| Chapter title |
Update on Mechanism and Therapeutic Implications of Spinal Cord Stimulation and Cerebral Hemodynamics: A Narrative Review
|
|---|---|
| Chapter number | 5 |
| Book title |
Trends in Reconstructive Neurosurgery
|
| Published in |
Acta neurochirurgica Supplement, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-3-319-39546-3_5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-3-31-939545-6, 978-3-31-939546-3
|
| Authors |
Elisabetta Peppucci, Rina Di Bonaventura, Vincenzo Esposito, Jun Zhong, Gerardo Iacopino, Giuseppe Barbagallo, Massimiliano Visocchi, Peppucci, Elisabetta, Bonaventura, Rina, Esposito, Vincenzo, Zhong, Jun, Iacopino, Gerardo, Barbagallo, Giuseppe, Visocchi, Massimiliano |
| Abstract |
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is well known for its early role in the management of chronic pain, mainly failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), spasticity, and bowel and bladder dysfunction. In more recent years, SCS has been proposed for patients suffering from refractory angina or peripheral vasculopathies in order to gain symptom relief, thus indicating some hemodynamic effect on the peripheral circulation. Taking into account this scientific observation, since the late1980s, researchers have started to investigate the potential effect of SCS on cerebral blood flow (CBF) regulation and its possible application in certain pathological settings dealing with vascular pattern dysfunction, such as ischemia, subarachnoid hemorrhage, head trauma, and brain tumors. The aim of this study was to review the scientific literature about SCS and its effect on CBF, evaluating the results both in "physiological" experimental models and clinical studies, as well as in the particular pathological conditions we have mentioned above. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 63% |
| India | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 38% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 38% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 15% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 23% |
| Unknown | 9 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 10% |
| Psychology | 3 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 25% |