Journal of Neurogastroenterology and Motility 2020; 26(1): 147-159  https://doi.org/10.5056/jnm19101
A Novel Approach in Spinal Cord Stimulation for Enhancing Gastric Motility: A Preliminary Study on Canines
Lei Tu, Payam Gharibani, Yi Yang, Bo Zhang, Feng Ji, Jieyun Yin, and Jiande D Z Chen*
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD , USA
Correspondence to: Jiande D Z Chen, PhD
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 5210 Eastern Ave, Alpha Center, 2/230, Baltimore, MD 21224, USA
Tel: +1-410-550-6854, Fax: +1-410-550-7861, E-mail: jchen184@jhmi.edu
Lei Tu and Payam Gharibani contributed equally to this work.
Received: May 10, 2019; Revised: October 19, 2019; Accepted: November 8, 2019; Published online: January 30, 2020.
© The Korean Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility. All rights reserved.

cc This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract

Background/Aims

Gastroparesis is commonly seen in patients with diabetes and functional dyspepsia with no satisfactory therapies. Dysautonomia is one of the main reasons for the imbalanced motility. We hypothesized that spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a viable therapy for gastroparesis via the autonomic modulation to improve gastric motility. The aim is to find an optimal method of SCS for treating gastroparesis.

Methods

Eight healthy-female dogs were implanted with a gastric cannula, a duodenal cannula, 2 multi-electrode spinal leads, and an implantable pulse generator. Gastric motility index (MI) was used to determine the best stimulation location/parameters of SCS. Optimized SCS was used to improve glucagon-induced gastroparesis.

Results

With fixed parameters, SCS at Thoracic 10 (T10) was found most effective for increasing gastric MI (37.8%, P = 0.013). SCS was optimized with different parameters (pulse width: 0.05–0.6 msec, frequency: 5–500 Hz, motor threshold: 30–90%) on T10. Our findings revealed that 0.5 msec, 20 Hz with 90% motor threshold at T10 were the best parameters in increasing MI. Glucagon significantly delayed gastric emptying, and this inhibitory effect was partially blocked by SCS. Gastric emptying at 120 minutes was 25.6% in the control session and 15.7% in glucagon session (P = 0.007 vs control), while it was 22.9% with SCS session (P = 0.041 vs glucagon). SCS with the optimal parameters was found to maximally enhance vagal activity and inhibit sympathetic activity assessed by the spectral analysis of heart rate variability.

Conclusions

SCS with optimized stimulation location and parameters improves gastric motility in healthy-dogs and accelerates gastric emptying impaired by glucagon via enhancing vagal activity.

Keywords: Gastric emptying; Gastrointestinal motility; Gastroparesis; Spinal cord stimulation; Vagal activity
Introduction

Delay in gastric emptying in the absence of mechanical obstruction is a common complication of gastroparesis.1 Gastroparesis is a neuromuscular disorder of the upper gastrointestinal tract which is accompanied by nausea, vomiting, epigastric pain or discomfort, early satiety, abdominal bloating, postprandial fullness, and weight loss.2 While the main etiology of gastroparesis is idiopathic,3 diabetes, postoperative ileus, connective tissue diseases, and neurological disorders are the other causes of gastroparesis.4 Main pathophysiological factors of gastroparesis include decreased or impaired gastric motility, reduced gastric accommodation and gastric hypersensitivity.5,6 Gastric motility includes gastric pace-making activity (gastric slow waves regulated by interstitial cells of Cajal) as well as antral contraction (peristalsis mediated through smooth muscle cells).4

While the individual and societal burden of gastroparesis are substantial, currently limited treatment options are available with no satisfactory outcomes. Gastric electrical stimulation (Enterra Therapy) has been approved for humanitarian use in treating nausea and vomiting in gastroparesis,7 however reports of efficacy have varied among different centers and some have failed to show any promising effects on overall symptoms of gastroparesis or gastric emptying.810 On the other hand, while a number of prokinetic medications (such as cisapride) were developed to restore normal gastrointestinal motility, they have been withdrawn from the market due to their unfavorable cardiovascular safety.11 Noteworthy is that treating overall symptoms of gastroparesis is another dilemma. Some medications can improve gastric accommodation or abdominal pain but they can reduce gastric motility,12 or some can increase gastric motility (prokinetics) but might reduce gastric accommodation.13 Consequently, no effective therapies are available for gastroparesis at present.

The autonomic function plays a key role in the regulation of gastric motility.6 Activation of the parasympathetic system or vagal nerve enhances gastric motility, whereas activation of sympathetic activity inhibits gastric motility.14 Therefore, normal gastric motility is maintained by balancing vagal and sympathetic activities. The imbalance of autonomic activity (reduced vagal activity and/or increased sympathetic activity) has been reported in diabetic gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia.15

Previously, we showed that impairment in autonomic functions (increased sympathovagal balance) may play a role in hyperglycemia-induced dysrhythmias/hypomotility in diabetic rats.16 On the other hand, in a preliminary rodent study, we showed that spinal cord stimulation (SCS) was able to decrease sympathetic activity and accelerate gastric emptying.17 We assumed that since SCS has also been widely used in pain management,18,19 it could be a great potential for treating gastroparesis because it might improve both hypomotility and hypersensitivity. In this study, we hypothesize that SCS is a viable therapy for gastroparesis by improving gastric motility via the autonomic mechanisms. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of SCS on gastrointestinal motility in healthy dogs. We used a commercially available SCS lead connected to an implantable pulse generator (IPG). Primarily, we tried to find the best location of stimulation of the spinal cord using our previous rodent parameters17 to increase gastric motility, and then we tried to optimize other parameters such as signal frequency, pulse width and motor threshold (MT). In the meantime, we validated if our location and parameters of SCS could alter the autonomic functions and hormones. Finally, we investigated the effects of our optimized SCS in gastric emptying rate of glucagon-induced gastroparesis in healthy dogs.

Materials and Methods

Animals and Ethics Statement

We used 8 healthy female hound dogs (18–25 kg; Marshall BioResources, North Rose, NY, USA) in this study while they were housed in an animal room with regulated temperature (22°C), 60% humidity, and a 12-hour light/12-hour dark cycle. This study was carried out in accordance with the guidelines of Care and Use of the laboratory Animals. The protocol was approved by the committee on the ethics of animal experiments with the protocol number: DO16M316. All surgical procedures were conducted in an operating room under well-ventilated, sterile conditions, and all efforts were made to minimize animal suffering. Following implantation of spinal cord leads and cannulas, animals were housed individually to avoid chewing off the externalized cannulas and protecting jackets. All dogs were acclimatized to the laboratory location and trained by being brought to the lab for getting used to the experimental environment. All experiments were arranged by randomized sessions.

