Literature DB >> 22150909

Acute vs. Prolonged Screening for Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Pain.

Martin E Weinand1, Hassan Madhusudan, Bennett Davis, Miguel Melgar.   

Abstract

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) was performed to test the hypothesis that pain relief data during acute (15 minute intraoperative) and prolonged (5 day) SCS screening have equivalent predictive value for long-term successful SCS control of chronic low back pain and/or lower extremity pain. A retrospective series of patients with chronic low back and/or lower extremity pain underwent either percutaneous or open (ie, laminectomy) SCS implantation during which acute intraoperative followed by prolonged screening trials for percentage pain relief (%PR) were performed. Data were analyzed for (a) correlation between positive predictive value (PPV) of acute and prolonged SCS screening for %PR and (b) PPV of acute vs. prolonged screening %PR for long-term SCS %PR. Fifty-four patients (male/female = 38/16; mean age ± SEM = 54.2 ± 2.0 years) underwent thoracic (T) (mean level = T9.1 ± 0.4) percutaneous (n = 33) and laminectomy (n = 21) implantation of SCS for acute (15 minute intraoperative) and prolonged (5.0 ± 0.3 days) SCS screening of pain relief. Correlation between successful (> 50%PR) pain relief during acute (n = 53/54, PPV = 98%) and prolonged (n = 47/52, PPV = 90%) screening was significant (Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient, SRCC = 0.462, p < 0.01). After permanent SCS implantation, at mean follow-up = 9.4 ± 1.5 months, acute and prolonged SCS screening %PR PPV's were each statistically significant for predicting long-term SCS relief of chronic pain (n = 31/38, PPV = 82% and n = 31/36, PPV = 86%, SRCC = 0.462 and 0.433, respectively, p < 0.01).  We conclude that successful pain relief during acute SCS screening is highly correlated with successful prolonged SCS screening of chronic low back and/or lower extremity pain relief. Acute and prolonged SCS screening appear to have equivalent predictive value for successful long-term SCS control of chronic low back and/or lower extremity pain. These preliminary results suggest potential justification for eliminating prolonged and retaining acute (intraoperative) SCS screening for selection of permanent SCS implantation candidates.

Entities:  

Year:  2003        PMID: 22150909     DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1403.2003.03002.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuromodulation        ISSN: 1094-7159


  10 in total

Review 1.  Spinal cord stimulation programming: a crash course.

Authors:  Breanna Sheldon; Michael D Staudt; Lucian Williams; Tessa A Harland; Julie G Pilitsis
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 3.042

2.  Explantation Rates and Healthcare Resource Utilization in Spinal Cord Stimulation.

Authors:  Jing L Han; Kelly R Murphy; Syed Mohammed Qasim Hussaini; Siyun Yang; Beth Parente; Jichun Xie; Promila Pagadala; Shivanand P Lad
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2017-02-15

Review 3.  Spinal cord stimulation with implanted epidural paddle lead relieves chronic axial low back pain.

Authors:  David A Stidd; Sergio Rivero; Martin E Weinand
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 3.133

4.  Does a Screening Trial for Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients with Chronic Pain of Neuropathic Origin have Clinical Utility and Cost-Effectiveness? (TRIAL-STIM Study): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Sam Eldabe; Ashish Gulve; Simon Thomson; Ganesan Baranidharan; Rui Duarte; Susan Jowett; Harbinder Sandhu; Raymond Chadwick; Morag Brookes; Anisah Tariq; Jenny Earle; Jill Bell; Anu Kansal; Shelley Rhodes; Rod S Taylor
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-11-16       Impact factor: 2.279

5.  Redefining Spinal Cord Stimulation "Trials": A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Single-Stage Wireless Permanent Implantable Devices.

Authors:  Richard B North; Aaron Calodney; Robert Bolash; Konstantin V Slavin; Michael Creamer; Richard Rauck; Payam Vahedifar; Ira Fox; Cuneyt Özaktay; Sunil Panchal; Niek Vanquathem
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2019-06-03

6.  Multicentre, double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial of 10 khz high-frequency spinal cord stimulation for chronic neuropathic low back pain (MODULATE-LBP): a trial protocol.

Authors:  Adnan Al-Kaisy; Jonathan Royds; Stefano Palmisani; David Pang; Samuel Wesley; Rod S Taylor; Andrew Cook; Sam Eldabe; Lance McCracken; Rui Duarte; Jeremy Fairbank
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-01-28       Impact factor: 2.279

7.  60-Day PNS Treatment May Improve Identification of Delayed Responders and Delayed Non-Responders to Neurostimulation for Pain Relief.

Authors:  Ramana Naidu; Sean Li; Mehul J Desai; Samir Sheth; Nathan D Crosby; Joseph W Boggs
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 3.133

8.  The Volume-Outcome Effect: Impact on Trial-to-Permanent Conversion Rates in Spinal Cord Stimulation.

Authors:  Kelly Ryan Murphy; Jing L Han; Syed Mohammed Qasim Hussaini; Siyun Yang; Beth Parente; Jichun Xie; Shivanand P Lad
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2016-10-03

9.  Postoperative Infections Associated With Prolonged Spinal Cord Stimulation Trial Duration (PROMISE RCT).

Authors:  Richard North; Mehul J Desai; Johan Vangeneugden; Christian Raftopoulos; Tony Van Havenbergh; Marc Deruytter; Jean-Michel Remacle; Jane Shipley; Ye Tan; Mary Jo Johnson; Carine Van den Abeele; Philippe Rigoard
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2020-04-08

10.  Cost-Effectiveness Model Shows Superiority of Wireless Spinal Cord Stimulation Implantation Without a Separate Trial.

Authors:  Richard B North; Harish S Parihar; Shawn D Spencer; Arthur F Spalding; Jane Shipley
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2020-02-17
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.