Better gait AFTER rhizotomies?

Nothing surprised me more than reading this paper and finding out that folks that have had rhizotomies, which removes the afferent input from the dorsal horn and sensory information from the reflex loops in the cord, actually had better gait. Of course these children had severe spastic diplegia, which means they have lost descending inhibition from higher center's and most likely had increased flexor tone in the lower extremities. 

image credit: http://realtyconnect.me/spinal-cord-cross-section-tracts/background-information-musculoskeletal-key-within-spinal-cord-cross-section-tracts/

Remember that the fibers entering the dorsal horn not only go to the dorsal columns but also to the spinocerebellar pathways. When someone has spasticity, the feedback loops are skewed and flexor drive coming from the rostral reticular formation generally is increased are often kept in check by the cerebellar and vestibular feedback loops. Perhaps the interruption of this feedback loop and lack of information from type IA and II afferents of the muscle spindles as well as Ib afferents from the globe tendon organs modulated the tone sufficiently to improve gait. This study did a selective dorsal rhizotomy which means only a portion of it was ablated. 

The somatotopic organization  of the dorsal horn of the spinal cord (i.e.: certain areas of the dorsal horn correspond to certain body parts) is well documented in humans; It would make sense that the dorsal root itself (i.e.: the afferent fibers in the nerve going into the dorsal horn) would be as well, as they are that way in murines (2) and felines (3). 

So, how does this apply to gait? People with strokes, cortical lesions, diseases like cerebral palsy and even possibly increased flexor tone, may benefit from altered input into the dorsal horn. It would have been really cool to see if they increased extensor activity in this individuals, if they would be benefited further. 

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with long-term improvement in gait in children after selective dorsal rhizotomy (SDR).

DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study SETTING: University medical center PARTICIPANTS: 36 children (age 4-13y) with spastic diplegia (gross motor classification system level I (n=14), II (n=15) and III (n=7) were included retrospectively from the database of our hospital. Children underwent selective dorsal rhizotomy (SDR) between January 1999 and May 2011. Patients were included if they received clinical gait analysis before and five years post-SDR, age >4 years at time of SDR and if brain MRI-scan was available.

INTERVENTION: Selective dorsal rhizotomy MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall gait quality was assessed with Edinburgh visual gait score (EVGS), before and five years after SDR. In addition, knee and ankle angles at initial contact and midstance were evaluated. To identify predictors for gait improvement, several factors were evaluated including: functional mobility level (GMFCS), presence of white matter abnormalities on brain-MRI, and selective motor control during gait (synergy analysis).

RESULTS: Overall gait quality improved after SDR, with a large variation between patients. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that worse score on EVGS and better GMFCS were independently related to gait improvement. Gait improved more in children with GMFCS I & II compared to III. No differences were observed between children with or without white matter abnormalities on brain MRI. Selective motor control during gait was predictive for improvement of knee angle at initial contact and midstance, but not for EVGS.

CONCLUSION: Functional mobility level and baseline gait quality are both important factors to predict gait outcomes after SDR. If candidates are well selected, SDR can be a successful intervention to improve gait both in children with brain MRI abnormalities as well as other causes of spastic diplegia.

1. Oudenhoven LM, van der Krogt MM, Romei M, van Schie PEM, van de Pol LA, van Ouwerkerk WJR, Harlaar Prof J, Buizer AI. Factors associated with long-term improvement of gait after selective dorsal rhizotomy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Jul 4. pii: S0003-9993(18)30442-8. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2018.06.016. [Epub ahead of print]

2. Wessels WJ1, Marani E. A rostrocaudal somatotopic organization in the brachial dorsal root ganglia of neonatal rats. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 1993;95 Suppl:S3-11.

3. Koerber HR, Brown PB. Somatotopic organization of hindlimb cutaneous nerve projections to cat dorsal horn. J Neurophysiol. 1982 Aug;48(2):481-9.

The Mighty Interossei

By request of one of our readers (Thank you Richard S), we were asked to “dig up” some information about the interossei. After scouring the literature, we turned up an interesting paper, talking about their anatomy. 

Of interesting note, the paper found extensive connections of the musculature with the surrounding fascia (talk about myofascial meridians!) as well as a fairly consistent slip of the peroneus longus which contributes to the 1st dorsal interossei. This is important considering the peroneus fires from midstance on, as do the interossei (and other foot intrinsics). Perhaps (since as the fore foot is extending in late midstance and pre swing) it assists in descending the head of the 1st metatarsal and resisting extension (contracting eccentrically) of the metatarsal phalangeal joints, helping to maintain stability of the fore foot for push off. 

“The extensive connections among the interossei indicate that they could be important stabilisers of the foot during those times when rigidity is required. The pull of the interossei is transformed across the tarsometatarsal joints by means of their attachment to the ligamentous meshwork. Thus they will act upon the tarsometatarsal joints. Crossing those joints on their plantar aspect, the interossei are well placed to assist in resisting extension. Even though their close attachment proximal to the joints creates a short lever arm and therefore relative inefficiency as flexors when weight is borne on the ball of the foot (MacConaill, 1949), the large mass of the combined interossei probably indicates that they do have a significant role in resisting extension at these joints. Also, the shapes of the tarsometatarsal joint surfaces restrict angular motion.”

Definitely a good read and available FREE full text online here

PAUL J. KALINt AND BRUCE ELLIOT HIRSCH: The origins and function of the interosseous muscles of the foot  J. Anat. (1987), 152, pp. 83-91