Animal Preparation and Surgical Procedures

Following overnight fasting, the dog was anesthetized with intravenous injection of thiopental sodium (11 mg/kg) and anesthesia was maintained with IsoFlo (1.5% isoflurane, inhalation). Thoracic vertebra number 9 (T9) was uncovered for laminectomy to expose the spinal cord. The furthest caudal rib (rib 13) connected to T13, helped us to locate T9 in this study. Two paddle electrode leads (CoverEdge 32; Boston Scientific Corporation, Boston, MA) were inserted from the laminoctomized T9 to cover the dorsal column of spinal cord rostrally from T7 to T9 and caudally from T10 to T12 (Fig. 1A and 1B). As shown in Figure 1B, these paddles could encompass spinal cord segments T8 to T12. These electrode paddles were connected to an IPG (Precision Spectra, Boston Scientific) which was placed in a subcutaneous pocket made underneath the skin at the back of the scapula. After insertion of the SCS paddles, an abdominal surgical procedure was performed to place the gastric and duodenal cannulas. In order to measure gastric motility via an intraluminal manometric catheter, a cannula with an inner diameter of 1 cm was placed in the middle of the anterior side of the stomach 15 cm above the pylorus.2022 In addition, another cannula was placed in the duodenum (10 cm below the pylorus for the assessment of gastric emptying.2326 Immediately after the surgery, antibiotics (cefpodoxime, 10 mg/kg) and pain medications (buprenorphine SR, 0.06 mg/kg) were given for a period of 7 days and 3 days, respectively. The animals were monitored twice daily for a period of at least 2 weeks and no experiments were performed before the dogs were completely recovered from the surgical procedures.

Spinal Cord Stimulation

SCS was delivered through the IPG, programmed via a wireless wand (Bionic Navigator 3D software with Illumina 3D Programming; Boston Scientific Corporation, Boston, USA). In order to optimize SCS for increasing gastric contractions, we used motility index (MI) or the summation of stomach antral contractions assessed by high-resolution manometry to determine the best location(s) and then the best parameters of SCS. Meanwhile, we validated our optimized location and parameters by assessing the autonomic functions through the spectral analysis of the heart rate variability (HRV) derived from the electrocardiogram (ECG).

In each study session, the dog was brought to the laboratory after an overnight fast. They were fed with one can of dog food (Pedigree chopped chicken, 421 kcal/can) and then immediately antral contractions and the ECG were simultaneously recorded for 20 minutes without SCS as a baseline and another 20 minutes with SCS or without SCS (considered as sham-SCS). Afterward, the SCS was terminated and the antral contractile recording was continuously made. If the recording returned to the baseline, the procedure was repeated: 20 minutes baseline and 20 minutes SCS at another location or another set of parameters. If the recording did not return to the baseline, no further tests were made. The maximal duration of each experimental session was less than 3 hours to ensure that gastric motility was of the postprandial pattern and the animal was not exhausted.

Experiment 1. Optimization of Spinal Cord Stimulation Methodologies

Optimization of spinal cord stimulation location(s)

This step was performed prior to the optimization of stimulation parameters for SCS. We used the following fixed parameters for stimulation to find the best location: frequency of 50 Hz, pulse width of 0.2 msec, intensity or amplitude of 90% of the MT or the tonic contractions of the abdominal muscles, and pulse train of 2 seconds on time, 3 seconds off time. These parameters were derived from our previous SCS findings in a rodent study to increase the gastric motility.17 A number of study sessions (described above) were performed on separate days with SCS delivered via different locations randomly chosen from the highest level (T7) to the lowest level (T12) covered by the electrode paddles. Animal behavior was closely monitored, and the testing time was shortened if unusual behavior was noted. Two consecutive sessions for each dog were at least 2 days apart.

A total of 8 locations were tested (Fig. 1): T7, T7–T8, T8–T9, T9, T10, T10–T11, T11–T12, and T12. For the coverage of 2 vertebrate positions, such as T8–T9 and T11–T12, SCS was performed via 4 pairs of electrodes located in these positions and the output current was equally distributed among the 4 channels. SCS at T7, T9, T10, and T12 was performed via one single pair of electrodes.

Optimization of spinal cord stimulation parameters

In this step, we tried to find a range for the pulse frequency, pulse width and MT within which SCS could have an ameliorating effect on antral contractions. Base on the best location found in the previous step, we tested different sets of parameters including different pulse frequencies (5, 10, 20, 50, 100, and 500 Hz), pulse widths (0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.5, and 0.6 msec), and pulse amplitudes (30% MT, 50% MT, 70% MT, and 90% MT) - (MT: lowest voltage output at which abdominal muscle contraction is visible) using the same procedure mentioned above. In each session, only one parameter was altered randomly. The pulse train was set at 2 seconds on time and 3 seconds off time.

Measurement and analysis of antral contraction

Antral contractions were measured by a multi-channel manometric system via a special catheter with 10 staggered circumferential sensors spaced at 1-cm intervals and an outer diameter of 4.2 mm (Ningbo Maida Medical Device Inc, Ningbo, China). The catheter was inserted in the distal stomach (antrum) via the gastric cannula to measure the gastric contractions. In this study, antral contractile signals were recorded and analyzed by a multi-channel recorder (MedView360 V2.0; Ningbo Maida Medical Device Inc., Ningbo, China). Channel 5 was selected for the analysis of MI due to its highest quality of the recording; presumably, the sensor in Channel 5 had the best contact with the gastric wall. MI was defined as the total number of contractions times the summation of all contraction peaks and then divided by the analyzed time period.

