Recovery from traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) is challenging due to the limited regenerative capacity of the central nervous system to restore cells, myelin, and neural connections. At the clinical level, the fundamental pillars of treatment are the reduction in secondary damage (neuroprotection) and rehabilitation; these are the tools we have to mitigate the disability caused by spinal cord injury (SCI). To date, the treatments on which neuroprotection has been based are the prevention of acute respiratory failure to avoid hypoxia, early hemodynamic control, neuroprotective drugs and surgical management. Optimizing early hemodynamic control to ensure adequate spinal cord perfusion may be key to the management of SCI. While neuroprotective agents like methylprednisolone have fallen into disuse, several promising therapies are currently being tested in clinical trials. In terms of surgical treatment, although their impact on neurological recovery remains debated, appropriate early bone decompression followed by duroplasty in selected cases is increasingly recommended. Advances in cell therapies hold significant potential for enhancing both clinical and functional outcomes in SCI patients. Moreover, emerging neuromodulation techniques, such as transcutaneous and epidural stimulation, along with innovations in rehabilitation technologies—such as robotic systems and exoskeletons—are becoming indispensable tools for improving locomotion and overall mobility in individuals with SCI. This article provides an update on the advances in neuroprotection against secondary damage caused by tSCI, in cellular therapies, and in new rehabilitation therapies.

(1) Background: Restoring arm and hand function is one of the priorities of people with cervical spinal cord injury (cSCI). Noninvasive electromagnetic neuromodulation is a current approach that aims to improve upper-limb function in individuals with SCI. The aim of this study is to review updated information on the different applications of noninvasive electromagnetic neuromodulation techniques that focus on restoring upper-limb functionality and motor function in people with cSCI. (2) Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were used to structure the search protocol. A systematic review of the literature was performed in three databases: the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro). (3) Results: Twenty-five studies were included: four were on transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), four on transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), two on transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS), ten on functional electrical stimulation (FES), four on transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), and one on neuromuscular stimulation (NMS). The meta-analysis could not be completed due to a lack of common motor or functional evaluations. Finally, we realized a narrative review of the results, which reported that noninvasive electromagnetic neuromodulation combined with rehabilitation at the cerebral or spinal cord level significantly improved upper-limb functionality and motor function in cSCI subjects. Results were significant compared with the control group when tSCS, FES, TENS, and NMS was applied. (4) Conclusions: To perform a meta-analysis and contribute to more evidence, randomized controlled trials with standardized outcome measures for the upper extremities in cSCI are needed, even though significant improvement was reported in each non-invasive electromagnetic neuromodulation study.

Transcutaneous multisegmental spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) has shown superior efficacy in modulating spinal locomotor circuits compared to single-site stimulation in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Building on these findings, we hypothesized that administering a single session of tSCS at multiple spinal segments may yield greater enhancements in muscle strength and gait function during stimulation compared to tSCS at only one or two segments. In our study, tSCS was applied at single segments (C5, L1, and Coc1), two segments (C5-L1, C5-Coc1, and L1-Coc1), or multisegments (C5-L1-Coc1) in a randomized order. We evaluated the 6-m walking test (6MWT) and maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) and assessed the Hmax/Mmax ratio during stimulation in ten individuals with incomplete motor SCI. Our findings indicate that multisegmental tSCS improved walking time and reduced spinal cord excitability, as measured by the Hmax/Mmax ratio, similar to some single or two-site tSCS interventions. However, only multisegmental tSCS resulted in increased tibialis anterior (TA) muscle strength. These results suggest that multisegmental tSCS holds promise for enhancing walking capacity, increasing muscle strength, and altering spinal cord excitability in individuals with incomplete SCI.

BACKGROUND: Predicting the ability to walk after traumatic spinal cord injury is of utmost importance in the clinical setting. Nevertheless, only a small fraction of predictive models are evaluated on their performance by other authors using external data. The Dutch Clinical Prediction Rule for long-term walking ability was developed and validated using neurological assessments performed within 15 days postinjury. However, in reality, this assessment is most often performed between 11 and 55 days. When considering a longer time from injury to neurological assessments, the Dutch Clinical Prediction Rule has only been externally validated for patients after non–traumatic spinal cord injury. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to validate the Dutch Clinical Prediction Rule with neurological assessment performed within 3–90 days after traumatic spinal cord injury, using (a) the Dutch Clinical Prediction Rule logistic regression coefficients (Equation 1); (b) the Dutch Clinical Prediction Rule weighted coefficients (Equation 2); and (c) the reestimated (using a Spanish population) weighted coefficients (Equation 3). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective (STROBE-compliant) study involving 298 adults with traumatic spinal cord injury admitted to a hospital between 2010 and 2019 in Spain. The Spinal Cord Independence Measure item-12 was used for walking assessment. RESULTS: Using Equation 1, the model yielded 86.2% overall classification accuracy, 94.5% sensitivity, and 83.4% specificity (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.939, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.915–0.965; p < .001). Using Equation 2 yielded 86.2% overall classification accuracy, 93.2% sensitivity, and 83.9% specificity (AUC = 0.9392, 95% CI: 0.914–0.964; p < .001). Using Equation 3 yielded 86.9% overall classification accuracy, 68.9% sensitivity, and 92.8% specificity (AUC = 0.939, 95% CI: 0.914–0.964; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the Dutch Clinical Prediction Rule in a Spanish traumatic spinal cord injury population with assessments performed up to 90 days postinjury with similar performance, using the original coefficients and including a reestimation of the coefficients.

Introduction: The ABLE Exoskeleton has been tested to be safe and feasible for persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) to complete basic skills in clinical settings but has not been tested for use in home and community environments. A user-centered design process was employed to test the feasibility of the current ABLE Exoskeleton (designed for clinical use) for persons with SCI to perform the basic and advanced skills required for home and community environments, to gain crucial feedback for the development of a novel personal-use exoskeleton.Methods: In this prospective pretest-posttest quasi-experimental study across two SCI centers (Germany, Spain), in-and outpatients with SCI were included into a 22-session training and assessment protocol, utilizing the ABLE Exoskeleton. Feasibility and usability measures [level of assistance (LoA) for basic and advanced skills, donning/doffing-time and LoA] were recorded together with safety outcomes, and participant and therapist satisfaction with the device.Results: 10 participants (44.4 ± 24 years), with SCI from C5 to T11, (American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale A–D) completed the study. In 209 sessions, six device-related adverse events (pain and skin lesions) were reported. Average total time for don and doff was 10:23 ± 3:30 min. Eight participants were able to complete don and doff with minimal assistance or less. Independence to carry out all skills in the device increased significantly for all participants (p < 0.05). Participants with chronic SCI required a significantly (p < 0.05) lower LoA for six of the nine advanced skills than those in the sub-acute phase.Discussion: This study shows that the ABLE Exoskeleton is safe, feasible and usable for people with SCI in respect to independent donning, doffing and performance of basic and advanced exoskeleton skills. The supervised exoskeleton use in the clinical environment was a highly valuable approach for identifying the challenging tasks and the necessary technological developments that need to be carried out for a personal-use exoskeleton, including a more independent sit-to-stand transition, faster speed of transitions between states and a richer display on the remote control for the user.Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05643313.