Brian M Ilfeld1, Rodney A Gabriel1, Michael F Saulino2,3, John Chae4,5,6, P Hunter Peckham7, Stuart A Grant8, Christopher A Gilmore9,10,11, Michael C Donohue12, Matthew G deBock13, Amorn Wongsarnpigoon13, Joseph W Boggs13. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, U.S.A. 2. MossRehab, Elkins Park, PA, U.S.A. 3. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Philadelphia, PA, U.S.A. 4. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, U.S.A. 5. MetroHealth Rehabilitation Institute, MetroHealth System, Cleveland, OH, U.S.A. 6. Cleveland Functional Electrical Stimulation Center, Cleveland, OH, U.S.A. 7. Biomedical Engineering and Orthopaedics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, U.S.A. 8. Department of Anesthesiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, U.S.A. 9. Department of Anesthesiology, Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, NC, U.S.A. 10. The Center for Clinical Research, Winston-Salem, NC, U.S.A. 11. Carolinas Pain Institute, Winston-Salem, NC, U.S.A. 12. Department of Neurology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, U.S.A. 13. SPR Therapeutics, LLC, Chapel Hill, NC, U.S.A.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous neurostimulation of the peripheral nervous system involves the insertion of a wire "lead" through an introducing needle to target a nerve/plexus or a motor point within a muscle. Electrical current may then be passed from an external generator through the skin via the lead for various therapeutic goals, including providing analgesia. With extended use of percutaneous leads sometimes greater than a month, infection is a concern. It was hypothesized that the infection rate of leads with a coiled design is lower than for leads with a noncoiled cylindrical design. METHODS: The literature was retrospectively reviewed for clinical studies of percutaneous neurostimulation of the peripheral nervous system of greater than 2 days that included explicit information on adverse events. The primary endpoint was the number of infections per 1,000 indwelling days. RESULTS: Forty-three studies were identified that met inclusion criteria involving coiled (n = 21) and noncoiled (n = 25) leads (3 studies involved both). The risk of infection with noncoiled leads was estimated to be 25 times greater than with coiled leads (95% confidence interval [CI] 2 to 407, P = 0.006). The infection rates were estimated to be 0.03 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.13) infections per 1,000 indwelling days for coiled leads and 0.83 (95% CI 0.16 to 4.33) infections per 1,000 indwelling days for noncoiled leads (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous leads used for neurostimulation of the peripheral nervous system have a much lower risk of infection with a coiled design compared with noncoiled leads: approximately 1 infection for every 30,000 vs. 1,200 indwelling days, respectively.
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous neurostimulation of the peripheral nervous system involves the insertion of a wire "lead" through an introducing needle to target a nerve/plexus or a motor point within a muscle. Electrical current may then be passed from an external generator through the skin via the lead for various therapeutic goals, including providing analgesia. With extended use of percutaneous leads sometimes greater than a month, infection is a concern. It was hypothesized that the infection rate of leads with a coiled design is lower than for leads with a noncoiled cylindrical design. METHODS: The literature was retrospectively reviewed for clinical studies of percutaneous neurostimulation of the peripheral nervous system of greater than 2 days that included explicit information on adverse events. The primary endpoint was the number of infections per 1,000 indwelling days. RESULTS: Forty-three studies were identified that met inclusion criteria involving coiled (n = 21) and noncoiled (n = 25) leads (3 studies involved both). The risk of infection with noncoiled leads was estimated to be 25 times greater than with coiled leads (95% confidence interval [CI] 2 to 407, P = 0.006). The infection rates were estimated to be 0.03 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.13) infections per 1,000 indwelling days for coiled leads and 0.83 (95% CI 0.16 to 4.33) infections per 1,000 indwelling days for noncoiled leads (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous leads used for neurostimulation of the peripheral nervous system have a much lower risk of infection with a coiled design compared with noncoiled leads: approximately 1 infection for every 30,000 vs. 1,200 indwelling days, respectively.
Authors: Marc A Huntoon; Bryan C Hoelzer; Abram H Burgher; Mark Friedrich B Hurdle; Elizabeth A Huntoon Journal: Reg Anesth Pain Med Date: 2008 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 6.288
Authors: John Chae; Mary Y Harley; Terri Z Hisel; Catherine M Corrigan; Jeffrey A Demchak; Yu-Tung Wong; Zi-Ping Fang Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2009-01-20 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Natalie H Strand; Ryan D'Souza; Christopher Wie; Stephen Covington; Moustafa Maita; John Freeman; Jillian Maloney Journal: Curr Pain Headache Rep Date: 2021-05-11
Authors: Brian M Ilfeld; Harold Gelfand; Sandeep Dhanjal; Robert Hackworth; Anthony Plunkett; Alparslan Turan; Alice M Vijjeswarapu; Steven P Cohen; James C Eisenach; Scott Griffith; Steven Hanling; Edward J Mascha; Daniel I Sessler Journal: Pain Med Date: 2020-12-12 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Brian M Ilfeld; Scott T Ball; Steven P Cohen; Steven R Hanling; Ian M Fowler; Amorn Wongsarnpigoon; Joseph W Boggs Journal: Mil Med Date: 2019-03-01 Impact factor: 1.437
Authors: Brian M Ilfeld; Anthony Plunkett; Alice M Vijjeswarapu; Robert Hackworth; Sandeep Dhanjal; Alparslan Turan; Steven P Cohen; James C Eisenach; Scott Griffith; Steven Hanling; Daniel I Sessler; Edward J Mascha; Dongsheng Yang; Joseph W Boggs; Amorn Wongsarnpigoon; Harold Gelfand Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 8.986
Authors: Brian M Ilfeld; Christopher A Gilmore; Stuart A Grant; Michael P Bolognesi; Daniel J Del Gaizo; Amorn Wongsarnpigoon; Joseph W Boggs Journal: J Orthop Surg Res Date: 2017-01-13 Impact factor: 2.359
Authors: Brian M Ilfeld; Stuart A Grant; Christopher A Gilmore; John Chae; Richard D Wilson; Amorn Wongsarnpigoon; Joseph W Boggs Journal: Pain Pract Date: 2016-12-30 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Christopher A Gilmore; Mehul J Desai; Thomas J Hopkins; Sean Li; Michael J DePalma; Timothy R Deer; Warren Grace; Abram H Burgher; Puneet K Sayal; Kasra Amirdelfan; Steven P Cohen; Meredith J McGee; Joseph W Boggs Journal: Pain Pract Date: 2021-07-27 Impact factor: 3.079
Authors: Brian M Ilfeld; Rodney A Gabriel; Engy T Said; Amanda M Monahan; Jacklynn F Sztain; Wendy B Abramson; Bahareh Khatibi; John J Finneran; Pia T Jaeger; Alexandra K Schwartz; Sonya S Ahmed Journal: Reg Anesth Pain Med Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 6.288