Skip to content

Neuromodulation in Lower Limb Amputees

Spinal Excitability Changes and Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation in Lower Limb Amputees

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04543786
Enrollment
3
Registered
2020-09-10
Start date
2022-03-07
Completion date
2022-06-29
Last updated
2023-07-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Amputation, Hoffman's Reflex, Phantom Limb Pain

Keywords

Electromyography, Electrical Stimulation, Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation, Posterior Root-Muscle Reflex

Brief summary

The goal of this study is to investigate the role of transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation on spinal cord excitability in lower limb amputees. In this study, the investigators will quantify the spinal cord excitability determined by 1) reflexes and electromyography, and 2) phantom limb pain using self-reported pain assessments. The investigators will assess these measures of spinal excitability in lower limb amputees before and after transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation.

Detailed description

The overall goal of this work is to investigate the changes in the spinal cord resulting from limb amputation. Limb amputation results in an extreme form of peripheral nerve injury. Damage to peripheral nerves, such as with neuropathy, crush injuries, nerve transection, or limb amputation often results in chronic pain, which may be associated with altered excitability of spinal sensorimotor pathways. These spinal pathways become hyperexcitable due to a lack of sensory input, which causes tonic disinhibition of descending circuits and spontaneous activity in the dorsal root ganglia (DRG). Spinal excitability can be measured using the H-reflex, in which electrical stimulation of muscle spindle Ia afferents activates spinal motoneurons via the myotatic reflex, as well as the posterior root-muscle (PRM) reflex, which is elicited by transcutaneous stimulation over the dorsal roots and is considered to be half of the H-reflex, excluding the peripheral primary afferents, but with multiple root activation. Spinal excitability has not been measured in amputees but may offer a potential biomarker for PLP. Neuromodulation may restore normal spinal excitability and reduce PLP, thus offering the potential to improve the quality of life in individuals with a lower limb amputation. The results of this study will provide the foundation for future development of a neuroprosthesis to restore spinal excitability and reduce PLP in individuals with a lower limb amputation. Subjects will undergo 5 testing and stimulation sessions in 1 week. An additional 3 days of recording sessions may be necessary if a phantom limb pain episode does not occur during normal testing days. Specific Aim 1: Quantify spinal excitability. A lack of sensory input results in spinal hyperexcitability through several pathways including tonic disinhibition of descending circuits and spontaneous activity in the DRG. Spinal cord excitability is directly related to reflex modulation; impaired or enhanced reflex modulation indicates abnormal spinal cord excitability. Spinal cord excitability will be determined in people with a lower limb amputation using the H-reflex and posterior root-muscle (PRM) reflex. The H-reflex is elicited with electrical stimulation of peripheral nerves, exciting muscle spindle Ia afferents projecting to spinal motoneurons via the myotatic reflex. Stimulation of the peripheral nerves also elicits a direct motor (M) wave. The PRM reflex is elicited by electrical stimulation of the posterior roots on the back. It is considered to be half of the H-reflex, excluding the peripheral motor efferents, but activates multiple dorsal roots. Reflex amplitude and latency, threshold, recruitment curves, and rate-dependent depression will be measured and compared to intact controls. The investigators hypothesize that H and PRM reflex hyperexcitability will be present in the residual limb of amputees with PLP. These results will provide insight into the role of limb amputation on spinal cord health and excitability. Specific Aim 2: Characterize the effects of transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation on spinal cord excitability and phantom limb pain. Neuromodulation of sensorimotor pathways using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), dorsal root ganglia stimulation (DRGS), and epidural spinal cord stimulation (eSCS) to reduce phantom limb pain have been explored with mixed results. The most promising methods for pain reduction were DRGS or laterally-placed eSCS, indicating that the DRG and dorsal roots are optimal targets for reducing PLP. However, these methods require surgical implantation of electrodes. Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) is a non-invasive method for stimulating the dorsal roots in a similar way as eSCS. Through activation of the primary afferents, tSCS may inhibit pain pathways and reduce the hyperexcitability that leads to chronic pain. tSCS in people with spinal cord injury has been shown to restore spinal inhibition and reduce H-reflex hyperexcitability. The investigators hypothesize that tSCS can reduce PLP through modulation of sensorimotor pathways. By comparing the H- and PRM reflex excitability recorded from the residual limb before and after each session of tSCS, a potential mechanism of PLP could be elucidated. H- and PRM reflex modulation, and any differences in the extent of modulation for each, can further inform on the mechanisms of tSCS and how it modulates sensorimotor pathways. The investigators will also quantify the subjects' experience of PLP before and after the 5 days of tSCS and correlate their pain experiences with spinal excitability measures. The investigators will use a visual analog scale and the McGill Pain Questionnaire to assess changes in pain perception. The investigators will also use an algometer to determine changes in local pain threshold.

Interventions

DEVICETranscutaneous spinal cord stimulation

Neuromodulation with transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation applied on lower back adjacent to spine for 30-60 minutes for 5 consecutive days.

