Cited by 435Spinal Cord Injury ResearchNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringPain Management and Treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Computational Model for Epidural Electrical Stimulation of Spinal Sensorimotor Circuits

Open access
Capogrosso, Marco, Wenger, Nikolaus, Raspopovic, Stanisa, Musienko, Pavel, Beauparlant, Janine, Bassi Luciani, Lorenzo, Courtine, Grégoire, Micera, Silvestro·2013·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Epidural electrical stimulation (EES) of lumbosacral segments can restore a range of movements after spinal cord injury. However, the mechanisms and neural structures through which EES facilitates movement execution remain unclear. Here, we designed a computational model and performed in vivo experiments to investigate the type of fibers, neurons, and circuits recruited in response to EES. We first developed a realistic finite element computer model of rat lumbosacral segments to identify the currents generated by EES. To evaluate the impact of these currents on sensorimotor circuits, we coupled this model with an anatomically realistic axon-cable model of motoneurons, interneurons, and myelinated afferent fibers for antagonistic ankle muscles. Comparisons between computer simulations and experiments revealed the ability of the model to predict EES-evoked motor responses over multiple intensities and locations. Analysis of the recruited neural structures revealed the lack of direct influence of EES on motoneurons and interneurons. Simulations and pharmacological experiments demonstrated that EES engages spinal circuits trans-synaptically through the recruitment of myelinated afferent fibers. The model also predicted the capacity of spatially distinct EES to modulate side-specific limb movements and, to a lesser extent, extension versus flexion. These predictions were confirmed during standing and walking enabled by EES in spinal rats. These combined results provide a mechanistic framework for the design of spinal neuroprosthetic systems to improve standing and walking after neurological disorders.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.1688-13.2013

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Show all 62 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Gardner E Martin J Jessel T (2000) in Principles of neural science, The bodily senses, eds Kandel E Schwartz J Jessell T (McGraw-Hill, New York), pp 430–450.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 435

Metadata

Authors
Capogrosso, M., Wenger, N., Raspopovic, S., Musienko, P., Beauparlant, J., Bassi Luciani, L., Courtine, G., & Micera, S.
Affiliations
  • Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna (IT)
  • École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2013-12-04
Volume
33
Issue
49
Pages
19326-19340
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2127033470
Cited by
435
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 9
FWCI
9.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • European Commission (258654)
  • École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
  • FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (261247)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Spinal Cord Injury Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
Keywords
epidural stimulation, spinal cord injury, lumbosacral spinal cord, sensorimotor circuits, motor neurons, interneurons, ankle muscles, standing and walking, rat model
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Animals, Computer Simulation, Electric Stimulation, Electrodes, Implanted, Epidural Space, Female, Interneurons, Models, Neurological, Motor Neurons, Nerve Fibers, Rats, Inbred Lew, Sensory Receptor Cells, Recruitment, Neurophysiological, Spinal Cord, Walking, Finite Element Analysis, Rats, Electrophysiological Phenomena

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review