Sofie Dietvorst1, Thomas Decramer1,2, Robin Lemmens3, Bart Morlion4, Bart Nuttin1,2, Tom Theys1,2. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 2. Experimental Neurosurgery & Neuroanatomy, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 3. Department of Neurology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 4. Leuven Centre for Algology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Pain encountered at the site of the implantable pulse generator (IPG) after invasive neuromodulation is a well-known and important complication. The reported incidence of implant site pain is variable, ranging between 0.4 and 35%. Implant site pain has never been systematically studied and no treatment guidelines are available. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed an observational study (study registration number mp05728) on the incidence and the determining factors of implant site pain, the subjective rating of intensity by sending questionnaires (n = 554) to our cohort of neuromodulation patients with IPGs. The number of revision surgeries and explants due to implant site pain were also analyzed. RESULTS: Total response rate was 50% (n = 278). Pain patients suffered significantly (p < 0.05) more often from IPG site pain than other patients undergoing neuromodulation therapies. Up to 64% of patients undergoing spinal cord stimulation reported IPG site discomfort or pain. Severe pocket pain was found in up to 8% of patients. No association was found between other variables (age, BMI, duration of follow-up, gender, smoking, number of pocket surgeries) and implant site pain. CONCLUSION: Pocket pain represents an important problem after invasive neuromodulation and is more prevalent in pain patients. We believe further technological improvements with miniaturized IPGs will impact the incidence of pocket pain and could even obviate the need for an IPG pocket.
OBJECTIVES: Pain encountered at the site of the implantable pulse generator (IPG) after invasive neuromodulation is a well-known and important complication. The reported incidence of implant site pain is variable, ranging between 0.4 and 35%. Implant site pain has never been systematically studied and no treatment guidelines are available. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed an observational study (study registration number mp05728) on the incidence and the determining factors of implant site pain, the subjective rating of intensity by sending questionnaires (n = 554) to our cohort of neuromodulation patients with IPGs. The number of revision surgeries and explants due to implant site pain were also analyzed. RESULTS: Total response rate was 50% (n = 278). Pain patients suffered significantly (p < 0.05) more often from IPG site pain than other patients undergoing neuromodulation therapies. Up to 64% of patients undergoing spinal cord stimulation reported IPG site discomfort or pain. Severe pocket pain was found in up to 8% of patients. No association was found between other variables (age, BMI, duration of follow-up, gender, smoking, number of pocket surgeries) and implant site pain. CONCLUSION: Pocket pain represents an important problem after invasive neuromodulation and is more prevalent in pain patients. We believe further technological improvements with miniaturized IPGs will impact the incidence of pocket pain and could even obviate the need for an IPG pocket.
Authors: Jonathan Bao; Olga Khazen; Zachary T Olmsted; Guy Gechtman; Miriam M Shao; Marisa DiMarzio; Gregory Topp; Vishad V Sukul; Michael D Staudt; Julie G Pilitsis Journal: Pain Med Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 3.750
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
Authors: Mohammad Mehdi Hajiabadi; Martin Jakobs; Petya Vicheva; Andreas Unterberg; Rezvan Ahmadi Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-05-17 Impact factor: 4.379