Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Electrical stimulation and stem cells for spinal injury in dogs
By Krueger, E et al.·Published in Neuroscience letters·2019·Anatomy Department, Brazil·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Effects of low-intensity electrical stimulation and adipose derived stem cells transplantation on the time-domain analysis-based electromyographic signals in dogs with SCI.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 27 paraplegic dogs with spinal cord injuries received different treatments to help improve their movement. Some dogs were given two stem cell transplants, others received low-intensity electrical stimulation, and a third group received both treatments. After 30 and 60 days, all groups showed improvements in their muscle activity, indicating some regained motor function. While all treatments seemed to help, there were no significant differences in recovery between the groups.
People also search for: dog spinal cord injury treatment · stem cell therapy for dogs · low-intensity electrical stimulation for dogs
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The application of low-intensity electrical stimulation (LIES) to neural tissue increases neurochemical factors responsible for regeneration as nerve growth factor. Stem cell (SC) therapy for patients with Spinal cord injury (SCI) promote some increase functional improvement. OBJECTIVE: Investigate the electromyographic response in paraplegic dogs undergoing LIES and SC transplantation. METHODS: 27 dogs paraplegics with SCI were divided into three groups with different types of therapy. G: two SC transplants (n = 9); G: LIES (n = 8); G: two SC transplants and LIES (n = 10). Adipose derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs) were transplanted by lumbar puncture in the amount of 1.2 × 10cells/50 μL. Acupuncture needles positioned in the interspinous space were used for stimulation. The electrical stimulation was applied with a mean voltage ∼30 mV and four consecutive modulated frequencies (5 Hz, 10 Hz, 15 Hz and 20 Hz) within 5 min each. The patients motor performance was evaluated before (Pre) the procedure and after 30 (Post) and 60 (Post) days, from electromyography root mean square (EMG) registered with subcutaneous electrodes in the vastus lateralis muscle, while the animals were in quadrupedal position. RESULTS: All three groups showed a significant intra-group increase of EMG(Pre vs. Postor Pre vs. Post). However, there were no statistically significant differences between Postand Post. The inter-group test (GX GX G) did not present significance when compared the instants Pre (p = 0.34), Post(p = 0.78) and Post(p = 0.64). CONCLUSION: Some dogs recovered motor activity, expressed by the EMGin all groups, in pre vs. post (30 or 60 days) comparisons.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30528708/