» Articles » PMID: 24655042

Comparison of Burst and Tonic Spinal Cord Stimulation on Spinal Neural Processing in an Animal Model

Overview
Journal Neuromodulation
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2014 Mar 25
PMID 24655042
Citations 19
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) using bursts of pulses suppressed neuropathic pain as well or better than tonic stimulation and limited the incidences of parasthesias. The present translational study explored possible differences in mechanisms of burst and tonic SCS on nociceptive spinal networks and/or the gracile nucleus supraspinal relay.

Materials And Methods: Visceromotor reflexes (VMRs, a nociceptive response) or extracellular activity of either L6-S2 spinal neurons or gracile nucleus neurons were recorded during noxious somatic stimulation (pinching) and visceral stimulation (colorectal distension [CRD]) in anesthetized rats. A stimulating (unipolar, ball) electrode at L2-L3 delivered 40 Hz burst or tonic SCS at different intensities relative to motor threshold (MT).

Results: Average MTs for burst SCS were significantly lower than for tonic SCS. Burst SCS reduced the VMR more than tonic SCS. After high-intensity SCS (90% MT), spinal neuronal responses to CRD and pinch were reduced similarly for burst and tonic SCS. At low-intensity SCS (60% MT), only burst SCS significantly decreased the nociceptive somatic response. Tonic but not burst SCS significantly increased spontaneous activity of neurons in the gracile nucleus.

Conclusion: Based on the clinically relevant burst versus tonic parameters used in this study, burst SCS is more efficacious than tonic SCS in attenuating visceral nociception. Burst and tonic SCS also suppress lumbosacral neuronal responses to noxious somatic and visceral stimuli; however, burst SCS has a greater inhibitory effect on the neuronal response to noxious somatic stimuli than to noxious visceral stimuli. Reduced or abolished paresthesia in patients may be due in part to burst SCS not increasing spontaneous activity of neurons in the gracile nucleus.

Citing Articles

Integrative approaches in spinal cord stimulation: Neuropathic pain management and motor recovery in spinal cord injury. A narrative review.

Bonomo R, Bonomo G, Rubiu E, Iess G, Cammarata G, Innocenti N Brain Spine. 2024; 4:102781.

PMID: 38601775 PMC: 11004705. DOI: 10.1016/j.bas.2024.102781.


Narrative review of current neuromodulation modalities for spinal cord injury.

Medina R, Ho A, Reddy R, Chen J, Castellanos J Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2023; 4:1143405.

PMID: 36969918 PMC: 10033643. DOI: 10.3389/fpain.2023.1143405.


Comparison of the Interference Effects on Somatosensory Evoked Potential from Tonic, Burst, and High-dose Spinal Cord Stimulations.

Urasaki E, Miyagi Y, Muramatsu S, Ezaki Y Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2022; 62(7):313-321.

PMID: 35545502 PMC: 9357458. DOI: 10.2176/jns-nmc.2021-0298.


Neural Recruitment During Conventional, Burst, and 10-kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation for Pain.

Rogers E, Zander H, Lempka S J Pain. 2021; 23(3):434-449.

PMID: 34583022 PMC: 8925309. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2021.09.005.


Differential Modulation of Dorsal Horn Neurons by Various Spinal Cord Stimulation Strategies.

Yeop Lee K, Lee D, Kagan Z, Wang D, Bradley K Biomedicines. 2021; 9(5).

PMID: 34070113 PMC: 8158340. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines9050568.