CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT02899637Updated Sep 14, 2016

Effects of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury

An interventional study of Active high-frequency Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Sham high-frequency Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Spinal Cord Injury, sponsored by University of Sao Paulo. Status unknown at 1 site in Brazil. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 60 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2016-09-14.

Sponsored by University of Sao Paulo · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Sep 2016), so the status shown — last known as Not yet recruiting — may be out of date.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
30
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 60 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The main objective is to conduct a study protocol to investigate the effects of repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) on sensory and motor performance of individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) . A double-blind randomized sham-controlled trial of patients with iSCI will be conducted.

Read the detailed description

Effective rehabilitation programs for individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) are required either in the acute or in the post-acute care. Rehabilitation techniques based on protocols that selectively stimulate specific pathways along the central nervous system have been considered effective in enhancing neurologic recovery thereby improving functional abilities. The rationale relies on the assumption that the stimulation of the corticospinal tract, primary motor cortex, and spinal cord might induce neuronal reorganization of structures that are largely involved in the control of voluntary movements. In this line of reasoning, protocols involving repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) have been found effective in enhancing corticospinal synaptic transmission, attenuating neuropathic pain, improving spasticity and sensorimotor function after iSCI. However, controversial findings have also been reported, as other studies showed unaltered central pain, as well as cortical excitability and sensorimotor function. The lack of consistent results is probably associated with differences in stimulation parameters, number of sessions, site of stimulation, chronicity and levels of injury, and outcome measurements of the previous studies. Thus, it is clear that there are remaining gaps in our knowledge and the development of new studies, preferably prospective fully double-blind placebo-controlled trials, is necessary to complement the current knowledge about the effects of rTMS in patients with iSCI.

02

Conditions studied

  • Spinal Cord Injury

Keywords

  • Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury
  • Rehabilitation
  • Non-invasive brain stimulation
  • Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
03

In context

Spinal Cord Injuries

1,948 studies on the registry are indexed under Spinal Cord Injuries; 505 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 30 is above the median of 24 across 1,566 interventional studies indexed under Spinal Cord Injuries.

Browse Spinal Cord Injuries studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Sao Paulo is the lead sponsor of 1,005 studies on the registry; 90 are open to participants now.

Of its 7 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 0 (0%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 60 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Have a clinical diagnosis of iSCI with nonprogressive etiology
  • Clinical stability
  • Aged between 18-60 years old
  • Score equal to 24 in the Mini-Mental State Examination
  • No electroencephalography alterations
  • Absence of depression assessed by Hamilton Depression Scale
  • Currently receiving inpatient rehabilitation in Physiotherapy Health Center of University of the State of Paraiba, Brazil.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Have metal prosthesis in some part of the body
  • Use cardiac pacemaker
  • Present dementia or neurological disorders which can increase cortical excitability
  • Have psychotic or schizophrenic disorders
  • Take drugs that reduce seizure threshold or spasticity.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Crossover assignment
Masking
Quadruple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
30 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Spinal Cord Injury (Active Group)

    Active high-frequency Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

    Device: Active high-frequency Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

  • Sham comparator
    Spinal Cord Injury (Control group)

    Sham high-frequency Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

    Device: Sham high-frequency Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Interventions

  • DeviceActive high-frequency Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

    Active intervention, 5Hz on the lower limbs area of the motor cortex, during one week

  • DeviceSham high-frequency Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

    Sham intervention, 5Hz on the lower limbs area of the motor cortex, during one week

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (ASIA), Assessment of change in motor scores from baseline to three weeks.

    The ASIA Motor Score is derived from part of the assessment for the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury. It involves testing the strength of ten key muscles on each side of the body in the supine position (e.g., elbow flexors, wrist extensors, hip flexors, quadriceps, dorsiflexors) on a scale of 0 = no contraction to 5 = normal resistance through full range of motion. Scores are summed to give a total possible score of 50 for the upper extremities and 50 for the lower extremities.

    Time frame: At baseline and after active intervention (i.e five consecutive days of rTMS) and sham (i.e five consecutive days of placebo rTMS). In a period of three weeks.

Secondary outcomes

  1. American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (ASIA), Assessment of change in sensory scores from baseline to three weeks.sensory score.

    The ASIA Sensory score is also part of the assessment for the International Standard for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury. It involves testing pinprick and light touch sensation at key points representing each dermatome. Pin-prick and light-touch sensation of each dermatome is separately scored on a 3-point scale (0, 1 and 2). Scores will be summed to give a total possible score of 224 where a higher score indicates better sensation than a lower score.

    Time frame: At baseline and after active intervention (i.e five consecutive days of rTMS) and sham (i.e five consecutive days of placebo rTMS). In a period of three weeks.

  2. Fugl-Meyer Scale for Upper and Lower Members, Assessment of change in motor scores from baseline to three weeks.

    Time frame: At baseline and after active intervention (i.e five consecutive days of rTMS) and sham (i.e five consecutive days of placebo rTMS). In a period of three weeks.