Experiment 2. Effects of Spinal Cord Stimulation on Glucagon-induced Delay in Gastric Emptying

In order to validate if our optimized location and parameters could be used for treating gastroparesis, we investigated the effect of SCS on glucagon-induced delay in gastric emptying in the same 8 dogs in 3 randomized sessions (Control: no glucagon, no SCS; Glucagon: glucagon without SCS, and Glucagon + SCS: glucagon with SCS) on separate days at an interval of at least 3 days. Glucagon was shown to consistently induce a delay in the gastric emptying.25

In each session, the animal was fasted overnight and brought to the lab in the morning. Following a standard test meal (375 g of solid food, regular Lab Chow that is usually consumed within 15 minutes), glucagon (0.1 mg/kg) was administered intravenously.25 Immediately after, the duodenal cannula was opened to collect emptied chyme every minute for the first 15 minutes and then every 15 minutes until 3 hours after the meal. The collected chyme was centrifuged and then air-dried for 1 week. Next, we weighed the dried chyme and calculated for gastric emptying using a previously established method.6 SCS was performed during the entire 3-hour gastric emptying test.

Experiment 3: Effects of Spinal Cord Stimulation on Polypeptide and Norepinephrine

This experiment was done in the 8 dogs in 2 randomized sessions. In each session, the animal was fasted overnight and brought to the lab in the morning. In the session without SCS, blood samples (10 mL) were drawn immediately before and 1 hour after a standard test meal (375 g of solid food, regular Lab Chow that is usually consumed within 15 minutes). In the other session with SCS, blood samples were taken at baseline in the fasting state, 30 minutes after SCS in the fasting state and 1 hour after the same test meal; SCS was performed during the entire 1-hour postprandial state.

Assessment of autonomic functions

The autonomic function was assessed by the spectral analysis of HRV derived from the ECG, and the plasma levels of pancreatic polypeptide (PP; reflecting vagal activation) and norepinephrine (NE; reflecting sympathetic activation). To prove our hypothesis that SCS improves gastric motility by improving the autonomic functions; the ECG was recorded concurrently with the antral contractions in all study sessions. A one-channel ECG was made via 3 electrodes placed at the apical side of the heart, the inside of the right hind leg, and the offside of the heart apex. After removing the hair by a hair clipper, the dog’s skin was cleaned by a special skin-prep cream (Nuprep; Weaver and Company, Aurora, CO, USA). Before placing ECG electrodes, a conductive gel (Ten20; Weaver and Company) was applied to reduce electrode-skin impedance. The recording was made using a special amplifier with a recording range of 1.5–100 Hz (model 2283 Fti Universal Fetrode Amplifier; UFI, Morro Bay, CA, USA).

Assessment of autonomic functions from heart rate variability

The HRV signal was derived from custom-made software by identifying R peaks and calculating consecutive RR intervals from the ECG. Then, the power spectrum of the HRV was calculated using a previously validated software.14,26,27 The power in the low-frequency components (LF: 0.04–0.15 Hz) reflects mainly sympathetic activity, whereas the power in the high-frequency components (HF: 0.15–0.50 Hz) stands purely parasympathetic or vagal activity.28

Assessment of plasma pancreatic polypeptide and norepinephrine

Blood samples were obtained as stated in Experiment 3 and coagulation was prevented with 10% EDTA and centrifuged at 1200 × g at 4°C for 20 minutes, and plasma samples were stored at −70°C. Plasma PP (MBS2606185; MyBioSource, San Diego, CA, USA) and NE (IB89537; IBL America, Minneapolis, MN, USA) were measured by ELISA, according to the manufacturer’s protocol.

Statistical Methods

All data are expressed as mean ± SEM. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the data among the different sessions. Least Significant Difference was used to assess the difference between 2 periods or 2 sessions. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Data were analyzed by statistical software SPSS 19.0 (IBM Corp, Somers, NY, USA).

Results

Optimization of Spinal Cord Stimulation Methodologies

In order to optimize the parameters of SCS for increasing gastric motility (gastric contraction), we employed MI, or the summation of antral contractions assessed by high-resolution manometry. Meanwhile, subsequently, we validated our optimized parameters by assessing the autonomic functions through the spectral analysis of the HRV.

Optimized spinal cord stimulation location(s)

As shown in Figure 1A and 1B, our implanted 2 multi-electrodes pedal spinal leads could cover vertebrae T7–T12 following the surgery. We used our prior rodent parameters (pulse width: 0.2 msec, frequency: 50 Hz, MT: 90.0%, time: 2 seconds on time/3 seconds off time) in the first step to find the best location(s) of SCS. Gastric MI was measured using high-resolution manometry by inserting a catheter in the gastric cannula (Fig. 1C). Summation of antral contractions assessed by manometry revealed that SCS at the level of vertebra T10 (segmental T10–T11) was able to increase the gastric MI by 37.8% significantly compared to the corresponding baseline (10 465 ± 1102 vs 7589 ± 872, respectively; P = 0.013) (Fig. 2). Interestingly, SCS at other locations of the spinal cord did not change the gastric MI.

Optimized spinal cord stimulation parameters

Following finding the best location for SCS (vertebra T10), we optimized each of stimulation parameters systematically, including frequency, pulse width and amplitude (Fig. 3). As shown in Figure 3A, we discovered that only frequency at 20 Hz was able to significantly enhance the gastric MI by 61.5% compared to the corresponding baseline (11 092 ± 1011 vs 6865 ± 806, respectively; P = 0.021). It is noteworthy that other frequencies of 5, 10, 50, 100, and 500 Hz did not alter the MI significantly.

On the other hand, interestingly, pulse width with both 0.2 msec and 0.5 msec could increase the MI, remarkably. As shown in Figure 3B, while SCS with 0.2 msec increased the gastric MI by 41.0% compared to the corresponding baseline (12774 ± 1896 vs 9041 ± 1134, P = 0.032), 0.5 msec enhanced it by 32.0% (10 546 ± 1429 vs 7936 ± 849, P = 0.043), respectively.

Optimizing the amplitude of SCS for increasing gastric motility indicated that a stimulation current of 90.0% of MT was needed to effectively increase the MI (10 694 ± 1565 with SCS at 90.0% MT vs 7185 ± 1120 at baseline, P = 0.041) (Fig. 3C).

