NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundFalls in extrapyramidal disorders, particularly Parkinson's disease (PD), multisystem atrophy (MSA), and progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), are key milestones affecting patients' quality of life, incurring increased morbidity/mortality and high healthcare costs. Unfortunately, gait and balance in parkinsonisms respond poorly to currently available treatments. A serendipitous observation of improved gait and balance in patients with PD receiving spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for back pain kindled an interest in using SCS to treat gait disorders in parkinsonisms.ObjectivesWe reviewed preclinical and clinical studies of SCS to treat gait dysfunction in parkinsonisms, covering its putative mechanisms and efficacies.Materials and methodsPreclinical studies in animal models of PD and clinical studies in patients with PD, PSP, and MSA who received SCS for gait disorders were included. The main outcome assessed was clinical improvement in gait, together with outcome measures used and possible mechanism of actions.ResultsWe identified 500 references, and 45 met the selection criteria and have been included in this study for analysis. Despite positive results in animal models, the outcomes in human studies are inconsistent.ConclusionsThe lack of blind and statistically powered studies, the heterogeneity in patient selection and study outcomes, and the poor understanding of the underlying mechanisms of action of SCS are some of the limiting factors in the field. Addressing these limitations will allow us to draw more reliable conclusions on the effects of SCS on gait and balance in extrapyramidal disorders.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.