Literature DB >> 34062145

Neuromodulation for chronic pain.

Helena Knotkova1, Clement Hamani2, Eellan Sivanesan3, María Francisca Elgueta Le Beuffe4, Jee Youn Moon5, Steven P Cohen6, Marc A Huntoon7.   

Abstract

Neuromodulation is an expanding area of pain medicine that incorporates an array of non-invasive, minimally invasive, and surgical electrical therapies. In this Series paper, we focus on spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapies discussed within the framework of other invasive, minimally invasive, and non-invasive neuromodulation therapies. These therapies include deep brain and motor cortex stimulation, peripheral nerve stimulation, and the non-invasive treatments of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. SCS methods with electrical variables that differ from traditional SCS have been approved. Although methods devoid of paraesthesias (eg, high frequency) should theoretically allow for placebo-controlled trials, few have been done. There is low-to-moderate quality evidence that SCS is superior to reoperation or conventional medical management for failed back surgery syndrome, and conflicting evidence as to the superiority of traditional SCS over sham stimulation or between different SCS modalities. Peripheral nerve stimulation technologies have also undergone rapid development and become less invasive, including many that are placed percutaneously. There is low-to-moderate quality evidence that peripheral nerve stimulation is effective for neuropathic pain in an extremity, low quality evidence that it is effective for back pain with or without leg pain, and conflicting evidence that it can prevent migraines. In the USA and many areas in Europe, deep brain and motor cortex stimulation are not approved for chronic pain, but are used off-label for refractory cases. Overall, there is mixed evidence supporting brain stimulation, with most sham-controlled trials yielding negative findings. Regarding non-invasive modalities, there is moderate quality evidence that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation does not provide meaningful benefit for chronic pain in general, but conflicting evidence regarding pain relief for neuropathic pain and headaches. For transcranial direct current stimulation, there is low-quality evidence supporting its benefit for chronic pain, but conflicting evidence regarding a small treatment effect for neuropathic pain and headaches. For transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, there is low-quality evidence that it is superior to sham or no treatment for neuropathic pain, but conflicting evidence for non-neuropathic pain. Future research should focus on better evaluating the short-term and long-term effectiveness of all neuromodulation modalities and whether they decrease health-care use, and on refining selection criteria and treatment variables.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34062145     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00794-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  17 in total

Review 1.  Does TENS Reduce the Intensity of Acute and Chronic Pain? A Comprehensive Appraisal of the Characteristics and Outcomes of 169 Reviews and 49 Meta-Analyses.

Authors:  Carole A Paley; Priscilla G Wittkopf; Gareth Jones; Mark I Johnson
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2021-10-04       Impact factor: 2.430

Review 2.  Non-invasive Brain Stimulation for Central Neuropathic Pain.

Authors:  Qi-Hao Yang; Yong-Hui Zhang; Shu-Hao Du; Yu-Chen Wang; Yu Fang; Xue-Qiang Wang
Journal:  Front Mol Neurosci       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 6.261

3.  High-definition transcranial infraslow pink noise stimulation for chronic low back pain: protocol for a pilot, safety and feasibility randomised placebo-controlled trial.

Authors:  Divya Bharatkumar Adhia; Ramakrishnan Mani; John N J Reynolds; Sven Vanneste; Dirk De Ridder
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 3.006

4.  Better Fields or Currents? A Head-to-Head Comparison of Transcranial Magnetic (rTMS) Versus Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) for Neuropathic Pain.

Authors:  Nathalie André-Obadia; Hasan Hodaj; Enkelejda Hodaj; Emile Simon; Chantal Delon-Martin; Luis Garcia-Larrea
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2022-10-20       Impact factor: 6.088

Review 5.  Neuropathic Pain in Multiple Sclerosis and Its Animal Models: Focus on Mechanisms, Knowledge Gaps and Future Directions.

Authors:  Ersilia Mirabelli; Stella Elkabes
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 4.003

6.  Association of Spinal Cord Stimulator Implantation With Persistent Opioid Use in Patients With Postlaminectomy Syndrome.

Authors:  To-Nhu Vu; Chachrit Khunsriraksakul; Yakov Vorobeychik; Alison Liu; Renan Sauteraud; Ganesh Shenoy; Dajiang J Liu; Steven P Cohen
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-01-04

Review 7.  Novel Nanotechnological Approaches for Targeting Dorsal Root Ganglion (DRG) in Mitigating Diabetic Neuropathic Pain (DNP).

Authors:  Ranjana Bhandari; Ashmita Sharma; Anurag Kuhad
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-02-08       Impact factor: 5.555

8.  Difference in Analgesic Effects of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation According to the Site of Pain.

Authors:  Nobuhiko Mori; Koichi Hosomi; Asaya Nishi; Dong Dong; Takufumi Yanagisawa; Hui Ming Khoo; Naoki Tani; Satoru Oshino; Youichi Saitoh; Haruhiko Kishima
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2021-11-26       Impact factor: 3.473

Review 9.  Brain mechanisms of chronic pain: critical role of translational approach.

Authors:  Joana Barroso; Paulo Branco; Apkar Vania Apkarian
Journal:  Transl Res       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 7.012

10.  Global Research on Neuropathic Pain Rehabilitation over the Last 20 Years.

Authors:  Xuan Su; Hao-Yu Hu; Chang Xu
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2021-07-07       Impact factor: 3.599

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.