OBJECTIVES: Motor cortex stimulation has been reported as an effective treatment for medically resistant neuropathic pain. The goal of this study is to review the efficacy of this treatment in a series of 14 patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of a consecutive series of 14 patients undergoing MCS for neuropathic pain at Stanford University Hospital and Clinics between 2002 and 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcome measure was a visual analogue scale, which patients completed prior to surgery and following each programming session. The motor cortex was localized using 1) MR image guidance, 2) intraoperative somatosensory evoked potentials and motor response to stimulation, and 3) postoperative imaging. All patients underwent extensive stimulator programming. RESULTS: Five patients exhibited a transient improvement of >50%. Of these, only two patients maintained >50% improvement to their last clinic visit. One of these patients died of unrelated causes, and the other complained of variable response at home. The median time from best to final VAS was 50 days. Average postoperative follow-up was 55.5 weeks. Postoperative imaging demonstrated appropriate lead placement in 12 patients. The other two patients did not undergo postoperative imaging. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort of 14 patients with neuropathic pain, motor cortex stimulation failed to produce acceptable long-term benefit. Possible reasons for this failure are discussed in the context of a small retrospective study.
OBJECTIVES: Motor cortex stimulation has been reported as an effective treatment for medically resistant neuropathic pain. The goal of this study is to review the efficacy of this treatment in a series of 14 patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The records of a consecutive series of 14 patients undergoing MCS for neuropathic pain at Stanford University Hospital and Clinics between 2002 and 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcome measure was a visual analogue scale, which patients completed prior to surgery and following each programming session. The motor cortex was localized using 1) MR image guidance, 2) intraoperative somatosensory evoked potentials and motor response to stimulation, and 3) postoperative imaging. All patients underwent extensive stimulator programming. RESULTS: Five patients exhibited a transient improvement of >50%. Of these, only two patients maintained >50% improvement to their last clinic visit. One of these patients died of unrelated causes, and the other complained of variable response at home. The median time from best to final VAS was 50 days. Average postoperative follow-up was 55.5 weeks. Postoperative imaging demonstrated appropriate lead placement in 12 patients. The other two patients did not undergo postoperative imaging. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort of 14 patients with neuropathic pain, motor cortex stimulation failed to produce acceptable long-term benefit. Possible reasons for this failure are discussed in the context of a small retrospective study.
Authors: Anthony T O'Brien; Rivadavio Amorim; R Jarrett Rushmore; Uri Eden; Linda Afifi; Laura Dipietro; Timothy Wagner; Antoni Valero-Cabré Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2016-11-09 Impact factor: 3.169
Authors: Dylan J H A Henssen; Erkan Kurt; Anne-Marie van Cappellen van Walsum; Inge Arnts; Jonne Doorduin; Tamas Kozicz; Robert van Dongen; Ronald H M A Bartels Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-01-30 Impact factor: 3.240