Brain-oscillation-synchronized stimulation to enhance motor recovery in early subacute stroke: a randomized controlled double-blind three- arm parallel-group exploratory trial comparing personalized, non- personalized and sham repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (Acronym: BOSS-STROKE).

BACKGROUND: Stroke is a major cause of death and the most frequent cause of permanent disability in western countries. Repetitive transcranial brain stimulation (rTMS) has been used to enhance neuronal plasticity after stroke, yet with only moderate effect sizes. Here we will apply a highly innovative technology that synchronizes rTMS to specific brain states identified by real-time analysis of electroencephalography. METHODS: One hundred forty-four patients with early subacute ischemic motor stroke will be included in a multicenter 3-arm parallel, randomized, double-blind, standard rTMS and sham rTMS-controlled exploratory trial in Germany. In the experimental condition, rTMS will be synchronized to the trough of the sensorimotor µ-oscillation, a high-excitability state, over ipsilesional motor cortex. In the standard rTMS control condition the identical protocol will be applied, but non-synchronized to the ongoing µ-oscillation. In the sham condition, the same µ-oscillation-synchronized protocol as in experimental condition will be applied, but with ineffective rTMS, using the sham side of an active/placebo TMS coil. The treatment will be performed over five consecutive work days (1,200 pulses per day, 6,000 pulses total). The primary endpoint will be motor performance after the last treatment session as measured by the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity. DISCUSSION: This study investigates, for the first time, the therapeutic efficacy of personalized, brain-state-dependent rTMS. We hypothesize that synchronization of rTMS with a high-excitability state will lead to significantly stronger improvement of paretic upper extremity motor function than standard or sham rTMS. Positive results may catalyze a paradigm-shift towards personalized brain-state-dependent stimulation therapies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05600374) on 10-21-2022.

Pulsed Facilitation of Corticospinal Excitability by the Sensorimotor µ-Alpha Rhythm.

Alpha oscillations (8-14 Hz) are assumed to gate information flow in the brain by means of pulsed inhibition; that is, the phasic suppression of cortical excitability and information processing once per alpha cycle, resulting in stronger net suppression for larger alpha amplitudes due to the assumed amplitude asymmetry of the oscillation. While there is evidence for this hypothesis regarding occipital alpha oscillations, it is less clear for the central sensorimotor µ-alpha rhythm. Probing corticospinal excitability via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the primary motor cortex and the measurement of motor evoked potentials (MEPs), we have previously demonstrated that corticospinal excitability is modulated by both amplitude and phase of the sensorimotor µ-alpha rhythm. However, the direction of this modulation, its proposed asymmetry, and its underlying mechanisms remained unclear. We therefore used real-time EEG-triggered single- and paired-pulse TMS in healthy humans of both sexes to assess corticospinal excitability and GABA-A-receptor mediated short-latency intracortical inhibition (SICI) at rest during spontaneous high amplitude µ-alpha waves at different phase angles (peaks, troughs, rising and falling flanks) and compared them to periods of low amplitude (desynchronized) µ-alpha. MEP amplitude was facilitated during troughs and rising flanks, but no phasic suppression was observed at any time, nor any modulation of SICI. These results are best compatible with sensorimotor µ-alpha reflecting asymmetric pulsed facilitation but not pulsed inhibition of motor cortical excitability. The asymmetric excitability with respect to rising and falling flanks of the µ-alpha cycle further reveals that voltage differences alone cannot explain the impact of phase.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The pulsed inhibition hypothesis, which assumes that alpha oscillations actively inhibit neuronal processing in a phasic manner, is highly influential and has substantially shaped our understanding of these oscillations. However, some of its basic assumptions, in particular its asymmetry and inhibitory nature, have rarely been tested directly. Here, we explicitly investigated the asymmetry of modulation and its direction for the human sensorimotor µ-alpha rhythm. We found clear evidence of pulsed facilitation, but not inhibition, in the human motor cortex, challenging the generalizability of the pulsed inhibition hypothesis and advising caution when interpreting sensorimotor µ-alpha changes in the sensorimotor system. This study also demonstrates how specific assumptions about the neurophysiological underpinnings of cortical oscillations can be experimentally tested noninvasively in humans.

[Rare medical incidents: Actual consensus statement for the removal of neuraxial catheter fragments]. / Nervenschäden bei Regionalanästhesie - Umgang mit in situ verbliebenen wirbelsäulennahen Katheterfragmenten.

The rupture of a catheter near the spine is rare. There are no evidence-based guidelines for diagnosis and therapy. Opinions derived from German anesthesiologists, neurosurgeons, orthopaedics and trauma surgeons are: Infants should have immediate surgery. In an asymptomatic adult, the catheter fragment does not require removal surgery. Antibiotic prophylaxis is not necessary. If symptomatic, the catheter fragment should be localized by a thin slice computed tomography or fluoroscopy. Otherwise surgical exploration is indicated. Direct surgery is recommended for cases with neurological symptoms, infections, loss of spinal fluid, pain and local discomfort. Relative indications for surgery are severe pain, tissue infection and intrathecal localization of the fragment. Surgery should be performed in prone position and under general anesthesia. Starting at the entry wound, the surgical access should be microsurgical and preferably by a neurosurgeon. If the entry is not detectable, a midline incision is suggested.