Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation (tAVNS) Delivered During Upper Limb Interactive Robotic Training Demonstrates Novel Antagonist Control for Reaching Movements Following Stroke.

Implanted vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) delivered concurrently with upper limb rehabilitation has been shown to improve arm function after stroke. Transcutaneous auricular VNS (taVNS) offers a non-invasive alternative to implanted VNS and may provide similar therapeutic benefit. There is much discussion about the optimal approach for combining VNS and physical therapy, as such we sought to determine whether taVNS administered during robotic training, specifically delivered during the premotor planning stage for arm extension movements, would confer additional motor improvement in patients with chronic stroke. Thirty-six patients with chronic, moderate-severe upper limb hemiparesis (>6 months; mean Upper Extremity Fugl-Meyer score = 25 ± 2, range 13-48), were randomized to receive 9 sessions (1 h in length, 3x/week for 3 weeks) of active (N = 18) or sham (N = 18) taVNS (500 ms bursts, frequency 30 Hz, pulse width 0.3 ms, max intensity 5 mA, ∼250 stimulated movements per session) delivered during robotic training. taVNS was triggered by the onset of a visual cue prior to center-out arm extension movements. Clinical assessments and surface electromyography (sEMG) measures of the biceps and triceps brachii were collected during separate test sessions. Significant motor improvements were measured for both the active and sham taVNS groups, and these improvements were robust at 3 month follow-up. Compared to the sham group, the active taVNS group showed a significant reduction in spasticity of the wrist and hand at discharge (Modified Tardieu Scale; taVNS = -8.94% vs. sham = + 2.97%, p < 0.05). The EMG results also demonstrated significantly increased variance for the bicep peak sEMG amplitude during extension for the active taVNS group compared to the sham group at discharge (active = 26.29% MVC ± 3.89, sham = 10.63% MVC ± 3.10, mean absolute change admission to discharge, p < 0.01), and at 3-month follow-up, the bicep peak sEMG amplitude was significantly reduced in the active taVNS group (P < 0.05). Thus, robot training improved the motor capacity of both groups, and taVNS, decreased spasticity. taVNS administered during premotor planning of movement may play a role in improving coordinated activation of the agonist-antagonist upper arm muscle groups by mitigating spasticity and increasing motor control following stroke. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier (NCT03592745).

Use of Platelet-Rich Plasma Immediately After an Injury Did Not Improve Ligament Healing, and Increasing Platelet Concentrations Was Detrimental in an In Vivo Animal Model.

BACKGROUND: Limited information in basic science and clinical trials exists to determine if ligament healing may be accelerated with the use of biological adjuvants, such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP). However, there has been widespread acceptance of PRP for use in clinical practice, despite an inadequate understanding of its biological mechanism of action. PURPOSE: To determine whether a single dose of PRP could accelerate ligament healing and correspondingly improve histological characteristics and biomechanical properties when injected immediately postoperatively into the injured medial collateral ligament (MCL) of New Zealand White rabbits. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Eighty skeletally mature New Zealand White rabbits (160 knees) were used. The MCL was torn midbody to simulate a grade 3 tear. After an acute injury of the MCL, the administration of autologous PRP at 3 different platelet concentrations (0 million/uL, platelet-poor plasma [PPP]; 0.6 million/uL, 2 times the baseline [2× PRP]; and 1.2 million/uL, 4 times the baseline [4× PRP]) was performed and compared with a saline injection control in the contralateral knee. Histological analysis and a biomechanical endpoint characterization were utilized to assess ligamentous healing and compare it to a sham surgery group. RESULTS: The PPP ( P = .001) and 4× PRP ( P = .002) groups had a significantly lower collagen subscore than the sham surgery group. No other differences were observed among the treatment groups, including the vascularity subscore and overall ligament tissue maturity index score. Compared with saline-injected contralateral knees, the maximum load for PPP and 2× PRP was not significantly different ( P = .788 and .325, respectively). The maximum load and stiffness for knees treated with 4× PRP were significantly less than for the saline-treated contralateral knees ( P = .006 and .001, respectively). CONCLUSION: One single dose of PPP or 2× PRP at the time of injury did not improve ligament healing. In addition, 4× PRP negatively affected ligament strength and histological characteristics at 6 weeks after the injury. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The current practice of treating knee ligament injuries with PRP may not improve healing at low doses of PRP. The decreased mechanical properties and histological appearance of the torn MCL suggest that high doses of PRP decrease the quality of repair tissue. Further in vivo studies are necessary to determine the dosing and timing of PRP administration after a ligament injury before the widespread use of PRP to treat ligament injuries is recommended.