Literature DB >> 32967388

Comparison of Spinal Cord Stimulation Waveforms for Treating Chronic Low Back Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Jay Karri1, Vwaire Orhurhu2, Sayed Wahezi3, Tuan Tang4, Timothy Deer5, Alaa Abd-Elsayed6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The treatment of chronic refractory low back pain (LBP) is challenging. Conservative and pharmacologic options have demonstrated limited efficacy. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been shown to be effective in reducing chronic LBP in various contexts. With emerging SCS technologies, the collective evidence of novel waveforms relative to traditional tonic stimulation for treating chronic LBP has yet to be clearly characterized.
OBJECTIVES: To provide evidence for various SCS waveforms-tonic, burst, and high frequency (HF)-relative to each other for treating chronic LBP. STUDY
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS: PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, prior systematic reviews, and reference lists were screened by 2 separate authors for all randomized trials and prospective cohort studies comparing different SCS waveforms for treatment of chronic LBP.
RESULTS: We identified 11 studies that included waveform comparisons for treating chronic LBP. Of these, 6 studies compared burst versus tonic, 2 studies compared burst versus HF, and 3 studies compared tonic versus HF. A meta-analysis of 5 studies comparing burst versus tonic was conducted and revealed pooled superiority of burst over tonic in pain reduction. One study comparing burst versus tonic was excluded given technical challenges in data extraction. LIMITATIONS: Both randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies were included for meta-analysis. Several studies included a high risk of bias in at least one domain.
CONCLUSIONS: Burst stimulation is superior to tonic stimulation for treating chronic LBP. However, superiority among other waveforms has yet to be clearly established given some heterogeneity and limitations in evidence. Given the relative novelty of burst and HF SCS waveforms, evidence of longitudinal efficacy is needed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chronic low back pain; burst; spinal cord stimulation; tonic

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32967388

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain Physician        ISSN: 1533-3159            Impact factor:   4.965


  3 in total

1.  The Effect of Spinal Cord Stimulation Frequency on the Neural Response and Perceived Sensation in Patients With Chronic Pain.

Authors:  Gerrit Eduard Gmel; Rosana Santos Escapa; John L Parker; Dave Mugan; Adnan Al-Kaisy; Stefano Palmisani
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2021-01-21       Impact factor: 4.677

2.  The Challenge of Converting "Failed Spinal Cord Stimulation Syndrome" Back to Clinical Success, Using SCS Reprogramming as Salvage Therapy, through Neurostimulation Adapters Combined with 3D-Computerized Pain Mapping Assessment: A Real Life Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Philippe Rigoard; Amine Ounajim; Lisa Goudman; Tania Banor; France Héroux; Manuel Roulaud; Etienne Babin; Bénédicte Bouche; Philippe Page; Bertille Lorgeoux; Sandrine Baron; Nihel Adjali; Kevin Nivole; Mathilde Many; Elodie Charrier; Delphine Rannou; Laure Poupin; Chantal Wood; Romain David; Maarten Moens; Maxime Billot
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-01-05       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 3.  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
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.