Figure 5
Relation between neuroanatomical mapping of lumbosacral and neurophysiological muscle responses. (A) Scatter plots for the slope versus activation threshold values across seven muscles (left and right muscles combined) for midline two bipolar contact electrodes. The scale is corresponding to the stimulation site at L1, L2, …, L5 and S spinal cord levels. (B) Scatter plots for the slope versus activation threshold values across seven muscles for unilateral two bipolar contact electrodes. (C) Heatmap plots for activation threshold values and slope values across seven muscles and L1, L2, …, L5 and S spinal cord levels for midline two bipolar contact electrodes. (D) Heatmap plots for the average of normalized activation threshold and slope values across seven muscles and L1, L2, …, L5 and S spinal cord levels for midline two bipolar contact electrodes. The Pearson correlation coefficients for comparing the targeted spinal cord levels by the activated electrode contacts (both midline and unilateral) with the normalized activation threshold values showed negative correlations for upper leg muscles: GL, RF, VL and MH and positive correlations for lower leg muscles: MG, TA and SOL with all the correlation values being statistically significant (P < 0.0001). For midline electrode configurations, the correlation results between the slope of the recruitment curves and spinal cord levels were not statistically significant for GL (P = 0.08) and MH (P = 0.09) but there were significant and positive correlations for VL (P < 0.0001) and RF (P < 0.0001) and there were significant and negative correlations for MG (P < 0.0001), TA (P = 0.02) and SOL (P < 0.0001). For unilateral electrode configurations, the correlation results between the slope of the recruitment curves and spinal cord levels were not statistically significant for GL (P = 0.3), RF (P = 0.1) and MH (P = 0.7) but there were significant and positive correlations for VL (P = 0.0008) and there were significant and negative correlations for MG (P = 0.01), TA (P = 0.001) and SOL (P = 0.03).

Relation between neuroanatomical mapping of lumbosacral and neurophysiological muscle responses. (A) Scatter plots for the slope versus activation threshold values across seven muscles (left and right muscles combined) for midline two bipolar contact electrodes. The scale is corresponding to the stimulation site at L1, L2, …, L5 and S spinal cord levels. (B) Scatter plots for the slope versus activation threshold values across seven muscles for unilateral two bipolar contact electrodes. (C) Heatmap plots for activation threshold values and slope values across seven muscles and L1, L2, …, L5 and S spinal cord levels for midline two bipolar contact electrodes. (D) Heatmap plots for the average of normalized activation threshold and slope values across seven muscles and L1, L2, …, L5 and S spinal cord levels for midline two bipolar contact electrodes. The Pearson correlation coefficients for comparing the targeted spinal cord levels by the activated electrode contacts (both midline and unilateral) with the normalized activation threshold values showed negative correlations for upper leg muscles: GL, RF, VL and MH and positive correlations for lower leg muscles: MG, TA and SOL with all the correlation values being statistically significant (P < 0.0001). For midline electrode configurations, the correlation results between the slope of the recruitment curves and spinal cord levels were not statistically significant for GL (P = 0.08) and MH (P = 0.09) but there were significant and positive correlations for VL (P < 0.0001) and RF (P < 0.0001) and there were significant and negative correlations for MG (P < 0.0001), TA (P = 0.02) and SOL (P < 0.0001). For unilateral electrode configurations, the correlation results between the slope of the recruitment curves and spinal cord levels were not statistically significant for GL (P = 0.3), RF (P = 0.1) and MH (P = 0.7) but there were significant and positive correlations for VL (P = 0.0008) and there were significant and negative correlations for MG (P = 0.01), TA (P = 0.001) and SOL (P = 0.03).

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close