Quantitative Sensory Testing in Patients With Chronic Unilateral Radicular Neuropathic Pain and Active Spinal Cord Stimulation

Objectives. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment option for chronic radicular neuropathic pain syndromes. This prospective study was performed to examine the peripheral effects of SCS on sensation using quantitative sensory testing (QST). Materials and Methods. We measured two consecutive QST measurements for thermal, tactile‐static, tactile‐dynamic, vibratory, and pain sensation of the lower limbs in seven patients with chronic unilateral radicular neuropathic pain who underwent SCS implantation for their pain. Measurements were performed when SCS was turned off and once again during SCS and subsequent reduced pain levels. Results. Baseline QST demonstrated significantly increased thresholds for tactile and warm and cold detection in the pain area. With SCS active, a significant reduction of the cold and warm perception and mechanical detection thresholds was found on the painful side (p < 0.01). Although not significant (p > 0.01), altered sensory thresholds with active SCS also were found at the healthy side where no paresthesias were felt. Conclusion. SCS leads to bilateral subclinical effects even if the evoked paresthesias are only unilateral. Pain perception thresholds are not altered with therapeutic SCS.     

Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Upper and Lower Extremity Neuropathic Pain due to Lyme Disease

Background. Lyme disease is caused by Borrelia, a bacterium transmitted by the bite of a deer tick. A slow developing encephalopathy or an axonal polyneuropathy with distal paresthesia and spinal or radicular pain rarely occurs and can be hard to treat. Materials and Methods. We report here the case of a 44‐year‐old woman with four‐limb, intolerable, neuropathic pain as sequelae to Lyme disease, which was resistant to conservative measures and was treated successfully with concurrent, thoracic, and cervical percutaneous spinal cord stimulation (SCS). Results. After 18 months of therapy and follow‐up, this patient's analgesia, as a result of SCS, continues to be excellent, with almost complete subjective pain relief and cessation of adjuvant analgesic medication. Conclusions. SCS may be efficacious for the treatment of neuropathic pain due to Lyme disease.     

Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Pain in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Objective: Chronic back and leg pain associated with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is common in the elderly. Surgical decompression is usually performed when conservative treatments fail. We present an evaluation of the long‐term outcome of patients suffering from symptomatic LSS treated with spinal cord stimulation (SCS). Materials and Methods: Data were collected prospectively in three independent registries in three European centers. Pooled data were analyzed retrospectively. Changes in pain intensity, functional status, and analgesic medication were compared at baseline and at the last available follow‐up. Demographic data as well as details regarding the implantation procedure and any adverse events were systematically recorded. Results: Data were recorded in 69 patients with a mean follow‐up period of 27 months. All patients showed clinically and statistically significant improvement in pain relief, the visual analog scale decreasing from 7.4 ± 2.3 to 2.8 ± 2.4 (p < 0.05). The use of analgesic medication decreased and the functional status improved. Conclusion: Spinal cord stimulation seems to be effective in the treatment of patients suffering from chronic pain associated with LSS. Being less invasive and reversible, SCS should be considered before surgical decompression, particularly in patients with increased risks associated with back surgery.     

Long-Term Outcome of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Pain Management

Study Design. This is a retrospective study on 102 patients subjected to implantation of a spinal cord stimulation system for nonmalignant chronic pain management. The study was conducted through an extensive questionnaire and telephone interviews by a neutral third party. All the patients were implanted with a complete spinal cord stimulation system without a preliminary trial with a temporarily implanted electrode. Diagnostic categories were neuropathic pain, failed back syndrome, spinal cord Injury pain, and miscellaneous. Average follow-up was 3.8 years (6 months to 8 years). Patients were divided in two groups: all the implanted patients in the survey (Group A) and the implanted patients who experienced some degree of pain relief with the stimulation (Group B). Group B (80 patients) closely matches previously published series where an initial temporary screening was performed. Results. Twenty-one percent of the patients never experienced any pain relief. Of the remaining 80, 75% were still using the stimulator. Fifty-one percent of the 80 patients were experiencing good to excellent results and 20% moderate results. There was no reduction over time in the amount of pain relief in patients who initially had at least 75% pain relief. Patients with initial pain relief between 50% and 74% observed a moderate reduction in their pain relief after two years. Patients who initially experienced less than 50% pain relief observed a dramatic reduction in their results in the long term follow-up. Psychological screening contributed to the success of the procedure. Conclusions. With proper medical and psychological screening and with demonstrated initial pain relief, spinal cord stimulation remains an effective modality in the long-term management of severe chronic pain.     

