An Autonomic Neuroprosthesis: Noninvasive Electrical Spinal Cord Stimulation Restores Autonomic Cardiovascular Function in Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite autonomic dysfunction after spinal cord injury (SCI) being the major cause of death and a top health priority, the clinical management options for these conditions are limited to drugs with delayed onset and nonpharmacological interventions with equivocal effectiveness. We tested the capacity of electrical stimulation, applied transcutaneously over the spinal cord, to manage autonomic dysfunction in the form of orthostatic hypotension after SCI. We assessed beat-by-beat blood pressure (BP), stroke volume, and cardiac contractility (dP/dt; Finometer), as well as cerebral blood flow (transcranial Doppler) in 5 individuals with motor-complete SCI (4 cervical, 1 thoracic) during an orthostatic challenge with and without transcutaneous electrical stimulation applied at the TVII level. During the orthostatic challenge, all individuals experienced hypotension characterized by a 37 ± 4 mm Hg decrease in systolic BP, a 52 ± 10% reduction in cardiac contractility, and a 23 ± 6% reduction in cerebral blood flow (all p < 0.05), along with severe self-reported symptoms. Electrical stimulation completely normalized BP, cardiac contractility, cerebral blood flow, and abrogated all symptoms. Noninvasive transcutaneous electrical spinal cord stimulation may be a viable therapy for restoring autonomic cardiovascular control after SCI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".