Literature DB >> 30828946

Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Study Protocol Using Human Spinal Cord Recording Comparing Safety, Efficacy, and Neurophysiological Responses Between Patients Being Treated With Evoked Compound Action Potential-Controlled Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation or Open-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation (the Evoke Study).

Robert Levy1, Timothy R Deer2, Lawrence Poree3, Steven M Rosen4, Leonardo Kapural5, Kasra Amirdelfan6, Nicole Soliday7, Angela Leitner7, Nagy Mekhail8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The spinal cord (SC) response to stimulation has yet to be studied in a pivotal clinical study. We report the study design of an ongoing multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled, parallel-arm study of an evoked compound action potential (ECAP) controlled closed-loop spinal cord stimulation (SCS) system, which aims to gain U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval.
METHODS: This study will enroll 134 SCS candidates with chronic trunk and limb pain from up to 20 United States sites. Subjects are randomized 1:1 to receive ECAP-controlled closed-loop or open-loop, conventional SCS. The primary objective is noninferiority of closed-loop stimulation determined by the proportion of subjects with ≥50% reduction in overall trunk and limb pain and no increase in pain medications at the three-month visit. If noninferiority is met, superiority is tested. In addition, measures recommended by IMMPACT (e.g., pain intensity, functional disability, emotional functioning, quality of life, impression of change, and sleep), neurophysiological properties (e.g., SC activation, conduction velocity, chronaxie, and rheobase), and safety are analyzed. DISCUSSION: All approved SCS therapies, regardless of the presence or absence of stimulation induced paresthesias, produce fixed-output stimuli; that is, the energy delivered from the electrode array has a defined output irrespective of the neural response of SC fibers. An SCS system has been developed that directly measures the neurophysiologic activation of the SC to stimulation (i.e., ECAP amplitude) and uses this information in a feedback mechanism to produce closed-loop SCS to maintain optimal and stable activation of the SC. This study represents the first randomized, double-blind, pivotal study in the field of neuromodulation to measure SC activation in ECAP-controlled closed-loop versus open-loop stimulation and is expected to yield important information regarding differences in safety, efficacy, and neurophysiological properties. The potential clinical utility of these objective measurements of SC activation and other neurophysiological properties promises to improve outcomes of SCS for chronic pain patients.
© 2019 International Neuromodulation Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  back pain; chronic pain; closed-loop; double-blind method; randomized controlled trial; spinal cord stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30828946     DOI: 10.1111/ner.12932

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


  6 in total

Review 1.  Neurostimulation methods in the treatment of chronic pain.

Authors:  X Moisset; M Lanteri-Minet; D Fontaine
Journal:  J Neural Transm (Vienna)       Date:  2019-10-21       Impact factor: 3.575

2.  Development of Machine Learning-Based Models to Predict Treatment Response to Spinal Cord Stimulation.

Authors:  Amir Hadanny; Tessa Harland; Olga Khazen; Marisa DiMarzio; Anthony Marchese; Ilknur Telkes; Vishad Sukul; Julie G Pilitsis
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2022-05-01       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  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

4.  Research design considerations for randomized controlled trials of spinal cord stimulation for pain: Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials/Institute of Neuromodulation/International Neuromodulation Society recommendations.

Authors:  Nathaniel Katz; Robert H Dworkin; Richard North; Simon Thomson; Sam Eldabe; Salim M Hayek; Brian H Kopell; John Markman; Ali Rezai; Rod S Taylor; Dennis C Turk; Eric Buchser; Howard Fields; Gregory Fiore; McKenzie Ferguson; Jennifer Gewandter; Chris Hilker; Roshini Jain; Angela Leitner; John Loeser; Ewan McNicol; Turo Nurmikko; Jane Shipley; Rahul Singh; Andrea Trescot; Robert van Dongen; Lalit Venkatesan
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 6.961

5.  Selectivity of afferent microstimulation at the DRG using epineural and penetrating electrode arrays.

Authors:  Ameya C Nanivadekar; Christopher A Ayers; Robert A Gaunt; Douglas J Weber; Lee E Fisher
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2019-12-13       Impact factor: 5.043

Review 6.  Advances in Pain Medicine: a Review of New Technologies.

Authors:  Natalie Strand; Maloney J; Vinicius Tieppo Francio; Murphy M; Michal Turkiewicz; Antonios El Helou; Maita M; Covington S; Singh N; Peck J; Wie C
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2022-07-29
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.