Sponsors

Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
CollaboratorNIH
Medical University of South Carolina
CollaboratorOTHER
Carnegie Mellon University
CollaboratorOTHER
University of Pittsburgh
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
BASIC_SCIENCE
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
21 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Participants must be between the ages of 21 and 70 years old. * Participants must have a trans-tibial amputation and phantom limb pain in at least one leg

Exclusion criteria

* Participants must not have any serious disease, disorder, or infection (ex. blood or bone disorder or infection) that could affect their ability to participate in this study. * Female participants of child-bearing potential must not be pregnant or breast feeding, or plan to become pregnant during the course of the study. * Participants must not have any implanted stimulators or pulse generators * Participants must not have any implanted metallic devices in their torso and/or legs * Participants must not have heart disease, including known arrhythmia

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Mean H-reflex ThresholdDay 2Reflex threshold: stimulation amplitude required to evoke reflex response. The presence of H-reflexes are expected in uninjured individuals.
Mean PRM Reflex ThresholdDay 2Reflex threshold: stimulation amplitude required to evoke reflex response. Thresholds in uninjured people have been reported to be approximately 30 mA.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Phantom Limb Pain ScoreDay 5McGill Pain Questionnaire: minimum = 0, maximum = 78, the higher the pain score the greater the pain
Pain Pressure ThresholdDay 5Pain Pressure Threshold Test using an algometer: minimum force that induces pain, minimum = 0 N, maximum = 444.8 N, a lower threshold indicates hypersensitivity
Pain ScoreDay 2Visual analog scale: minimum = 0, maximum = 10, the higher the score the greater the pain

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation
Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation: Neuromodulation with transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation applied on lower back adjacent to spine for 30-60 minutes for 5 consecutive days.
3
Total3

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicTranscutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
3 Participants
H-reflex thresholdNA mA
Nature of limb amputation
Alcohol Neuropathy
1 Participants
Nature of limb amputation
Diabetic Neuropathy
1 Participants
Nature of limb amputation
Trauma
1 Participants
Pain pressure threshold23.84 Newton
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.08
Pain score6 Score on a Scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2
Phantom limb pain score34 Score on a Scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7
PRM threshold59.5 mA
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.1
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
3 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
3 participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Gender
Man
2 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Gender
Woman
1 Participants
Side of limb amputation
Left
2 Participants
Side of limb amputation
Right
1 Participants
Time since amputation
>= 5 years
2 Participants
Time since amputation
< 6 months
1 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 3
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 3
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 3

Outcome results

Primary

Mean H-reflex Threshold

Reflex threshold: stimulation amplitude required to evoke reflex response. The presence of H-reflexes are expected in uninjured individuals.

Time frame: Day 3

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationMean H-reflex ThresholdNA mA
Primary

Mean H-reflex Threshold

Reflex threshold: stimulation amplitude required to evoke reflex response. The presence of H-reflexes are expected in uninjured individuals.

Time frame: Day 4

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationMean H-reflex ThresholdNA mA
Primary

Mean H-reflex Threshold

Reflex threshold: stimulation amplitude required to evoke reflex response. The presence of H-reflexes are expected in uninjured individuals.

Time frame: Day 5

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationMean H-reflex ThresholdNA mA
Primary

Mean H-reflex Threshold

Reflex threshold: stimulation amplitude required to evoke reflex response. The presence of H-reflexes are expected in uninjured individuals.

Time frame: Day 2

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationMean H-reflex ThresholdNA mA
Primary

Mean PRM Reflex Threshold

Reflex threshold: stimulation amplitude required to evoke reflex response. Thresholds in uninjured people have been reported to be approximately 30 mA.

Time frame: Day 4

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationMean PRM Reflex Threshold56.2 mAStandard Deviation 7.6
p-value: <0.001ANOVA
Primary

Mean PRM Reflex Threshold

Reflex threshold: stimulation amplitude required to evoke reflex response. Thresholds in uninjured people have been reported to be approximately 30 mA.

Time frame: Day 5

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationMean PRM Reflex Threshold38.6 mAStandard Deviation 12.2
p-value: <0.001ANOVA
Primary

Mean PRM Reflex Threshold

Reflex threshold: stimulation amplitude required to evoke reflex response. Thresholds in uninjured people have been reported to be approximately 30 mA.

Time frame: Day 3

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationMean PRM Reflex Threshold55.8 mAStandard Deviation 5.9
p-value: <0.001ANOVA
Primary

Mean PRM Reflex Threshold

Reflex threshold: stimulation amplitude required to evoke reflex response. Thresholds in uninjured people have been reported to be approximately 30 mA.

Time frame: Day 2

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationMean PRM Reflex Threshold56.7 mAStandard Deviation 4.9
p-value: 0.0048ANOVA
Secondary

Pain Pressure Threshold

Pain Pressure Threshold Test using an algometer: minimum force that induces pain, minimum = 0 N, maximum = 444.8 N, a lower threshold indicates hypersensitivity

Time frame: Day 5

Population: One participant excluded from this analysis due to inconsistent pain medication use on last testing day

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationPain Pressure Threshold50.67 NewtonStandard Deviation 26.07
p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Pain Score

Visual analog scale: minimum = 0, maximum = 10, the higher the score the greater the pain

Time frame: Day 4

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationPain Score4.8 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 1
p-value: 0.56ANOVA
Secondary

Pain Score

Visual analog scale: minimum = 0, maximum = 10, the higher the score the greater the pain

Time frame: Day 2

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationPain Score4.7 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 1.5
p-value: 0.56ANOVA
Secondary

Pain Score

Visual analog scale: minimum = 0, maximum = 10, the higher the score the greater the pain

Time frame: Day 3

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationPain Score3.7 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 3.2
p-value: 0.56ANOVA
Secondary

Pain Score

Visual analog scale: minimum = 0, maximum = 10, the higher the score the greater the pain

Time frame: Day 5

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationPain Score4.5 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 0.5
p-value: 0.56ANOVA
Secondary

Phantom Limb Pain Score

McGill Pain Questionnaire: minimum = 0, maximum = 78, the higher the pain score the greater the pain

Time frame: Day 5

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Transcutaneous Spinal Cord StimulationPhantom Limb Pain Score18.3 Score on a ScaleStandard Deviation 6.8

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026