Contralaterally-controlled functional electrical stimulation-induced muscle contraction for severe lower extremity paralysis.
Tadashi Imura, Hiroki Wada, Motoya Matsui and 2 others
PMID 37131352WHAT IT FOUND
A man with no left ankle movement after brain tumor surgery regained voluntary dorsiflexion and independent walking after receiving functional electrical stimulation triggered by his unaffected leg.
The device was used alongside standard physical and occupational therapy.
Key findings
01The patient had no observable muscle contraction in the left ankle at 40 days post-operation.
02By 149 days after surgery, active ankle dorsiflexion recovered to +20 degrees and muscle strength reached 5.0 kg.
03The patient was able to walk independently with a plastic ankle-foot brace and maintained motor function one year after the operation.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
This is a single case report, so it cannot determine if the treatment works for other patients. The patient received regular physical and occupational therapy at the same time as the electrical stimulation, so it is impossible to know if the improvement was due to the device, the standard therapy, or the combination. The authors acknowledge that natural resolution of post-operative brain swelling may have contributed to the recovery, although they note no improvement occurred until 40 days after surgery. There was no comparison group or control condition to measure the effect against the natural course of recovery.
Declared interests
One author (T.M.) has previously received funding from OG Giken Co., Ltd., the manufacturer of the IVES device used in this study. However, the authors state that the company was not involved in the design, collection, analysis, or writing of this specific study.
The easy way to misread this
Do not attribute the patient's recovery solely to the IVES device. The patient was receiving regular physical and occupational therapy concurrently, and the authors explicitly state that the effectiveness of the FES therapy alone has not been shown.