NCT06311526

Brief Summary

Spasticity, common after a stroke, aggravates the patient's motor impairment causing pain and limitation in daily activities such as eating, dressing and walking. There are different spasticity treatments, such as botulinum neurotoxin, in the first place. Among the emerging therapies is focal extracorporeal shock wave therapy, consisting of a sequence of sonic (mechanical) impulses with high peak pressure. Systematic reviews highlighted that shock waves effectively improve lower and upper limb spasticity. Moreover, the shock waves therapeutic effect can last up to 12 weeks from the last treatment session. When used to treat stroke spasticity, the shock waves' mechanism of action is poorly detailed. On the one side, shock waves could change the physical properties of the muscular tissue (e.g. viscosity, rigidity). On the other, the shock waves produce a robust mechanical stimulation that massively activates muscle and skin mechanoreceptors (e.g. muscle spindles). This activation would modulate, in turn, the spinal (and supra-spinal) circuits involved in spasticity. To our knowledge, no study investigated the shock waves mechanism of action in stroke upper limb spasticity. Research question: do shock waves exert their therapeutic effect on spasticity by changing the muscle's physical properties or by indirectly modulating the excitability of spinal circuits? Specific aims: To investigate the mechanism of action of shock wave therapy as a treatment of upper limb spasticity after a stroke. Two major hypotheses will be contrasted: shock waves reduce hypertonia 1) by changing the muscle's physical features or 2) by changing the motoneurons excitability and the excitability of the stretch reflex spinal circuits. Shock wave therapy is expected to improve spasticity, thus improving the following clinical tests: the Modified Ashworth Scale (an ordinal score of spasticity) and the Functional Assessment for Upper Limb (FAST-UL, an ordinal score of upper limb dexterity). This clinical improvement is expected to be associated with changes in spastic muscle echotexture assessed with ultrasounds, such as an improvement in the Heckmatt scale (an ordinal score of muscle echotexture in spasticity). Clinical improvement is also expected to be associated with an improvement in the following neurophysiological parameters: a reduction of the H/Mmax ratio (an index of hyperexcitability of the monosynaptic stretch reflex circuit), a decrease in amplitude of the F waves (a neurophysiological signal reflecting the excitability of single/restricted motoneurones) and an increase of the homosynaptic depression (also known as post-activation depression, reflecting the excitability of the transmission between the Ia fibres and motoneurones). Understanding the shock wave mechanism of action will lead to a better clinical application of this spasticity treatment. If the shock waves exert their therapeutic effect by changing the muscle's physical properties, they could be more appropriate for patients with muscle fibrosis on ultrasounds. On the contrary, if the shock waves work on spasticity by indirectly acting on the nervous system's excitability, then a neurophysiology study could be used to preliminary identify the muscle groups with the most significant neurophysiological alterations, which could be the muscles benefitting the most from this treatment.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
12

participants targeted

Target at below P25 for all trials

Timeline
Completed

Started May 2023

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

May 30, 2023

Completed
9 months until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

March 8, 2024

Completed
7 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

March 15, 2024

Completed
12 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

March 13, 2025

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

March 13, 2025

Completed
Last Updated

November 18, 2025

Status Verified

November 1, 2025

Enrollment Period

1.8 years

First QC Date

March 8, 2024

Last Update Submit

November 17, 2025

Conditions

Keywords

SpasticityStrokeExtracorporeal Shockwave TherapyStroke upper limb impairmentNeurophysiologyMusculoskeletal ultrasound

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (4)

  • M wave and H reflex recruitment curve

    Recruitment curves of the Flexor Carpi Radialis muscle of both upper limbs

    At baseline, after 7, 14 and 21 days of intervention, at 28 and 84 days after the end of the intervention

  • H reflex post-activation depression

    Post-activation depression of the Flexor Carpi Radialis H reflex of both sides

    At baseline, after 7, 14 and 21 days of intervention, at 28 and 84 days after the end of the intervention

  • F waves

    F waves of the First Dorsal Interosseus muscles of both upper limbs

    At baseline, after 7, 14 and 21 days of intervention, at 28 and 84 days after the end of the intervention

  • T reflex

    T reflex of the Flexor Carpi Radialis of both sides

    At baseline, after 7, 14 and 21 days of intervention, at 28 and 84 days after the end of the intervention

Secondary Outcomes (2)

  • Upper limb dexterity measures

    At baseline, after 7, 14 and 21 days of intervention, at 28 and 84 days after the end of the intervention

  • Ultrasound arm and forearm assessment

    At baseline, after 7, 14 and 21 days of intervention, at 28 and 84 days after the end of the intervention

Study Arms (1)

Stroke patients suffering a spastic upper limb paresis

Other: Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy

Interventions

Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy administered to the belly of spastic muscles of the upper limb.