Concurrent Alterations in the Cardiac Autonomic Function

To test our hypothesis that SCS-induced enhancement in gastric motility is attributed to its effects on the autonomic function, we harnessed the spectral analysis of HRV to examine how our optimized SCS could alter the autonomic functions. As shown in Figure 4A, SCS (with prior parameters) at levels of T10 as well as T10–T11 was able to intensify the parasympathetic activity represented by the high frequency (HF) (Fig. 4A). While SCS at T10 increased the HF by 6.8% (P = 0.039), stimulation at T10–T11 strengthened it by 6.6% (P = 0.048) compared to the baseline. Interestingly, SCS at other locations of the spinal cord did not change the autonomic functions. Subsequently, in order to test the other parameters, we performed SCS at T10 while at each session we changed only one parameter. As shown in Figure 4B, spectral analysis of HRV revealed that frequency at 20 Hz could improve the parasympathetic activity during SCS compared to baseline (0.598 ± 0.043 vs 0.503 ± 0.049, respectively; P = 0.040). It is noteworthy that other frequencies of 5, 10, 50, 100, and 500 Hz did not alter the HF. On the other hand, spectral analysis of HRV delineated that parasympathetic activity was increased significantly only at 0.5 msec pulse width, compared to the baseline (0.583 ± 0.055 vs 0.502 ± 0.060, respectively; P = 0.040) (Fig. 4C). Furthermore, as shown in Figure 4D, the spectral analysis of HRV supported the MI results showing that amplitude of 90.0% MT could enhance parasympathetic activity (HF) by 19.8% compared with the baseline (0.601 ± 0.029 vs 0.502 ± 0.022, respectively; P = 0.033).

Improvement of Glucagon-induced Gastroparesis With Spinal Cord Stimulation

Glucagon has been shown to induce a delay in gastric emptying and lead to temporary gastroparesis. Therefore, in our study, we injected glucagon to the normal dogs prior to the solid gastric emptying test and treated them with/without optimized SCS in separate sessions. As shown in Figure 5A, glucagon-induced a significant delay in gastric emptying 30 minutes after injection/food intake and the effect maintained until the end of the study (180 minutes). Interestingly, our optimized SCS ameliorates the effects of glucagon 90 minutes after injection and improved glucagon-induced delay in gastric emptying for the rest of the study session. The area under the curve (AUC) of the gastric emptying test also showed a significant delay after glucagon injection compared with the control (Fig. 5B). While glucagon reduced the AUC of gastric emptying by 42.7% compared with the control (75.09 ± 18.54 vs 131.17 ± 23.98, P = 0.002), SCS was able to reverse the glucagon effects and increase the AUC of gastric emptying by 51.6% (113.85 ± 1977.00 vs 75.09 ± 18.54, P = 0.005).

Modulation of the Systemic Autonomic Function by Optimized Spinal Cord Stimulation

The spectral analysis of HRV reflects the cardiac vagal efferent activity. To understand the systemic effects of SCS on the autonomic function, we also measured NE (reflecting systemic sympathetic activity) and pancreatic PP (reflecting systemic activation of vagal activity) in the bloodstream following optimized SCS in both fasting and fed states (Fig. 6A and 6B).

Pancreatic polypeptide

As shown in Figure 6B, in session with no SCS, PP was increased to almost 3-fold than the fasting state 1 hour after food intake (1.07 ± 0.34 ng/mL vs 0.39 ± 0.16 ng/mL, respectively; P < 0.001). However, in another session, we showed that our optimized SCS for 30 minutes could elevate PP release in the fasting state by more than 70.0% in comparison with the corresponding fasting baseline prior to SCS (0.77 ± 0.14 vs 0.45 ± 0.16, P = 0.007). In spite of this, although PP release in the fed state of SCS session was significantly higher than the corresponding fasting state with and without stimulation, 1 hour SCS was not able to increase PP in the fed state compared to the fed state without SCS (1.07 ± 0.34 ng/mL vs 1.25 ± 0.32 ng/mL, P = 0.090), suggesting that under the normal postprandial state, the release of PP reached an almost maximal level without SCS.

Norepinephrine

Figure 6C shows the NE release in bloodstream tested in 2 different sessions with and without SCS. In contrast to PP in session with no SCS, NE was not altered markedly compared with the fasting state 1 hour after meal consumption (0.42 ± 0.03 ng/mL vs 0.43 ± 0.04 ng/mL, respectively; P > 0.05). Nevertheless, in the SCS session, our optimized SCS could significantly reduce the NE release both in the fasting (0.41 ± 0.04 vs 0.38 ± 0.03, respectively; P = 0.041) and in the fed state (0.41 ± 0.04 vs 0.39 ± 0.02, respectively; P = 0.042).

Discussion

In this study, we discovered that SCS was able to increase gastric motility when it was applied on T10. We also learned that SCS at the same location and with our optimized parameters could intensify parasympathetic activity and mitigate sympathovagal balance in healthy dogs. As expected, our optimized SCS accelerated glucagon-induced delay in gastric emptying of solids. SCS may have therapeutic potential for treating gastric motility disorders such as gastroparesis.

While gastroparesis is a common symptom in patients with diabetes, neurological disorders or connective tissue diseases (apart from its idiopathic etiology),4 there are few treatment options available either with no satisfactory outcomes or with serious side effects. Currently, medical treatment entails the use of prokinetic and anti-emetic therapies. Prokinetics such as cholinergic agonists (neostigmine and pyridostigmine), dopamine antagonists (metoclopramide and domperidone [not available in the United States]), serotonergic agonists (cisapride and tegaserod) and macrolides (erythromycin) have been used to improve gastric motility.13,29 However, prokinetics of nonselective serotonin type 4 receptor agonists such as cisapride and tegaserod have cardiovascular adverse effects and hence they were dropped from the market.30 Domperidone has been associated with QT prolongation and ventricular tachycardia and is available in the United States only through an Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigational drug application.31,32 Erythromycin has been shown to improve gastric motility but exert little effects on symptoms.33 Antiemetic therapies such as metoclopramide, a D2-receptor antagonist, is the only FDA-approved medication for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in gastroparesis.32 Although a variety of other medications (scopolamine, aprepitant, and tricyclic antidepressants) are available for treating nausea and vomiting in other diseases, the data available behind their use for gastroparesis is very limited. To date, metoclopramide is the only available medication serves as both prokinetic and antiemetic, however it is not potent in accelerating gastric emptying and usage in a long run (> 12 weeks) has a severe side effect such as the risk of tardive dyskinesia.13,29 Alternatively, surgical treatments, such as jejunostomy tube feeding, may be used if intestinal motility is normal; however, they do not solve the main problem. GES or Enterra Therapy on the other hand for treating nausea and vomiting in gastroparesis7 has not been very promising on overall symptoms of gastroparesis or gastric emptying.810

