Explore the vast range of titles available.

Osteoporosis is mainly a geriatric disease with a high incidence, and the resulting spinal fractures and hip fractures cause great harm to patients. Anti-osteoporosis drugs are the main treatment for osteoporosis currently, but these drugs have potential clinical limitations and side effects, so the development of new therapies is of great significance to patients with osteoporosis. Electrical stimulation therapy mainly includes pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF), direct current (DC), and capacitive coupling (CC). Meanwhile, electrical stimulation therapy is clinically convenient without side effects. In recent years, many researchers have explored the use of electrical stimulation therapy for osteoporosis. Based on this, the role of electrical stimulation therapy in osteoporosis was summarized. In the future, electrical stimulation might become a new treatment for osteoporosis.

In this 10-month, crossover, double-blind study of 16 patients with severe, refractory obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD), stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus reduced the symptoms of OCD. Eleven patients had serious adverse events, including one intracerebral hemorrhage and two infections requiring electrode removal. Stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus reduced the symptoms of OCD in 16 patients; however, 11 patients had serious adverse events. Severe obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) is characterized by intrusive, anxious thoughts and repetitive, ritualized behaviors. It is one of the most disabling of the chronic psychiatric disorders and has considerable repercussions on family relationships, social life, and the ability to function at work. 1 The current treatment of OCD consists of a combination of serotonin-reuptake inhibitors and cognitive–behavioral therapy; with this treatment, however, 25 to 40% of patients have persistent symptoms and lasting functional repercussions. 2 In the hope of reducing the disability and debilitation of patients whose OCD is highly refractory, ablative neurosurgical stereotactic treatments have been attempted, but the efficacy of . . .

Deep brain stimulation is a promising treatment for severe depression, but lack of efficacy in randomized trials raises questions regarding anatomical targeting. We implanted multi-site intracranial electrodes in a severely depressed patient and systematically assessed the acute response to focal electrical neuromodulation. We found an elaborate repertoire of distinctive emotional responses that were rapid in onset, reproducible, and context and state dependent. Results provide proof of concept for personalized, circuit-specific medicine in psychiatry. Acute mapping of responses to focal electrical neuromodulation in a patient with treatment-resistant depression reveals distinct mood and symptom changes that are highly context dependent.

We assessed the effectiveness of interferential current (IFC) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) therapies in the management of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) compared with splint therapy, a standard treatment modality for CTS. This was a prospective, single-blinded, single-center, randomized, three-group parallel intervention study of 3 weeks duration. Efficacy was examined in the third week after the end of treatments. Subjects were assigned randomly to one of three groups: group I patients received splint therapy, group II patients received TENS applied on the palmar surface of the hand and the carpal tunnel, and group III patients underwent IFC therapy applied on the palmar surface of the hand and the volar surface of the forearm. TENS and ICF treatments were applied five times weekly for a total of 15 sessions. Group 1 patients were stabilized with volar wrist splints for 3 weeks. The efficacy of the therapies was assessed before initiation of therapy and at 3 weeks after completion of therapy using a visual analog scale (VAS), a symptom severity scale, the functional capacity scale of the BCTQ, and measurement of median nerve motor distal latency (mMDL) and median sensory nerve conduction velocity (mSNCV). Groups were compared pairwise using the Mann–Whitney U test to identify the source of differences between groups. The Wilcoxon test was used to analyze changes in variables over time within a group. In the VAS, BCTQ, MDL, and mSNCV, no significant difference was observed between the groups ( p  > 0.05). In the VAS, BCTQ, and mSNCV, statistically significant improvements were detected in all groups ( p  < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between TENS and splint therapy with respect to improvement in clinical scores, whereas IFC therapy provided a significantly greater improvement in VAS, mMDL, and mSNCV values than splint therapy (VAS: 4.80 ± 1.18 and 6.37 ± 1.18; p  = 0.001, mMDL: 3.89 ± 0.88 and 4.06 ± 0.61; p  = 0.001, mSNCV: 41.80 ± 1.76 and 40.75 ± 1.48; p  = 0.010). IFC therapy provided a significantly greater improvement in VAS, symptom severity, functional capacity, and mMDL and mSNCV values than TENS therapy (VAS: 4.80 ± 1.18 and 6.68 ± 1.42; p  < 0.001, symptom severity: 2.70 ± 1.03 and 3.37 ± 1.21; p  = 0.015, functional capacity: 1.90 ± 1.21 and 2.50 ± 0.78; p  = 0.039, mMDL: 3.89 ± 0.88 and 4.06 ± 0.88; p  = 0.003, and mSNCV: 41.80 ± 1.76 and 41.38 ± 1.78; p  = 0.021). IFC may be considered a new and safe therapeutic option for the treatment of CTS.

