Peripheral electrical stimulation to induce cortical plasticity: A systematic review of stimulus parameters

Abstract

Peripheral electrical stimulation (ES) is commonly used as an intervention to facilitate movement and relieve pain in a variety of conditions. It is widely accepted that ES induces rapid plastic change in the motor cortex. This leads to the exciting possibility that ES could be used to drive cortical plasticity in movement disorders, such as stroke, and conditions where pain affects motor control. This paper aimed to critically review the literature to determine which parameters induced cortical plasticity in healthy individuals using ES. A literature search located papers that assessed plasticity in the primary motor cortex of adult humans. Studies that evaluated plasticity using change in the amplitude of potentials evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex were included. Details from each study including sample size, ES parameters and reported findings were extracted and compared. Where data were available, Cohen’s standardised mean differences (SMD) were calculated. Nineteen studies were located. Of the parameters evaluated, variation of the intensity of peripheral ES appeared to have the most consistent effect on modulation of excitability of corticomotor pathway to stimulated muscles. There was a trend for stimulation above motor threshold to increase excitability (SMD 0.79 mV, CI −0.10 to 1.64). Stimulation below motor threshold, but sufficient to induce sensory perception, produced conflicting results. Further studies with consistent methodology and larger subject numbers are needed before definitive conclusions can be drawn. There also appeared to be a time effect. That is, longer periods of ES induced more sustained changes in cortical excitability. There is insufficient evidence to determine the effect of other stimulation parameters such as frequency and waveform. Further research is needed to confirm whether modulation of these parameters affects plastic change.

Introduction

Electrical stimulation (ES) over peripheral structures has been gaining popularity as a rehabilitative intervention for many neurological and musculoskeletal conditions. This is due to a growing evidence base that supports the efficacy of ES as a treatment option and improved functionality and portability of stimulation equipment (Bijak et al., 2002, Wheeler and Peckham, 2009). Electrical stimulation has been used extensively to re-educate and facilitate voluntary contraction in neurological conditions, such as stroke and spinal cord injury (Price and Pandyan, 2000, Ada and Foongchomcheay, 2002, Ragnarsson, 2008, Sujith, 2008). In this form, it is commonly known as either neuromuscular electrical stimulation or functional electrical stimulation. For pain relief, ES is used in the management of acute and chronic pain states such as rheumatoid arthritis, chronic low back pain, post-surgery and during labour (Brosseau et al., 2003, Khadilkar et al., 2007, Nnoaham and Kumbang, 2008, Dowswell et al., 2009). Here, the application is commonly known as transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and the aim is to activate descending pain inhibitory systems and spinal gating mechanisms.

The rationale for motor stimulation has traditionally been considered at the level of the muscle and motoneurone. For example, repeated muscle contraction from peripheral nerve stimulation increases the oxidative capacity of muscle, increases the number of micro capillaries and leads to transformation of muscle fibre types (Rochester et al., 1995, Perez et al., 2002, Mokrusch et al., 2004). In addition, motor stimulation, which results in both orthodromic and antidromic impulses, is thought to strengthen synapses in the ventral horn leading to plastic change in spinal motoneurones (Rushton, 2003). Typically, stimulation is applied at a frequency that achieves a tetanic functional motor response, i.e. between 30 and 50 Hz with ramped intensity and on and off periods.

While changes occur locally in the muscle and spinal cord, recent work has also demonstrated that ES induces cortical plasticity. In adult humans, rapid plastic change in the motor and sensory cortices has been induced by alteration of afferent input. Augmented afferent input using repetitive ES of a peripheral nerve leads to increased or decreased response to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) (Ridding et al., 2000, Ridding et al., 2001, McKay et al., 2002). Due to the potential for afferent input to affect motor and sensory systems, electrical stimulation provides an exciting approach to alleviate sensory and motor symptoms in neurological disorders, such as stroke, and in conditions where pain affects motor control. However, there is currently no consensus regarding the optimal parameters to induce cortical plasticity using peripheral ES. This information is essential if methods to induce cortical plasticity are to be adopted in clinical practice. Here, we address this issue with a systematic review of the literature to determine the effect of stimulation parameters on the induction of corticomotor plasticity in healthy individuals using peripheral ES.