All the above-mentioned treatment approaches due to their natures can address only a fraction of overall symptoms/problems and somehow exacerbate the other symptoms. As we know, regulation of gastric motility needs intrinsic contractions/relaxations of GI muscles under the influence of extrinsic afferents/efferents of the autonomic nervous system. In fact, gastric motility is known to be enhanced by increasing vagal activity and to be diminished by increasing sympathetic activity and thus maintained by balancing the vagal and sympathetic activities.17 Autonomic imbalance (reduced vagal activity and/or increased sympathetic activity) has been reported in 2 major populations of gastroparesis: patients with functional dyspepsia and patients with diabetes.34,35 In addition, gastric accommodation is also regulated by the autonomic function: enhancement of vagal activity or suppression of sympathetic activity increases accommodation.3537 In this study, we have demonstrated that the optimized SCS inhibited sympathetic activity and enhanced vagal activity. These effects were believed to result in improved gastric motility. In the optimization experiment, we have found that the parameters/locations that were most effective in enhancing gastric motility were also most effective in improving vagal activity assessed by the spectral analysis of HRV, suggesting a strong autonomic mechanism. Low frequency (LF)-HRV was initially assumed to be only sympathetic outflow representing sympathetic tone; however, this view is not without controversial opinions as some authors suggest that LF-HRV (0.04–0.15 Hz) primarily reflects parasympathetic influence,38 and it is potentially affected by other cardiac mechanisms such as baroreflex sensitivity.39 Contrarily, HF-HRV (0.15–5.00 Hz) has been shown to reflect only vagal tone40 and can be taken as an index of cardiac parasympathetic activity.38,41 Thus, in this study we utilized HF-HRV as a representative of vagal (parasympathetic) activity. In addition to the HRV spectra analysis, we also assessed the plasma levels of PP and NE. The optimized SCS suppressed both fasting and postprandial NE and increased fasting PP; however, it showed no effects on postprandial PP, probably attributed to the fact that the meal-induced release of PP reached its maximal value without SCS.

To our best knowledge, this was the first study to optimize stimulation location and parameters of SCS systematically to improve gastric motility. To be able to observe the effect of SCS on gastric motility, we employed a high-resolution solid-state manometry device to measure gastric motility (gastric contraction). SCS has been widely applied for the treatment of pain.19,4247 The main clinical applications of SCS consist of chronic regional pain syndromes, vascular pain, radicular pain,48 urological diseases, and abdominal visceral pain.44,49 However, there are few studies reporting potential applications of SCS for the treatment of gastrointestinal motility disorders.44,50 In our previous rodent study, SCS was found to diminish sympathetic activity and accelerate gastric emptying in diabetic rats.17 Meanwhile, in another similar study, SCS showed prokinetic effect in a rodent model of postoperative ileus.51 In the current study, the optimization of SCS was carried out in a large animal to provide translational advantages. Based on our previous rodent study we showed that SCS at T9–T10 with 0.2ms (pulse width), 50Hz (frequency), 90% (MT), at 2s on/3s off was able to enhance gastric motility and decrease sympathetic activity.17 Yet in this canine study, firstly we needed to find the spinal cord location(s) where stimulation was able to increase gastric motility efficiently. Using the rodent SCS parameters, we found an immediate increase in gastric contraction when SCS was applied at T10 (segmental T10–T11). In contrast, in another study with induced post-operative intestinal obstruction in rats, electrical stimulation of the spinal cord at the T5–T8 level was shown to accelerate gastric emptying.51 This difference could be due to the species variations as well as the type of stimulation. Meanwhile, they did not stimulate the segments lower than T8, so there are no comparable data available.

As we know, the sympathetic nerve fibers to the stomach come from the thoracic and abdominal sympathetic trunk. The greater splanchnic nerve detaches from the sympathetic trunk between the T8 and the L1 ganglia and enters the abdominal cavity to reach the celiac ganglia to innervate the stomach and other organs in the abdomen.52 Instead, parasympathetic nerve fibers are innervating stomach via the vagus nerve. Interestingly, our finding demonstrated that SCS at T10 as well as T10–T11 is more efficiently decreasing sympathetic activity and increasing the vagal nerve activity (Fig. 4A). Although the mechanism of action of SCS in suppressing the sympathetic activity is not very clear (could be attributed to a suppressed greater splanchnic nerve activity), increasing the vagal activity might be due to the activation of motor nuclei of the vagus nerve in the brain stem. Indeed, some reports have confirmed the activation of supraspinal centers in reducing pain by SCS.53,54 Alongside with another rodent study, we also found that stimulation of the sacral nerve (S2) could hyperactivate the nucleus tractus solitarius (NTS) in the brain stem and augment the vagal nerve activity measured by spectral analysis of HRV.55

In previous studies, we have shown that electrical stimulation is a parameter-dependent treatment.6,14,17,34,56 Therefore, we needed to optimize SCS with parameters including pulse frequency, pulse width, and the pulse amplitude. SCS in the treatment of pain has been performed from LF (40–60 Hz) to HF (1–10 kHz).42,57 It was previously believed that using HF (kHz) in SCS for managing pain is more effective based on the gate control theory,58 however other studies displayed that lower frequencies (below 5 Hz) also may produce pain alleviation in humans59 which can be hardly explained by the gate control theory. Regardless, HF (kHz) stimulation has recently been shown and proposed to be more effective than low-frequency stimulation.42 Nonetheless, unlike SCS for neuropathic pain, HF (kHz) stimulation showed little effects on gastric distention-induced pain. Since we had also shown that LF (50 Hz) could accelerate gastric emptying in rats, we tried frequencies between 5 Hz to 500 Hz in the current study. Our optimization study showed that only frequency at 20 Hz (but not other frequencies) was able to significantly enhance the gastric MI. Furthermore, the spectral analysis of HRV also revealed that SCS at 20 Hz at T10 could successfully reduce the sympathetic activity, as well.

In pain management, SCS is typically delivered continuously.60 Wolter and Winkelmuller61 reported that both intermittent and continuous SCS had equal effectiveness. De Ridder et al62 showed that burst stimulation suppressed neuropathic pain more effectively without the mandatory paresthesia. In this study, we employed the burst stimulation with 2 seconds on time and 3 seconds off time as per our previous rodent study that showed the most effective outcome in gastric emptying.17

SCS with a pulse width of 1 ms or higher had no effects on the electromyography responses following visceral hypersensitivity in hypersensitive rats, as Yearwood et al63 have also shown that 0.4 msec is the effective pulse width for reducing pain in their clinical study. Exploring the best pulse width in this study showed that both 0.2 msec and 0.5 msec could increase the MI, remarkably. However, since SCS with only 0.5 msec at T10 was able to increase the parasympathetic activity, we selected 0.5 msec as our optimal pulse width. Optimizing the amplitude of SCS for increasing gastric motility indicated that 90% of MT were more effective in increasing the MI as well as enhancing parasympathetic activity. Therefore, based on these findings (MI as well as autonomic functions by spectral analysis of HRV), we selected the best parameters (pulse width: 0.5 msec, frequency: 20 Hz, and MT: 90%) for increasing the gastric contraction and parasympathetic activity.

