The effect of transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation on corticospinal excitability in chronic incomplete spinal cord injury

• Published in: NeuroRehabilitation (Reading, Mass.) Vol. 43; no. 2; pp. 125 - 134
• Main Authors: Powell, Elizabeth Salmon, Carrico, Cheryl, Salyers, Emily, Westgate, Philip M., Sawaki, Lumy
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London, England SAGE Publications 01.01.2018; Sage Publications Ltd; IOS Press
• Subjects: Adult; Electrodes; Evoked Potentials, Motor; Excitability; Feasibility studies; Female; Humans; Magnetic fields; Male; Middle Aged; Motor evoked potentials; Neurological Rehabilitation - methods; Pyramidal tracts; Pyramidal Tracts - physiopathology; Spinal cord injuries; Spinal Cord Injuries - physiopathology; Spinal Cord Injuries - rehabilitation; Spinal Cord Stimulation - adverse effects; Spinal Cord Stimulation - methods; Transcranial magnetic stimulation; transcranial magnetic stimulation; Neuromodulation; humans; neuroplasticity; lower extremity
• ISSN: 1053-8135; 1878-6448; 1878-6448
• DOI: 10.3233/NRE-172369

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the feasibility of modulating bilateral corticospinal excitability with different polarities of transcutaneous spinal direct current stimulation (tsDCS) in chronic, incomplete spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS: Six subjects with chronic incomplete SCI (>12 months post injury) participated in this crossover study. Intervention consisted of 3 sessions, separated by at least 1 week, in which each subject received the conditions cathodal, anodal, and sham tsDCS. Stimulation was delivered at 2.5 mA for 20 minutes with the active electrode positioned over the spinous processes of T10-T11 and the reference electrode over left deltoid. To measure the effects of tsDCS on corticospinal excitability, motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from transcranial magnetic stimulation were measured bilaterally from soleus before and after tsDCS. RESULTS: Five subjects completed all 3 sessions. One subject withdrew after 2 sessions due to complications unrelated to the study. MEPs were measurable in 5 subjects. No significant differences in change of MEP amplitudes were found between the 3 conditions. However, there were trends that indicated laterality of response, particularly with cathodal tsDCS increasing corticospinal excitability contralateral to the reference electrode and decreasing corticospinal excitability ipsilateral to the reference electrode. CONCLUSION: Corticospinal excitability may be modulated with laterality by tsDCS in individuals with chronic, incomplete SCI. Further research is needed to 1) determine whether different placement of the reference electrode can lead to uniform modulation bilaterally, and 2) reveal whether these alterations in corticospinal excitability can lead to improved movement function in individuals with chronic, incomplete SCI.