Background Electrical stimulation of peripheral nerves is used in a variety of applications such as restoring motor function in paralyzed limbs, and more recently, as means to provide intuitive sensory feedback in limb prostheses. However, literature on the safety requirements for stimulation is scarce, particularly for chronic applications. Some aspects of nerve interfacing such as the effect of stimulation parameters on electrochemical processes and charge limitations have been reviewed, but often only for applications in the central nervous system. This review focuses on the safety of electrical stimulation of peripheral nerve in humans. Methods We analyzed early animal studies evaluating damage thresholds, as well as more recent investigations in humans. Safety requirements were divided into two main categories: passive and active safety. We made the distinction between short-term (< 30 days) and chronic (> 30 days) applications, as well as between electrode preservation (biostability) and body tissue healthy survival (harmlessness). In addition, transferability of experimental results between different tissues and species was considered. Results At present, extraneural electrodes have shown superior long-term stability in comparison to intraneural electrodes. Safety limitations on pulse amplitude (and consequently, charge injection) are dependent on geometrical factors such as electrode placement, size, and proximity to the stimulated fiber. In contrast, other parameters such as stimulation frequency and percentage of effective stimulation time are more generally applicable. Currently, chronic stimulation at frequencies below 30 Hz and percentages of effective stimulation time below 50% is considered safe, but more precise data drawn from large databases are necessary. Unfortunately, stimulation protocols are not systematically documented in the literature, which limits the feasibility of meta-analysis and impedes the generalization of conclusions. We therefore propose a standardized list of parameters necessary to define electrical stimulation and allow future studies to contribute to meta-analyses. Conclusion The safety of chronic continuous peripheral nerve stimulation at frequencies higher than 30 Hz has yet to be documented. Precise parameter values leading to stimulation-induced depression of neuronal excitability (SIDNE) and neuronal damage, as well as the transition between the two, are still lacking. At present, neural damage mechanisms through electrical stimulation remain obscure.

Background Chronic non-specific low back pain is a major socioeconomic public health issue worldwide and, despite the volume of research in the area, it is still a difficult-to-treat condition. The conservative analgesic therapy usually comprises a variety of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies, such as transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. The neuromatrix pain model and the new findings on the process of chronicity of pain point to a higher effectiveness of treatments that address central rather than peripheral structures. The transcranial direct current stimulation is a noninvasive technique of neuromodulation that has made recent advances in the treatment of chronic pain. The simultaneous combination of these two electrostimulation techniques (cerebral and peripheral) can provide an analgesic effect superior to isolated interventions. However, all the evidence on the analgesic efficacy of these techniques, alone or combined, is still fragmented. This is a protocol for a randomized clinical trial to investigate whether cerebral electrical stimulation combined with peripheral electrical stimulation is more effective in relieving pain than the isolated application of electrical stimulations in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. Methods/Design Ninety-two patients will be randomized into four groups to receive transcranial direct current stimulation (real/sham) + transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (real/sham) for 12 sessions over a period of four weeks. The primary clinical outcome (pain intensity) and the secondary ones (sensory and affective aspects of pain, physical functioning and global perceived effect) will be recorded before treatment, after four weeks, in Month 3 and in Month 6 after randomization. Confounding factors such as anxiety and depression, the patient’s satisfaction with treatment and adverse effects will also be listed. Data will be collected by an examiner unaware of (blind to) the treatment allocation. Discussion The results of this study may assist in clinical decision-making about the combined use of cerebral and peripheral electrical stimulation for pain relief in patients with chronic low back pain. Trial registration NCT01896453

Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) has been investigated as a novel neuromodulation tool. Although taVNS is generally considered safe with only mild and transient adverse effects (AEs), those specifically caused by taVNS have not yet been investigated. This systematic review and meta-analysis on taVNS aimed to (1) systematically analyze study characteristics and AE assessment, (2) characterize and analyze possible AEs and their incidence, (3) search for predictable risk factors, (4) analyze the severity of AE, and (5) suggest an evidence-based taVNS adverse events questionnaire for safety monitoring. The articles searched were published through April 7, 2022, in Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Lilacs databases. In general, we evaluated 177 studies that assessed 6322 subjects. From these, 55.37% of studies did not mention the presence or absence of any AEs; only 24.86% of the studies described that at least one adverse event occurred. In the 35 studies reporting the number of subjects with at least one adverse event, a meta-analytic approach to calculate the risk differences of developing an adverse event between active taVNS and controls was used. The meta-analytic overall adverse events incidence rate was calculated for the total number of adverse events reported on a 100,000 person-minutes-days scale. There were no differences in risk of developing an adverse event between active taVNS and controls. The incidence of AE, in general, was 12.84/100,000 person-minutes-days of stimulation, and the most frequently reported were ear pain, headache, and tingling. Almost half of the studies did not report the presence or absence of any AEs. We attribute this to the absence of AE in those studies. There was no causal relationship between taVNS and severe adverse events. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of transcutaneous auricular stimulation safety. Overall, taVNS is a safe and feasible option for clinical intervention.