Further, we demonstrated an ameliorating effect of the optimized SCS for glucagon-induced gastroparesis. As stated earlier, although a number of prokinetics, such as metoclopramide, domperidone, erythromycin, azithromycin, cisapride, and tegaserod, have been developed or applied for treating gastric dysmotility, they were not available in the USA or not practically used in clinical settings due to their severe side-effects.11,32,6466 Due to its autonomic mechanisms, the proposed SCS may also exert ameliorating effects on other pathophysiologies of gastroparesis, such as impaired gastric accommodation and visceral pain. Gastric accommodation is known to be mediated via the vagal and nitrinergic mechanisms and the SCS-induced enhancement in vagal activity may, therefore, improve gastric accommodation, which deserves further investigation. SCS is an established therapy for pain43,64 and has also been reported to attenuate pain in rodent models of visceral hypersensitivity and patients with visceral pain.44,47

The findings of this study suggest a therapeutic potential of the optimized SCS for gastroparesis. The procedure for the placement of spinal lead and IPG is minimally invasive and can be performed with no hospitalization. In addition to its prokinetic effects as shown in this study, the optimized SCS is also projected to improve impaired accommodation and visceral pain. This would make the optimized SCS an attractive therapy for gastroparesis. Further clinical studies with chronic SCS are warranted. One limitation of this present study was the lack of chronic SCS data due to unavailability of a canine model of chronic gastroparesis.

In conclusion, optimized SCS increases gastric motility and accelerates gastric emptying of solids probably by inhibiting sympathetic activity and improving vagal activity. SCS with optimized stimulation parameters and locations may have therapeutic potential for gastric dysmotility, such as gastroparesis.

Acknowledgements

The authors are currently working at the following addresses: Lei Tu (Division of Gastroenterology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China), Yi Yang (The Second Department of Gastroenterology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian, Liaoning, China), Bo Zhang (Department of Gastroenterology, Changzheng Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China), and Feng Ji (The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, China).

Figures
Fig. 1. Schematic figures of the location of the leads on the spinal cord and cannulae in the stomach and intestine in dogs after surgery. (A, B) Schematic figures of the exposed spinal cord to depict the location of leads alongside the spinal vertebrae (A: T7–T12) to cover the spinal cord segments (B: T8–T12). (C) Shows the locations of cannulae in both stomach and duodenum for inserting the catheter in the stomach to measure the motility index (MI) using high-resolution manometry as well as performing gastric emptying test through the duodenal cannula. SCS, spinal cord stimulation.

Fig. 2. Finding the best location of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) by measuring the motility index using high-resolution manometry. Motility index was used to optimize the best location of SCS using prior parameters to enhance gastric contraction. Data are presented in mean and SEM (*P < 0.05 vs baseline, n = 8).

Fig. 3. Optimization of the parameters of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) by measuring the gastric contraction using high-resolution manometry. Motility index from high-resolution manometry was employed to optimize the SCS. SCS was performed on vertebra T10 to optimize the parameters for the best frequency (A: 5–500 Hz), pulse width (B: 0.05–0.6 msec) and amplitude (C: 30–90%) in dogs. Data are presented in mean and SEM (*P < 0.05 vs baseline, n = 8).

Fig. 4. Validating the best location as well as our optimized parameters of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) by measuring the autonomic functions via employing the spectral analysis of heart rate variability (HRV). High frequency (HF) shown to represent the parasympathetic activity in HRV. (A) Using prior parameters, T10 and T10–T11 showed more increase in parasympathetic activity based on HRV analysis. Subsequently, SCS was performed on T10 to confirm the parameters for the best frequency (B: 5–500 Hz), pulse width (C: 0.05–0.60 msec) and amplitude (D: 30–90%) in dogs. Data are presented in mean and SE (*P < 0.05 vs baseline, n = 8).

Fig. 5. Effects of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) on solid gastric emptying in glucagon-induced temporarily gastroparesis model in healthy dogs. (A) Glucagon induced a substantial delay in gastric emptying after 30 minutes, while our optimized SCS location (T10) and parameters (pulse width: 0.5 msec, frequency: 20 Hz, amplitude: 90.0% and 2 seconds on time/3 seconds off time) reversed the glucagon effects after 90 minutes. (B) The area under the curve (AUC) of the gastric emptying test in different groups. Data are presented in mean and SEM (*P < 0.05 vs control session; P < 0.05 vs glucagon session, n = 8).

Fig. 6. Measuring the autonomic functions using parasympathetic (polypeptide [PP]) and sympathetic (norepinephrine [NE]) hormones in the bloodstream following SCS on T10 with our optimized parameters (pulse width: 0.5 msec, frequency: 20 Hz, and amplitude: 90.0% and 2 seconds on time/3 seconds off time). (A) Blood draw was performed in 2 distinct sessions as illustrated above. (B, C) shows the PP and NE release in separate sessions before and after SCS, respectively. Data presented in mean and SE (*P < 0.05 vs fasting state in SCS session, n = 8). Fast, fasting state.

Footnotes

Financial support: This research was funded by the NIH SPARC Program (1U18TR001920).

Conflicts of interest: None.

Author contributions: Jiande D Z Chen and Jieyun Yin: study concept and design, analysis and interpretation of data, critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content, study supervision, and obtaining funding; and Lei Tu, Payam Gharibani, Yi Yang, Bo Zhang, and Feng Ji: study design, performing the research, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting of the manuscript, and statistical analysis.

