INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) with lower thoracic leads has been studied extensively. However, the evidence base for cervical SCS is less well developed, and reports of multiarea SCS lead placement are uncommon. Therefore, this single-center retrospective study evaluated outcomes from 10-kHz SCS with cervical or combined cervical and thoracic lead placement. METHOD: All patients that underwent a 10-kHz SCS trial with either cervical or combined cervical and thoracic lead placement between 2015 and 2020 were included in our study. We reviewed patient's charts for demographic information, lead placement, and pain scores up to 48 months after implantation. RESULTS: Of the 105 patients that underwent a 10-kHz SCS trial during the review period, 92 (88%) had back/neck or extremity pain that responded to therapy (≥ 50% pain relief from baseline) and received a permanent system. Sixty-two of these patients (67%) were implanted with combined cervical and thoracic leads, while 30 (33%) received cervical-only leads. Pain relief in both regions exceeded 60% at most visits throughout the 48-month study period. Throughout follow-up, the responder rate in both pain areas was consistently ≥ 70%. No unexpected adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: The 10-kHz SCS provided effective and durable pain relief with either cervical or combined cervical and thoracic leads. The efficacy and safety profile of both applications appears to be comparable to lower thoracic SCS. Our results suggest that 10-kHz SCS is a useful paresthesia-free therapeutic option for chronic neuropathic pain originating in the cervical area, as well as more complex multiarea pain presentations.
INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) with lower thoracic leads has been studied extensively. However, the evidence base for cervical SCS is less well developed, and reports of multiarea SCS lead placement are uncommon. Therefore, this single-center retrospective study evaluated outcomes from 10-kHz SCS with cervical or combined cervical and thoracic lead placement. METHOD: All patients that underwent a 10-kHz SCS trial with either cervical or combined cervical and thoracic lead placement between 2015 and 2020 were included in our study. We reviewed patient's charts for demographic information, lead placement, and pain scores up to 48 months after implantation. RESULTS: Of the 105 patients that underwent a 10-kHz SCS trial during the review period, 92 (88%) had back/neck or extremity pain that responded to therapy (≥ 50% pain relief from baseline) and received a permanent system. Sixty-two of these patients (67%) were implanted with combined cervical and thoracic leads, while 30 (33%) received cervical-only leads. Pain relief in both regions exceeded 60% at most visits throughout the 48-month study period. Throughout follow-up, the responder rate in both pain areas was consistently ≥ 70%. No unexpected adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: The 10-kHz SCS provided effective and durable pain relief with either cervical or combined cervical and thoracic leads. The efficacy and safety profile of both applications appears to be comparable to lower thoracic SCS. Our results suggest that 10-kHz SCS is a useful paresthesia-free therapeutic option for chronic neuropathic pain originating in the cervical area, as well as more complex multiarea pain presentations.
Authors: Timothy R Deer; Jay S Grider; Tim J Lamer; Jason E Pope; Steven Falowski; Corey W Hunter; David A Provenzano; Konstantin V Slavin; Marc Russo; Alexios Carayannopoulos; Jay M Shah; Michael E Harned; Jonathan M Hagedorn; Robert B Bolash; Jeff E Arle; Leo Kapural; Kasra Amirdelfan; Sameer Jain; Liong Liem; Jonathan D Carlson; Mark N Malinowski; Markus Bendel; Ajax Yang; Rohit Aiyer; Ali Valimahomed; Ajay Antony; Justin Craig; Michael A Fishman; Adnan A Al-Kaisy; Nick Christelis; Richard W Rosenquist; Robert M Levy; Nagy Mekhail Journal: Pain Med Date: 2020-11-07 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Christopher Gharibo; Gary Laux; Brian R Forzani; Christopher Sellars; Eric Kim; Shengping Zou Journal: Pain Med Date: 2013-10-18 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Adnan Al-Kaisy; Jonathan Royds; Omar Al-Kaisy; Stefano Palmisani; David Pang; Tom Smith; Nicholas Padfield; Stephany Harris; Samuel Wesley; Thomas Lamar Yearwood; Stephen Ward Journal: Reg Anesth Pain Med Date: 2020-08-26 Impact factor: 6.288
Authors: Timothy R Deer; Tim J Lamer; Jason E Pope; Steven M Falowski; David A Provenzano; Konstantin Slavin; Stanley Golovac; Jeffrey Arle; Joshua M Rosenow; Kayode Williams; Porter McRoberts; Samer Narouze; Sam Eldabe; Shivanand P Lad; Jose A De Andrés; Eric Buchser; Philippe Rigoard; Robert M Levy; Brian Simpson; Nagy Mekhail Journal: Neuromodulation Date: 2017-01-02
Authors: Timothy R Deer; Nagy Mekhail; David Provenzano; Jason Pope; Elliot Krames; Simon Thomson; Lou Raso; Allen Burton; Jose DeAndres; Eric Buchser; Asokumar Buvanendran; Liong Liem; Krishna Kumar; Syed Rizvi; Claudio Feler; David Abejon; Jack Anderson; Sam Eldabe; Philip Kim; Michael Leong; Salim Hayek; Gladstone McDowell; Lawrence Poree; Elizabeth S Brooks; Tory McJunkin; Paul Lynch; Leo Kapural; Robert D Foreman; David Caraway; Ken Alo; Samer Narouze; Robert M Levy; Richard North Journal: Neuromodulation Date: 2014-08
Authors: Timothy R Deer; Ioannis M Skaribas; Nameer Haider; John Salmon; Chong Kim; Christopher Nelson; Jerry Tracy; Anthony Espinet; Todd E Lininger; Robert Tiso; Melinda A Archacki; Stephanie N Washburn Journal: Neuromodulation Date: 2013-09-24