  3. Electromyography (lower limbs), Assessment of change in motor function from baseline to three weeks.

    Time frame: At baseline and after active intervention (i.e five consecutive days of rTMS) and sham (i.e five consecutive days of placebo rTMS). In a period of three weeks.

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Universidade Estadual da Paraiba
    Campina Grande, Paraiba 58429-500, Brazil
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Belci M, Catley M, Husain M, Frankel HL, Davey NJ. Magnetic brain stimulation can improve clinical outcome in incomplete spinal cord injured patients. Spinal Cord. 2004 Jul;42(7):417-9. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3101613. PubMed 15111994 ↗
  • Benito J, Kumru H, Murillo N, Costa U, Medina J, Tormos JM, Pascual-Leone A, Vidal J. Motor and gait improvement in patients with incomplete spinal cord injury induced by high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2012 Spring;18(2):106-12. doi: 10.1310/sci1802-106. PubMed 23459246 ↗
  • Bunday KL, Perez MA. Motor recovery after spinal cord injury enhanced by strengthening corticospinal synaptic transmission. Curr Biol. 2012 Dec 18;22(24):2355-61. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2012.10.046. Epub 2012 Nov 29. Erratum In: Curr Biol. 2013 Jan 7;23(1):94. PubMed 23200989 ↗
  • Defrin R, Grunhaus L, Zamir D, Zeilig G. The effect of a series of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulations of the motor cortex on central pain after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 Dec;88(12):1574-80. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.07.025. PubMed 18047871 ↗
  • Jette F, Cote I, Meziane HB, Mercier C. Effect of single-session repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation applied over the hand versus leg motor area on pain after spinal cord injury. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013 Sep;27(7):636-43. doi: 10.1177/1545968313484810. Epub 2013 Apr 11. PubMed 23579183 ↗
  • Kang BS, Shin HI, Bang MS. Effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation over the hand motor cortical area on central pain after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009 Oct;90(10):1766-71. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.04.008. PubMed 19801069 ↗
  • Kumru H, Murillo N, Samso JV, Valls-Sole J, Edwards D, Pelayo R, Valero-Cabre A, Tormos JM, Pascual-Leone A. Reduction of spasticity with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with spinal cord injury. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010 Jun;24(5):435-41. doi: 10.1177/1545968309356095. Epub 2010 Jan 6. PubMed 20053952 ↗
  • Kuppuswamy A, Balasubramaniam AV, Maksimovic R, Mathias CJ, Gall A, Craggs MD, Ellaway PH. Action of 5 Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on sensory, motor and autonomic function in human spinal cord injury. Clin Neurophysiol. 2011 Dec;122(12):2452-61. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2011.04.022. Epub 2011 May 19. PubMed 21600843 ↗
  • Lammertse D, Tuszynski MH, Steeves JD, Curt A, Fawcett JW, Rask C, Ditunno JF, Fehlings MG, Guest JD, Ellaway PH, Kleitman N, Blight AR, Dobkin BH, Grossman R, Katoh H, Privat A, Kalichman M; International Campaign for Cures of Spinal Cord Injury Paralysis. Guidelines for the conduct of clinical trials for spinal cord injury as developed by the ICCP panel: clinical trial design. Spinal Cord. 2007 Mar;45(3):232-42. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3102010. Epub 2006 Dec 19. PubMed 17179970 ↗
  • Oudega M, Perez MA. Corticospinal reorganization after spinal cord injury. J Physiol. 2012 Aug 15;590(16):3647-63. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2012.233189. Epub 2012 May 14. PubMed 22586214 ↗
  • Tazoe T, Perez MA. Effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on recovery of function after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015 Apr;96(4 Suppl):S145-55. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.07.418. Epub 2014 Aug 29. PubMed 25175159 ↗
  • Yilmaz B, Kesikburun S, Yasar E, Tan AK. The effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on refractory neuropathic pain in spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med. 2014 Jul;37(4):397-400. doi: 10.1179/2045772313Y.0000000172. Epub 2013 Nov 11. PubMed 24621025 ↗
  • de Araujo AVL, Barbosa VRN, Galdino GS, Fregni F, Massetti T, Fontes SL, de Oliveira Silva D, da Silva TD, Monteiro CBM, Tonks J, Magalhaes FH. Effects of high-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation on functional performance in individuals with incomplete spinal cord injury: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2017 Nov 6;18(1):522. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2280-1. PubMed 29110687 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 14, 2016, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02899637
Lead sponsor
University of Sao Paulo
Collaborators
Universidade Estadual da Paraiba
Responsible party
Fernando Henrique Magalhães (Associate Professor, University of Sao Paulo) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 14, 2016
Start date
Oct 2016
Primary completion
Dec 2016 (estimated)
Completion
May 2017 (estimated)
Last update
Sep 14, 2016

Study contacts

Amanda Vitoria L Araujo
Contact
amandavitooria@gmail.com
+55 (11) 971212653
Fernando H Magalhaes, Ph.D.
principal investigator · University of Sao Paulo

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Sep 2016. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion