Comparison of disc and wire electrodes to restore cough via lower thoracic spinal cord stimulation. (4th May 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: DiMarco, Anthony F.; Geertman, Robert T.; Nemunaitis, Gregory A.; Kowalski, Krzysztof E.
• Is Part Of: Journal of spinal cord medicine. Volume 45:Number 3(2022)
• Page Start: 354
• Page End: 363
• Publication Date: 2022-05-04
• Subjects: Spinal cord injury -- Tetraplegia -- Cough -- Respiratory muscles -- Rehabilitation; Spinal cord -- Wounds and injuries -- Periodicals; Spinal cord -- Diseases -- Periodicals; 616.8305
• DOI: 10.1080/10790268.2021.1936388
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1079-0268

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: To compare the safety and effectiveness of wire (WE) vs. disc (DE) electrodes to restore cough in subjects with spinal cord injury (SCI). Design: Clinical trials assessing the effectiveness and clinical outcomes associated with two electrode systems to activate the expiratory muscles. Setting: Inpatient hospital setting for DE or WE electrode insertion; outpatient evaluation of cough efficacy and instructions for home use. Participants: Twenty-nine subjects with SCI; 17 participants with DE and 12 with WE implants. Intervention: Surgical implantation of WE or DE to restore cough. Daily application of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) at home. Main outcome measure(s): Airway pressure (P) and peak airflow (F) generation achieved with SCS; clinical parameters including ease in raising secretions, incidence of acute respiratory tract infections (RTI) and side effects. Results: P and F achieved with DE and WE were not significantly different. For example, at total lung capacity (TLC) with participant effort, P was 128 ± 12 cmH2 O and 118 ± 14 cmH2 O, with DE and WE, respectively. The degree of difficulty in raising secretions improved markedly in both groups. The incidence of RTI per year fell from 1.3 ± 0.3 and 1.3 ± 0.5–0.3 ± 0.1 and 0.1 ± 0.1 for DE and WE groups, respectively (P < 0.01 for both when compared to pre-implant values and NS between DE and WE groups). The only significant side effect i.e. short-term autonomic dysreflexia was also similar between groups. Conclusions: The results of this investigation indicate that both DE and WE result in comparable degrees of expiratory muscle activation, clinical benefits and side effects. Importantly, SCS to restore cough can be achieved with use of WE which can be placed using minimally invasive techniques and associated reduction in cost, surgical time and overall risk. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00116337., NCT01659541, FDA IDE: G980267