Del Brocco, M.; Ansah, G. J.; Duran, M.; Bhowmick, S.; Gopinath, C.; Jantz, M. K.; Bose, R.; Lempka, S. F.; Fisher, L.

Objective. Lateral spinal cord stimulation (LSCS) is a promising approach for restoring somatosensory feedback in lower-limb amputees, but its spatial selectivity remains limited. Percepts often spread to unintended regions of the residual limb, and reducing electrode contact size may not improve focality. This study investigated whether the anatomical organization of lumbar dorsal rootlets (DR) imposes fundamental constraints on LSCS selectivity. Approach. Acute neurophysiology experiments were performed in six adult cats. Both LSCS and individual DR stimulation were conducted in the same animals. For DR stimulation, bipolar hook electrodes were used to stimulate individual DR, while antidromic compound action potentials (CAPs) were recorded from femoral and sciatic nerve branches instrumented with nerve cuffs. For LSCS, custom 32-contact epidural paddle electrodes were placed over the lateral surface of the spinal cord at corresponding vertebral levels. Recruitment thresholds, dynamic ranges, and response patterns were analyzed across spinal levels, and DR recruitment patterns were directly compared to those evoked by LSCS within the same animals. Main results. A clear rostrocaudal organization was observed across spinal levels during stimulation of individual DR, with femoral branches predominantly recruited at L4-L5 and sciatic branches at L6-L7. However, no somatotopic organization was found across DR within each spinal level; individual DR frequently co-activated multiple branches within the same group, and selective recruitment could only be maintained over a narrow dynamic range (median ~10 A). LSCS exhibited even a narrower dynamic range (~5 A) but closely mirrored DR recruitment patterns, indicating that LSCS activates sensory afferents in a manner determined by the organizational structure of the DR. Significance. These findings demonstrate that the limited spatial selectivity of LSCS can largely be attributed to the coarse organization of DR within each root level rather than due to limitations of epidural electrode design. Moving electrodes intradurally or reducing contact size further is unlikely to substantially improve focality. Instead, improving paddle stability to ensure consistent placement over the appropriate spinal levels may be a more effective strategy for enhancing percept localization.