A NEW TECHNOLOGY FOR RECOVERY OF LOCOMOTION IN PATIENTS AFTER A STROKE

T. R. Moshonkina; Мошонкина Т. Р.; E. N. Zharova; Жарова Е. Н.; S. S. Ananev; Ананьев С. С.; N. D. Shanybina; Шандыбина Н. Д.; E. A. Vershinina; Вершинина Е. А.; V. A. Lyakhovetskii; Ляховецкий В. А.; A. A. Grishin; Гришин А. А.; E. V. Shlyakhto; Шляхто Е. В.; Y. P. Gerasimenko; Герасименко Ю. П.

doi:10.31857/S2686738922600601

A NEW TECHNOLOGY FOR RECOVERY OF LOCOMOTION IN PATIENTS AFTER A STROKE

Authors: Moshonkina T.R.¹, Zharova E.N.², Ananev S.S.¹, Shanybina N.D.¹, Vershinina .A.¹, Lyakhovetskii V.A.¹, Grishin A.A.¹, Shlyakhto E.V.², Gerasimenko Y.P.¹
Affiliations:
1. Pavlov Institute of Physiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences
2. Almazov National Medical Research Centre
Issue: Vol 508, No 1 (2023)
Pages: 14-18
Section: Articles
URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/2686-7389/article/view/135662
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/S2686738922600601
EDN: https://elibrary.ru/MNUEOU
ID: 135662

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access
Restricted Access

Access granted
Restricted Access

Subscription Access

Abstract
About the authors
References
Supplementary files
Statistics

Abstract

Neural networks in the spinal cord can generate the walking pattern and control posture in the absence of supraspinal influences. A technology has been created using transcutaneous electrical spinal cord stimulation (tSCS). During walking, tSCS activated spinal locomotor networks, as well as leg flexor/extensor motor pools in the swing/support phases, respectively. It was suggested that the use of this technology in people with locomotion disorders would improve walking. Patients with hemiparesis were studied 3–11 months after a stroke, the duration of the course was 2 weeks. Patients of the main and control groups received standard therapy and rehabilitation using technology; in the control group, sham tESCS was used. After the course in the main group, in contrast to the control group, minimal clinically significant changes in walking parameters were achieved. The developed technology is an effective means of restoring walking in patients with hemiparesis.

Keywords

spinal cord, electrical stimulation, motor control, locomotion, motor rehabilitation

References

Angeli C., Edgerton V., Gerasimenko Y., et al. Altering spinal cord excitability enables voluntary movements after chronic complete paralysis in humans // Brain. 2014. V. 137. P. 1394–1409.
Wagner F., Mignardot J., Le Goff-Mignardot C., et al. Targeted neurotechnology restores walking in humans with spinal cord injury // Nature. 2018. V. 563. P. 65–71.
Moshonkina T., Grishin A., Bogacheva I., et al. Novel non-invasive strategy for spinal neuromodulation to control human locomotion // Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2021. V. 14. P. 622533.
Gorodnichev R., Pukhov A., Moiseev S., et al. Regulation of gait cycle phases during noninvasive electrical stimulation of the spinal cord // Hum. Physiol. 2021.V. 47. P. 60–69.
Siu R., Brown E., Mesbah S., et al. Novel noninvasive spinal neuromodulation strategy facilitates recovery of stepping after motor complete paraplegia // J. Clin. Med. 2022. V. 11. P. 3670.
Feigin V., Norrving B., Mensah G. Global burden of stroke // 2017. Circ. Res. V. 120. P. 439–448.
Grishin A., Bobrova E., Reshetnikova V., et al. A system for detecting stepping cycle phases and spinal cord stimulation as a tool for controlling human locomotion // Biomed. Eng. 2021. V. 54. P. 312–316.
Murray L., Tahayori B., Knikou M. Transspinal direct current stimulation produces persistent plasticity in human motor pathways // Sci. Rep. 2018. V. 8. P. 1–11.
Benavides F., Jo H., Lundell H., et al. Cortical and subcortical effects of transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation in humans with tetraplegia // J. Neurosci. 2020. V. 40. P. 2633–2643.
Fulk G., He Y. Minimal clinically important difference of the 6-minute walk test in people with stroke // J. Neurol. Phys. Ther. 2018. V. 42. P. 235–240.
Bohannon R., Glenney S. Minimal clinically important difference for change in comfortable gait speed of adults with pathology: a systematic review // J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2014. V. 20. P. 295–300.