MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The dawn of cardiovascular neuroprosthetics: Epidural spinal cord stimulation acutely restores cardiovascular function in persons with clinically complete spinal cord injury

2017· article· en· W3213796684 on OpenAlexafffund
Aaron A. Phillips, Christopher R. West, Jordan W. Squair, Susan J. Harkema, Claudia Angeli, Andrei V. Krassioukov

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaInternational Collaboration On Repair Discoveries
FundersRick Hansen Institute
KeywordsMedicineSpinal cord injurySpinal cordSupine positionLumbosacral jointAnesthesiaFunctional electrical stimulationStimulationCardiologyInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION Neuroprosthetic electrical stimulation of the lumbosacral spinal cord with surgical implants has the capacity to excite dormant neuronal circuitry that has lost supraspinal control due to a spinal cord injury. Very recently, this intervention was even shown to elicit involuntary and voluntary stepping‐like movement of skeletal muscles previously thought to be paralyzed. OBJECTIVE Considering that autonomic and cardiovascular dysfunctions are the leading cause of death after spinal cord injury, and a higher health priority than walking again by these individuals, we set out to explore if lumbosacral electrical stimulation of the spinal cord could be harnessed to regulate the cardiovascular system after spinal cord injury. METHODS Three of the first individuals with cervical spinal cord injury to be implanted worldwide were assessed in the present study, all of whom presented with cardiovascular dysfunction, in the form of severe orthostatic hypotension as well as impaired cardiac and cerebral regulation. A 16‐electrode array () paddle was implanted over the lower lumbar/sacral spinal cord segments and connected to an electrical stimulation unit (both Medtronic). At least one month after implantation, we developed a cardiovascular optimized stimulation paradigm, that excited sympathetic preganglionic neurons but did not elicit skeletal muscle contraction (confirmed with electromyography; ). We measured beat‐by‐beat blood pressure (photoplethysmography), cardiac function (echocardiography), and cerebral blood flow regulation (transcranial Doppler), in the supine position and in response to sit‐up, as well as cognitive function (Stroop test) with and without (in randomized order) cardiovascular optimized stimulation. Statistics on only one to three individuals is not typically recommended and was not performed. RESULTS Targeted cardiovascular electrical stimulation resulted in: [1] abrogated orthostatic hypotension (–39mmHg and severe presyncope vs. −8mmHg and absence of symptoms; ); [2] maintained stroke volume (−32ml vs. −8ml; ) and cerebral blood flow (−25 cm/s vs. −6cm/s; ) during sit‐up; and [3] restored neurovascular coupling (+0% vs. 18%); and Stroop performance (P3–P2 time: 42s vs. 21s). Increased low‐frequency power of systolic blood pressure oscillations suggest supraspinal medullary sympathetic control of blood pressure is restored . CONCLUSIONS Neuroprosthetic modulation of spinal cord circuitry caudal to injury can restore normal autonomic control, which challenges our dogmatic understanding of the inherent functionality of the autonomic pathways in the spinal cord after injury. This data may represent the dawn of a new age for neuroprosthetic management of autonomic and cardiovascular heath. Support or Funding Information Craig Neilsen Foundation, Rick Hansen Institute, Helmsley Foundation Research Trust.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207