References
  1. Moshiree B, Potter M, Talley NJ. Epidemiology and pathophysiology of gastroparesis. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2019;29:1-14.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  2. Pasricha PJ, Parkman HP. Gastroparesis: definitions and diagnosis. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2015;44:1-7.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  3. Hasler WL. Gastroparesis: pathogenesis, diagnosis and management. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011;8:438-453.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  4. Camilleri M, Parkman HP, Shafi MA, Abell TL, Gerson L. Clinical guideline: management of gastroparesis. Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108:18-37.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  5. Navas CM, Patel NK, Lacy BE. Gastroparesis: medical and therapeutic advances. Dig Dis Sci 2017;62:2231-2240.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  6. Ouyang H, Yin J, Wang Z, Pasricha PJ, Chen JD. Electroacupuncture accelerates gastric emptying in association with changes in vagal activity. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2002;282:G390-G396.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  7. Gonzalez HC, Velanovich V. Enterra therapy: gastric neurostimulator for gastroparesis. Expert Rev Med Devices 2010;7:319-332.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  8. Burlen J, Runnels M, Mehta M, et al. Efficacy of gastric electrical stimulation for gastroparesis: US/European comparison. Gastroenterology Res 2018;11:349-354.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  9. Davis BR, Sarosiek I, Bashashati M, Alvarado B, McCallum RW. The long-term efficacy and safety of pyloroplasty combined with gastric electrical stimulation therapy in gastroparesis. J Gastrointest Surg 2017;21:222-227.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  10. Teich S, Mousa HM, Punati J, Di Lorenzo C. Efficacy of permanent gastric electrical stimulation for the treatment of gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia in children and adolescents. J Pediatr Surg 2013;48:178-183.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  11. Giudicessi JR, Ackerman MJ, Camilleri M. Cardiovascular safety of prokinetic agents: a focus on drug-induced arrhythmias. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2018;30:e13302.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  12. Tack J, Janssen P, Masaoka T, Farré R, Van Oudenhove L. Efficacy of buspirone, a fundus-relaxing drug, in patients with functional dyspepsia. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012;10:1239-1245.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  13. Quigley EMM. Prokinetics in the management of functional gastrointestinal disorders. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 2017;19:53.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  14. Yin J, Levanon D, Chen JD. Inhibitory effects of stress on postprandial gastric myoelectrical activity and vagal tone in healthy subjects. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2004;16:737-744.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  15. Moningi S, Nikhar S, Ramachandran G. Autonomic disturbances in diabetes: assessment and anaesthetic implications. Indian J Anaesth 2018;62:575-583.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  16. Ouyang X, Li S, Foreman R, et al. Hyperglycemia-induced small intestinal dysrhythmias attributed to sympathovagal imbalance in normal and diabetic rats. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2015;27:406-415.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  17. Song GQ, Sun Y, Foreman RD, Chen JD. Therapeutic potential of spinal cord stimulation for gastrointestinal motility disorders: a preliminary rodent study. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2014;26:377-384.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  18. Kapural L, Deer T, Yakovlev A, et al. Technical aspects of spinal cord stimulation for managing chronic visceral abdominal pain: the results from the national survey. Pain Med 2010;11:685-691.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  19. Kapural L, Nagem H, Tlucek H, Sessler DI. Spinal cord stimulation for chronic visceral abdominal pain. Pain Med 2010;11:347-355.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  20. Xing JH, Chen JD. Gastric electrical stimulation with parameters for gastroparesis enhances gastric accommodation and alleviates distention-induced symptoms in dogs. Dig Dis Sci 2006;51:2160-2164.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  21. Lei Y, Chen JD. Effects of dual pulse gastric electrical stimulation on gastric tone and compliance in dogs. Dig Liver Dis 2009;41:277-282.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  22. Xu X, Lei Y, Chen JD. Effects and mechanisms of electrical stimulation of the stomach, duodenum, ileum, and colon on gastric tone in dogs. Dig Dis Sci 2010;55:895-901.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  23. Wang N, Song S, Chen J. Synchronized dual pulse gastric electrical stimulation improves gastric emptying and activates enteric glial cells via upregulation of GFAP and S100B with different courses of subdiaphragmatic vagotomy in rats. Mol Med Rep 2017;15:3826-3832.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  24. Chen J, Koothan T, Chen JD. Synchronized gastric electrical stimulation improves vagotomy-induced impairment in gastric accommodation via the nitrergic pathway in dogs. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2009;296:G310-G318.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  25. Xu J, Ross RA, McCallum RW, Chen JD. Two-channel gastric pacing with a novel implantable gastric pacemaker accelerates glucagon-induced delayed gastric emptying in dogs. Am J Surg 2008;195:122-129.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  26. Xu J, Chen JD. Intestinal electrical stimulation improves delayed gastric emptying and vomiting induced by duodenal distension in dogs. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2008;20:236-242.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  27. Liu J, Qiao X, Chen JD. Vagal afferent is involved in short-pulse gastric electrical stimulation in rats. Dig Dis Sci 2004;49:729-737.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  28. Yin J, Ji F, Gharibani P, Chen JD. Vagal nerve stimulation for glycemic control in a rodent model of type 2 diabetes. Obes Surg 2019;29:2869-2877.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  29. Quigley EM. Prokinetics in the management of functional gastrointestinal disorders. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2015;21:330-336.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  30. Tack J, Camilleri M, Chang L, et al. Systematic review: cardiovascular safety profile of 5-HT4 agonists developed for gastrointestinal disorders. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2012;35:745-767.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  31. Drolet B, Rousseau G, Daleau P, Cardinal R, Turgeon J. Domperidone should not be considered a no-risk alternative to cisapride in the treatment of gastrointestinal motility disorders. Circulation 2000;102:1883-1885.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  32. Navas CM, Patel NK, Lacy BE. Symptomatic management of gastroparesis. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2019;29:55-70.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  33. Shah S, Kaswala D, Patel N, Sood S, Brelvi Z. Reprogramming of gastric motility with “Pulse Therapy” (metoclopramide and erythromycin) in severe gastroparesis. J Family Med Prim Care 2013;2:399-401.