BACKGROUND: With advances in spinal cord stimulation (SCS) technology, particularly rechargeable implantable, patients are now being offered a wider range of parameters to treat their pain. In particular, pulse width (PW) programming ranges of rechargeable implantable pulse generators now match that of radiofrequency systems (with programmability up to 1000 microseconds. The intent of the present study was to investigate the effects of varying PW in SCS. OBJECTIVE: To understand the effects of PW programming in spinal cord stimulation (SCS). DESIGN: Single-center, prospective, randomized, single-blind evaluation of the technical and clinical outcomes of PW programming. SETTING: Acute, outpatient follow-up. METHODS: Subjects using fully-implanted SCS for > 3 months to treat chronic intractable low back and/or leg pain. Programming of a wide range (50-1000 microseconds) of programmed PW settings using each patient's otherwise unchanged 'walk-in' program. OUTCOME MEASURES: Paresthesia thresholds (perception, maximum comfortable, discomfort), paresthesia coverage and patient choice of tested programs. RESULTS: We found strength-duration parameters of chronaxie and rheobase to be 295 (242 - 326) microseconds and 2.5 (1.3 - 3.3) mA, respectively. The median PW of all patients' 'walk-out' programs was 400 microseconds, approximately 48% higher than median chronaxie (p = 0.01), suggesting that chronaxie may not relate to patient-preferred stimulation settings. We found that 7/19 patients selected new PW programs, which significantly increased their paresthesia-pain overlap by 56% on average (p = 0.047). We estimated that 10/19 patients appeared to have greater paresthesia coverage, and 8/19 patients appeared to display a 'caudal shift' of paresthesia coverage with increased PW. LIMITATIONS: Small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Variable PW programming in SCS appears to have clinical value, demonstrated by some patients improving their paresthesia-pain overlap, as well as the ability to increase and even 'steer' paresthesia coverage.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: With advances in spinal cord stimulation (SCS) technology, particularly rechargeable implantable, patients are now being offered a wider range of parameters to treat their pain. In particular, pulse width (PW) programming ranges of rechargeable implantable pulse generators now match that of radiofrequency systems (with programmability up to 1000 microseconds. The intent of the present study was to investigate the effects of varying PW in SCS. OBJECTIVE: To understand the effects of PW programming in spinal cord stimulation (SCS). DESIGN: Single-center, prospective, randomized, single-blind evaluation of the technical and clinical outcomes of PW programming. SETTING: Acute, outpatient follow-up. METHODS: Subjects using fully-implanted SCS for > 3 months to treat chronic intractable low back and/or leg pain. Programming of a wide range (50-1000 microseconds) of programmed PW settings using each patient's otherwise unchanged 'walk-in' program. OUTCOME MEASURES: Paresthesia thresholds (perception, maximum comfortable, discomfort), paresthesia coverage and patient choice of tested programs. RESULTS: We found strength-duration parameters of chronaxie and rheobase to be 295 (242 - 326) microseconds and 2.5 (1.3 - 3.3) mA, respectively. The median PW of all patients' 'walk-out' programs was 400 microseconds, approximately 48% higher than median chronaxie (p = 0.01), suggesting that chronaxie may not relate to patient-preferred stimulation settings. We found that 7/19 patients selected new PW programs, which significantly increased their paresthesia-pain overlap by 56% on average (p = 0.047). We estimated that 10/19 patients appeared to have greater paresthesia coverage, and 8/19 patients appeared to display a 'caudal shift' of paresthesia coverage with increased PW. LIMITATIONS: Small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Variable PW programming in SCS appears to have clinical value, demonstrated by some patients improving their paresthesia-pain overlap, as well as the ability to increase and even 'steer' paresthesia coverage.
Authors: Luana Colloca; Taylor Ludman; Didier Bouhassira; Ralf Baron; Anthony H Dickenson; David Yarnitsky; Roy Freeman; Andrea Truini; Nadine Attal; Nanna B Finnerup; Christopher Eccleston; Eija Kalso; David L Bennett; Robert H Dworkin; Srinivasa N Raja Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2017-02-16 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: Jacob Caylor; Rajiv Reddy; Sopyda Yin; Christina Cui; Mingxiong Huang; Charles Huang; Rao Ramesh; Dewleen G Baker; Alan Simmons; Dmitri Souza; Samer Narouze; Ricardo Vallejo; Imanuel Lerman Journal: Bioelectron Med Date: 2019-06-28
Authors: Erich Talamoni Fonoff; Andrea C de Lima-Pardini; Daniel Boari Coelho; Bernardo Assumpção Monaco; Birajara Machado; Carolina Pinto de Souza; Maria Gabriela Dos Santos Ghilardi; Clement Hamani Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2019-08-27 Impact factor: 4.003