4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Deep brain stimulation for locomotion in incomplete human spinal cord injury (DBS-SCI): protocol of a prospective one-armed multi-centre study

      other

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating condition with immediate impact on the individual’s health and quality of life. Major functional recovery reaches a plateau 3–4 months after injury despite intensive rehabilitative training. To enhance training efficacy and improve long-term outcomes, the combination of rehabilitation with electrical modulation of the spinal cord and brain has recently aroused scientific interest with encouraging results. The mesencephalic locomotor region (MLR), an evolutionarily conserved brainstem locomotor command and control centre, is considered a promising target for deep brain stimulation (DBS) in patients with SCI. Experiments showed that MLR-DBS can induce locomotion in rats with spinal white matter destructions of >85%.

          Methods and analysis

          In this prospective one-armed multi-centre study, we investigate the safety, feasibility, and therapeutic efficacy of MLR-DBS to enable and enhance locomotor training in severely affected, subchronic and chronic American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale C patients in order to improve functional recovery. Patients undergo an intensive training programme with MLR-DBS while being regularly followed up until 6 months post-implantation. The acquired data of each timepoint are compared with baseline while the primary endpoint is performance in the 6-minute walking test. The clinical trial protocol was written in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials checklist.

          Ethics and dissemination

          This first in-man study investigates the therapeutic potential of MLR-DBS in SCI patients. One patient has already been implanted with electrodes and underwent MLR stimulation during locomotion. Based on the preliminary results which promise safety and feasibility, recruitment of further patients is currently ongoing. Ethical approval has been obtained from the Ethical Committee of the Canton of Zurich (case number BASEC 2016-01104) and Swissmedic (10000316). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.

          Trial registration number

          NCT03053791.

          Related collections

          Most cited references91

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials.

          The protocol of a clinical trial serves as the foundation for study planning, conduct, reporting, and appraisal. However, trial protocols and existing protocol guidelines vary greatly in content and quality. This article describes the systematic development and scope of SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) 2013, a guideline for the minimum content of a clinical trial protocol.The 33-item SPIRIT checklist applies to protocols for all clinical trials and focuses on content rather than format. The checklist recommends a full description of what is planned; it does not prescribe how to design or conduct a trial. By providing guidance for key content, the SPIRIT recommendations aim to facilitate the drafting of high-quality protocols. Adherence to SPIRIT would also enhance the transparency and completeness of trial protocols for the benefit of investigators, trial participants, patients, sponsors, funders, research ethics committees or institutional review boards, peer reviewers, journals, trial registries, policymakers, regulators, and other key stakeholders.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A new method for measuring daytime sleepiness: the Epworth sleepiness scale.

            The development and use of a new scale, the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), is described. This is a simple, self-administered questionnaire which is shown to provide a measurement of the subject's general level of daytime sleepiness. One hundred and eighty adults answered the ESS, including 30 normal men and women as controls and 150 patients with a range of sleep disorders. They rated the chances that they would doze off or fall asleep when in eight different situations commonly encountered in daily life. Total ESS scores significantly distinguished normal subjects from patients in various diagnostic groups including obstructive sleep apnea syndrome, narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia. ESS scores were significantly correlated with sleep latency measured during the multiple sleep latency test and during overnight polysomnography. In patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome ESS scores were significantly correlated with the respiratory disturbance index and the minimum SaO2 recorded overnight. ESS scores of patients who simply snored did not differ from controls.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function.

              This article presents the development of a brief, self-report measure of female sexual function. Initial face validity testing of questionnaire items, identified by an expert panel, was followed by a study aimed at further refining the questionnaire. It was administered to 131 normal controls and 128 age-matched subjects with female sexual arousal disorder (FSAD) at five research centers. Based on clinical interpretations of a principal components analysis, a 6-domain structure was identified, which included desire, subjective arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, and pain. Overall test-retest reliability coefficients were high for each of the individual domains (r = 0.79 to 0.86) and a high degree of internal consistency was observed (Cronbach's alpha values of 0.82 and higher) Good construct validity was demonstrated by highly significant mean difference scores between the FSAD and control groups for each of the domains (p < or = 0.001). Additionally, divergent validity with a scale of marital satisfaction was observed. These results support the reliability and psychometric (as well as clinical) validity of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) in the assessment of key dimensions of female sexual function in clinical and nonclinical samples. Our findings also suggest important gender differences in the patterning of female sexual function in comparison with similar questionnaire studies in males.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2021
                30 September 2021
                : 11
                : 9
                : e047670
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentDepartment of Neurosurgery , University Hospital Zurich , Zurich, Switzerland
                [2 ]departmentInstitute for Regenerative Medicine , University of Zurich , Schlieren, Switzerland
                [3 ]departmentSpinal Cord Injury Center , Balgrist University Hospital , Zurich, Switzerland
                [4 ]departmentDepartment of Neuro-Urology , Balgrist University Hospital , Zurich, Switzerland
                [5 ]departmentDepartment of Neurology , University Hospital Zurich , Zurich, Switzerland
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Anna-Sophie Hofer; hofer@ 123456irem.uzh.ch
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1930-2140
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1991-5919
                Article
                bmjopen-2020-047670
                10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047670
                8487195
                34593490
                9921a28c-a3d7-4a22-9942-2eab5444d7a8
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 04 December 2020
                : 09 September 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: Department of Neurology, University Hospital Zurich;
                Award ID: Not applicable
                Funded by: Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Zurich;
                Award ID: Not applicable
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004374, Medtronic;
                Award ID: Not applicable
                Funded by: Spinal Cord Injury Center, Balgrist University Hospital;
                Award ID: Not applicable
                Categories
                Neurology
                1506
                1713
                Protocol
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                rehabilitation medicine,neurological injury,spine,neurosurgery,clinical trials
                Medicine
                rehabilitation medicine, neurological injury, spine, neurosurgery, clinical trials

                Comments

                Comment on this article