-31 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Soshi Samejima; Charlotte D Caskey; Fatma Inanici; Siddhi R Shrivastav; Lorie N Brighton; Jared Pradarelli; Vincente Martinez; Katherine M Steele; Rajiv Saigal; Chet T Moritz Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2022-01-01