This technical report describes a 360-channel flexible multi-electrode array with high spatial resolution, wide coverage area and minimal damage to the recorded neural tissue. Among other descriptions of multiunit in vivo neuronal recording in cats, the authors also use the electrode array to show spiral-patterned spread of epileptic neural activity in the neocortex. Arrays of electrodes for recording and stimulating the brain are used throughout clinical medicine and basic neuroscience research, yet are unable to sample large areas of the brain while maintaining high spatial resolution because of the need to individually wire each passive sensor at the electrode-tissue interface. To overcome this constraint, we developed new devices that integrate ultrathin and flexible silicon nanomembrane transistors into the electrode array, enabling new dense arrays of thousands of amplified and multiplexed sensors that are connected using fewer wires. We used this system to record spatial properties of cat brain activity in vivo , including sleep spindles, single-trial visual evoked responses and electrographic seizures. We found that seizures may manifest as recurrent spiral waves that propagate in the neocortex. The developments reported here herald a new generation of diagnostic and therapeutic brain-machine interface devices.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive method of brain stimulation that has been intensively investigated in clinical and cognitive neuroscience. Although the general impression is that tDCS is a safe technique with mild and transient adverse effects (AEs), human data on safety and tolerability are largely provided from single-session studies in healthy volunteers. In addition the frequency of AEs and its relationship with clinical variables is unknown. With the aim of assessing tDCS safety in different conditions and study designs, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of tDCS clinical trials. We assessed Medline and other databases and reference lists from retrieved articles, searching for articles from 1998 (first trial with contemporary tDCS parameters) to August 2010. Animal studies, review articles and studies assessing other neuromodulatory techniques were excluded. According to our eligibility criteria, 209 studies (from 172 articles) were identified. One hundred and seventeen studies (56%) mentioned AEs in the report. Of these studies, 74 (63%) reported at least one AE and only eight studies quantified AEs systematically. In the subsample reporting AEs, the most common were, for active vs. sham tDCS group, itching (39.3% vs. 32.9%, p>0.05), tingling (22.2% vs. 18.3%, p>0.05), headache (14.8% vs. 16.2%, p>0.05), burning sensation (8.7% vs. 10%, p>0.05) and discomfort (10.4% vs. 13.4%, p>0.05). Meta-analytical techniques could be applied in only eight studies for itching, but no definite results could be obtained due to between-study heterogeneity and low number of studies. Our results suggested that some AEs such as itching and tingling were more frequent in the tDCS active group, although this was not statistically significant. Although results suggest that tDCS is associated with mild AEs only, we identified a selective reporting bias for reporting, assessing and publishing AEs of tDCS that hinders further conclusions. Based on our findings, we propose a revised adverse effects questionnaire to be applied in tDCS studies in order to improve systematic reporting of tDCS-related AEs.

Background Transcutaneous neurostimulation (TNS) at extracephalic sites is a well known treatment of pain. Thanks to recent technical progress, the Cefaly ® device now also allows supraorbital TNS. During observational clinical studies, several patients reported decreased vigilance or even sleepiness during a session of supraorbital TNS. We decided therefore to explore in more detail the potential sedative effect of supraorbital TNS, using standardized psychophysical tests in healthy volunteers. Methods We performed a double-blind cross-over sham-controlled study on 30 healthy subjects. They underwent a series of 4 vigilance tests (Psychomotor Vigilance Task, Critical Flicker Fusion Frequency, Fatigue Visual Numeric Scale, d2 test). Each subject was tested under 4 different experimental conditions: without the neurostimulation device, with sham supraorbital TNS, with low frequency supraorbital TNS and with high frequency supraorbital TNS. Results As judged by the results of three tests (Psychomotor Vigilance Task, Critical Flicker Fusion Frequency, Fatigue Visual Numeric Scale) there was a statistically significant (p < 0.001) decrease in vigilance and attention during high frequency TNS, while there were no changes during the other experimental conditions. Similarly, performance on the d2 test was impaired during high frequency TNS, but this change was not statistically significant. Conclusion Supraorbital high frequency TNS applied with the Cefaly ® device decreases vigilance in healthy volunteers. Additional studies are needed to determine the duration of this effect, the underlying mechanisms and the possible relation with the stimulation parameters. Meanwhile, this effect opens interesting perspectives for the treatment of hyperarousal states and, possibly, insomnia.