Literature DB >> 12435997

Spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain of spinal origin: a valuable long-term solution.

Richard B North1, F Todd Wetzel.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A literature review was conducted.
OBJECTIVE: To review the indications and efficacy of spinal cord stimulation, particularly in reference to chronic pain of spinal origin. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The first spinal cord stimulation was implanted by Shealy in 1967 via a subarachnoid route. Early systems were plagued with a high rate of complications and technical problems. With the evolving technology, especially the advent of multichannel programmable systems and more precise epidural placement, the ability of spinal cord stimulation to treat various pain syndromes improved. This article reviews the literature on spinal cord stimulation from 1967 to the present.
METHODS: The literature is reviewed, with a particular focus on recent studies investigating the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation for low back pain.
RESULTS: Most studies are limited by the same flaws, namely, retrospective study design. At this writing, the few published randomized prospective studies have suggested that spinal cord stimulation may be superior to repeat surgery. Complication rates have declined to approximately 8%, and reoperation is necessary in approximately 4% of patients. When current percutaneous techniques are used, a lead migration rate lower than 3% may be achieved. For certain topographies, laminotomy leads may be superior, particularly with regard to low back pain.
CONCLUSIONS: The ultimate efficacy of spinal cord stimulation remains to be determined, primarily because of limitations associated with the published literature. However, on the basis of the current evidence, it may represent a valuable treatment option, particularly for patients with chronic pain of predominantly neuropathic origin and topographical distribution involving the extremities. The potential treatment of other pain topographies and etiologies by spinal cord stimulation continues to be studied.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12435997     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200211150-00035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  5 in total

Review 1.  Activity-dependent plasticity in spinal cord injury.

Authors:  James V Lynskey; Adam Belanger; Ranu Jung
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2008

2.  Treatment of a Large Cohort of Veterans Experiencing Musculoskeletal Disorders with Spinal Cord Stimulation in the Veterans Health Administration: Veteran Characteristics and Outcomes.

Authors:  Laura D Wandner; Brenda T Fenton; Joseph L Goulet; Constance M Carroll; Alicia Heapy; Diana M Higgins; Matthew J Bair; Friedhelm Sandbrink; Robert D Kerns
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 3.133

3.  Spontaneous lead breakage in implanted spinal cord stimulation systems.

Authors:  Tae Hun Kim; Pyung Bok Lee; Hye Min Son; Jong Bum Choi; Jee Youn Moon
Journal:  Korean J Pain       Date:  2010-03-10

4.  Spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2005-03-01

5.  Repetitive H-wave device stimulation and program induces significant increases in the range of motion of post operative rotator cuff reconstruction in a double-blinded randomized placebo controlled human study.

Authors:  Kenneth Blum; Amanda L C Chen; Thomas J H Chen; Roger L Waite; B William Downs; Eric R Braverman; Mallory M Kerner; Stella M Savarimuthu; Nicholas DiNubile
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2009-10-29       Impact factor: 2.362

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.