Stroke patients suffering a spastic upper limb paresis

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
Sampling MethodNon-Probability Sample
Study Population

Stroke patients with an upper limb spastic paresis.

You may qualify if:

  • age \> 18 years
  • first hemispheric stroke at least six months ago
  • spasticity of wrist and elbow flexors muscles with grade 1 to 3 of the Modified Ashworth Scal
  • no botulinum toxin injection in the previous six months
  • ability to give informed consent

You may not qualify if:

  • anticoagulant medicine
  • presence of a pacemaker, an implantable cardioverter defibrillator or other medical devices
  • active cancer
  • skin lesions at the site of shock wave administration
  • an major neurological disease in addition to the hemiparesis (e.g. spastic hemiparesis in a patient who had Parkinson's disease before their stroke).

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano

Milan, MI, 20122, Italy

Location

Related Publications (7)

  • Wissel J, Manack A, Brainin M. Toward an epidemiology of poststroke spasticity. Neurology. 2013 Jan 15;80(3 Suppl 2):S13-9. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182762448.

    PMID: 23319481BACKGROUND
  • Manganotti P, Amelio E. Long-term effect of shock wave therapy on upper limb hypertonia in patients affected by stroke. Stroke. 2005 Sep;36(9):1967-71. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000177880.06663.5c. Epub 2005 Aug 18.

    PMID: 16109905BACKGROUND
  • Opara J, Taradaj J, Walewicz K, Rosinczuk J, Dymarek R. The Current State of Knowledge on the Clinical and Methodological Aspects of Extracorporeal Shock Waves Therapy in the Management of Post-Stroke Spasticity-Overview of 20 Years of Experiences. J Clin Med. 2021 Jan 12;10(2):261. doi: 10.3390/jcm10020261.

    PMID: 33445623BACKGROUND
  • Pierrot-Deseilligny, E. & Burke, D. Contribution of Spinal Pathways to the Pathophysiology of Movement Disorders. The Circuitry of the Human Spinal Cord 565-579 (2012) doi:10.1017/CBO9781139026727.015.

    BACKGROUND
  • Kohn AF, Floeter MK, Hallett M. Presynaptic inhibition compared with homosynaptic depression as an explanation for soleus H-reflex depression in humans. Exp Brain Res. 1997 Sep;116(2):375-80. doi: 10.1007/pl00005765.

    PMID: 9348136BACKGROUND
  • Lundbye-Jensen J, Nielsen JB. Immobilization induces changes in presynaptic control of group Ia afferents in healthy humans. J Physiol. 2008 Sep 1;586(17):4121-35. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2008.156547. Epub 2008 Jul 3.

    PMID: 18599534BACKGROUND
  • Lamy JC, Wargon I, Mazevet D, Ghanim Z, Pradat-Diehl P, Katz R. Impaired efficacy of spinal presynaptic mechanisms in spastic stroke patients. Brain. 2009 Mar;132(Pt 3):734-48. doi: 10.1093/brain/awn310. Epub 2008 Nov 26.

    PMID: 19036767BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

StrokeParesisHemiplegiaMuscle Spasticity

Interventions

Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Cerebrovascular DisordersBrain DiseasesCentral Nervous System DiseasesNervous System DiseasesVascular DiseasesCardiovascular DiseasesNeurologic ManifestationsSigns and SymptomsPathological Conditions, Signs and SymptomsParalysisMuscular DiseasesMusculoskeletal DiseasesMuscle HypertoniaNeuromuscular Manifestations

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Ultrasonic TherapyDiathermyHyperthermia, InducedTherapeuticsPhysical Therapy ModalitiesRehabilitation

Study Design

Study Type
observational
Observational Model
COHORT
Time Perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

March 8, 2024

First Posted

March 15, 2024

Study Start

May 30, 2023

Primary Completion

March 13, 2025

Study Completion

March 13, 2025

Last Updated

November 18, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-11

Locations