Abstract
Transcutaneous spinal stimulation (TSS) studies rely on the depolarization of afferent fibers to provide input to the spinal cord; however, this has not been routinely ascertained. Thus, we aimed to characterize the types of responses evoked by TSS and establish paired-pulse ratio cutoffs that distinguish posterior root reflexes, evoked by stimulation of afferent nerve fibers, from motor responses, evoked by stimulation of efferent nerve fibers. Twelve neurologically intact participants (six women) underwent unipolar TSS (cathode over T11-12 spinal processes, anode paraumbilically) while resting supine. In six participants, unipolar TSS was repeated 2-3 months later and also compared to a bipolar TSS configuration (cathode 2.5 cm below T11-12, anode 5 cm above cathode). EMG signals were recorded from 16 leg muscles. A paired-pulse paradigm was applied at interstimulus intervals (ISIs) of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 400 ms. Responses were categorized by three assessors into reflexes, motor responses, or their combination (mixed responses) based on the visual presence/absence of paired-pulse suppression across ISIs. The paired-pulse ratio that best discriminated between response types was derived for each ISI. These cutoffs were validated by repeating unipolar TSS 2-3 months later and with bipolar TSS. Unipolar TSS evoked only reflexes (90%) and mixed responses (10%), which were mainly recorded in the quadriceps muscles (25-42%). Paired-pulse ratios of 0.51 (25-ms ISI) and 0.47 (50-ms ISI) best distinguished reflexes from mixed responses (100% sensitivity, > 99.2% specificity). These cutoffs performed well in the repeated unipolar TSS session (100% sensitivity, > 89% specificity). Bipolar TSS exclusively elicited reflexes which were all correctly classified. These results can be utilized in future studies to ensure that the input to the spinal cord originates from the depolarization of large afferents. This knowledge can be applied to improve the design of future neurophysiological studies and increase the fidelity of neuromodulation interventions.