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  34. Stocker A, Abell TL, Rashed H, Kedar A, Boatright B, Chen J. Autonomic evaluation of patients with gastroparesis and neurostimulation: comparisons of direct/systemic and indirect/cardiac measures. Gastroenterology Res 2016;9:10-16.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  35. Guo WJ, Yao SK, Zhang YL, et al. Impaired vagal activity to meal in patients with functional dyspepsia and delayed gastric emptying. J Int Med Res 2018;46:792-801.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  36. Browning KN, Travagli RA. Central nervous system control of gastrointestinal motility and secretion and modulation of gastrointestinal functions. Compr Physiol 2014;4:1339-1368.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  37. Guarino D, Nannipieri M, Iervasi G, Taddei S, Bruno RM. The role of the autonomic nervous system in the pathophysiology of obesity. Front Physiol 2017;8:665.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  38. Reyes del Paso GA, Langewitz W, Mulder LJ, van Roon A, Duschek S. The utility of low frequency heart rate variability as an index of sympathetic cardiac tone: a review with emphasis on a reanalysis of previous studies. Psychophysiology 2013;50:477-487.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  39. Goldstein DS, Bentho O, Park MY, Sharabi Y. Low-frequency power of heart rate variability is not a measure of cardiac sympathetic tone but may be a measure of modulation of cardiac autonomic outflows by baroreflexes. Exp Physiol 2011;96:1255-1261.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  40. Laborde S, Mosley E, Thayer JF. Heart rate variability and cardiac vagal tone in psychophysiological research - recommendations for experiment planning, data analysis, and data reporting. Front Psychol 2017;8:213.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  41. Zhang J, Sha W, Zhu H, Chen JD. Blunted peripheral and central responses to gastric mechanical and electrical stimulations in diet-induced obese rats. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2013;19:454-466.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  42. Chakravarthy K, Richter H, Christo PJ, Williams K, Guan Y. Spinal cord stimulation for treating chronic pain: reviewing preclinical and clinical data on paresthesia-free high-frequency therapy. Neuromodulation 2018;21:10-18.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  43. Deer TR, Skaribas IM, Haider N, et al. Effectiveness of cervical spinal cord stimulation for the management of chronic pain. Neuromodulation 2014;17:265-271 discussion 271..
    Pubmed CrossRef
  44. Greenwood-Van Meerveld B, Johnson AC, Foreman RD, Linderoth B. Spinal cord stimulation attenuates visceromotor reflexes in a rat model of post-inflammatory colonic hypersensitivity. Auton Neurosci 2005;122:69-76.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  45. Kapural L, Narouze SN, Janicki TI, Mekhail N. Spinal cord stimulation is an effective treatment for the chronic intractable visceral pelvic pain. Pain Med 2006;7:440-443.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  46. Kapural L, Rakic M. Spinal cord stimulation for chronic visceral pain secondary to chronic non-alcoholic pancreatitis. J Clin Gastroenterol 2008;42:750-751.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  47. Yakhnitsa V, Linderoth B, Meyerson BA. Spinal cord stimulation attenuates dorsal horn neuronal hyperexcitability in a rat model of mononeuropathy. Pain 1999;79:223-233.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  48. Simpson BA. Spinal cord stimulation. Br J Neurosurg 1997;11:5-11.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  49. Tiede JM, Ghazi SM, Lamer TJ, Obray JB. The use of spinal cord stimulation in refractory abdominal visceral pain: case reports and literature review. Pain Pract 2006;6:197-202.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  50. Moshonkina TR, Stolbkov YK, Kozlovskaya IB, Gerasimenko YP. [Mehanisms of influences of electrical spinal cord stimulation on autonomic functions]. Fiziol Cheloveka 2016;42:124-135 [Russian].
    Pubmed
  51. Maher J, Johnson AC, Newman R, et al. Effect of spinal cord stimulation in a rodent model of post-operative ileus. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2009;21:672677, e33-e34.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  52. Mizeres NJ. The anatomy of the autonomic nervous system in the dog. Am J Anat 1955;96:285-318.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  53. Saadé NE, Jabbur SJ. Nociceptive behavior in animal models for peripheral neuropathy: spinal and supraspinal mechanisms. Prog Neurobiol 2008;86:22-47.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  54. Barchini J, Tchachaghian S, Shamaa F, et al. Spinal segmental and supraspinal mechanisms underlying the pain-relieving effects of spinal cord stimulation: an experimental study in a rat model of neuropathy. Neuroscience 2012;215:196-208.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  55. Tu L, Zhang H, Gharibani P, Zhang N, Yin J, Chen J. 1048-centrally mediated vagal efferent pathway involved in anti-inflammatory effects of sacral nerve stimulation. Gastroenterology 2018;154(suppl 1):S-198.
    CrossRef
  56. Zhou J, Li S, Wang Y, et al. Inhibitory effects and mechanisms of electroacupuncture via chronically implanted electrodes on stress-induced gastric hypersensitivity in rats with neonatal treatment of iodoacetamide. Neuromodulation 2017;20:767-773.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  57. Thomson SJ, Tavakkolizadeh M, Love-Jones S, et al. Effects of rate on analgesia in kilohertz frequency spinal cord stimulation: results of the PROCO randomized controlled trial. Neuromodulation 2018;21:67-76.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  58. Jeon YH. Spinal cord stimulation in pain management: a review. Korean J Pain 2012;25:143-150.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  59. Linderoth B, Foreman RD. Physiology of spinal cord stimulation: review and update. Neuromodulation 1999;2:150-164.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  60. Ahmed S, Yearwood T, De Ridder D, Vanneste S. Burst and high frequency stimulation: underlying mechanism of action. Expert Rev Med Devices 2018;15:61-70.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  61. Wolter T, Winkelmüuller M. Continuous versus intermittent spinal cord stimulation: an analysis of factors influencing clinical efficacy. Neuromodulation 2012;15:13-19 discussion 20..
    Pubmed CrossRef
  62. De Ridder D, Vanneste S, Plazier M, van der Loo E, Menovsky T. Burst spinal cord stimulation: toward paresthesia-free pain suppression. Neurosurgery 2010;66:986-990.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  63. Yearwood TL, Hershey B, Bradley K, Lee D. Pulse width programming in spinal cord stimulation: a clinical study. Pain Physician 2010;13:321-335.
    Pubmed
  64. Perruchoud C, Eldabe S, Batterham AM, et al. Analgesic efficacy of high-frequency spinal cord stimulation: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study. Neuromodulation 2013;16:363-369 discussion 369..
    Pubmed CrossRef
  65. Song J, Yin J, Sallam HS, Bai T, Chen Y, Chen JD. Electroacupuncture improves burn-induced impairment in gastric motility mediated via the vagal mechanism in rats. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2013;25:807-e635.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  66. Yin J, Chen J, Chen JD. Ameliorating effects and mechanisms of electroacupuncture on gastric dysrhythmia, delayed emptying, and impaired accommodation in diabetic rats. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2010;298:G563-G570.
    Pubmed CrossRef


This Article

e-submission

Archives

Aims and Scope