Quantitative Sensory Testing of Spinal Cord and Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in Chronic Pain Patients

Background/Objectives: The physiological mechanisms underlying the pain-modulatory effects of clinical neurostimulation therapies, such as spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS), are only partially understood. In this pilot prospective study, we used patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and quantitative sensory testing (QST) to investigate the physiological effects and possible mechanisms of action of SCS and DRGS therapies.Materials and Methods: We tested 16 chronic pain patients selected for SCS and DRGS therapy, before and after treatment. PROs included pain intensity, pain-related symptoms (e.g., pain interference, pain coping, sleep interference) and disability, and general health status. QST included assessments of vibration detection theshold (VDT), pressure pain threshold (PPT) and tolerance (PPToL), temporal summation (TS), and conditioned pain modulation (CPM), at the most painful site.Results: Following treatment, all participants reported significant improvements in PROs (e.g., reduced pain intensity [p < 0.001], pain-related functional impairment [or pain interference] and disability [p = 0.001 for both]; better pain coping [p = 0.03], sleep [p = 0.002]), and overall health [p = 0.005]). QST showed a significant treatment-induced increase in PPT (p = 0.002) and PPToL (p = 0.011), and a significant reduction in TS (p = 0.033) at the most painful site, but showed no effects on VDT and CPM. We detected possible associations between a few QST measures and a few PROs. Notably, higher TS was associated with increased pain interference scores at pre-treatment (r = 0.772, p = 0.009), and a reduction in TS was associated with the reduction in pain interference (r = 0.669, p = 0.034) and pain disability (r = 0.690, p = 0.027) scores with treatment.Conclusions: Our preliminary findings suggest significant clinical and therapeutic benefits associated with SCS and DRGS therapies, and the possible ability of these therapies to modulate pain processing within the central nervous system. Replication of our pilot findings in future, larger studies is necessary to characterize the physiological mechanisms of SCS and DRGS therapies.     

Factors Contributing to Spinal Cord Stimulation Outcomes for Chronic Pain

ObjectiveSpinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been shown to be a safe and effective therapy for patients with chronic pain. However, some patients do not obtain or maintain adequate pain relief after SCS. The goal of this study was to identify factors that affect patient outcome with regard to SCS.Materials and MethodsA retrospective analysis of electronic medical records at a single site was performed. Records for 181 patients who received SCS implants from 2014 through 2016 were collected with follow-up data captured up to August 2019. Patient outcome was measured by device explantation and patient benefit from the SCS. Study parameters included demographic characteristics, history of pain, SCS implant characteristics, and postimplantation events.ResultsAn earlier diagnosis of radiculopathy was associated with an increased risk of poor benefit (relative risk [RR], 1.81; 95% CI, 1.19–2.74; p = 0.008). Postimplantation falls were associated with an increased risk of poor benefit (RR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.48–3.17; p = 0.009). Device manufacturer was associated with both patient benefit and explantation. Device 2 was associated with a reduced risk of poor benefit (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.32–0.85; p = 0.009). Device 4 was associated with an increased risk of poor benefit (RR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.14–2.55; p = 0.02) and increased risk of device explantation (RR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.2–6.02; p = 0.03).ConclusionsPatient outcome was associated with diagnosis, postimplantation falls, and device manufacturer. Further investigation is recommended to confirm associations through prospective studies that can more accurately quantify patient outcome over longer periods.     

Sacral Nerve and Spinal Cord Stimulation for Intractable Neuropathic Pain Caused by Spinal Cord Infarction

Central cord pain is very difficult to relieve, even with the many kinds of medical and surgical treatments available. Following spinal cord infarctions, central cord pain can develop. The problems that may arise could include limb pain, pelvic pain, difficulties voiding, and difficulties defecating. We are reporting a case of central cord pain caused by a spinal cord infarction of the conus medullaris. Limb pain was reduced by spinal cord stimulation. Voiding and defecation difficulties and pelvic pain were reduced by sacral nerve stimulation. Thus, in a case involving both intractable limb and pelvic pain, a combination therapy of these two stimulations might be an effective treatment modality.     

Spinal Cord Stimulation Paradigms and Pain Relief: A Preclinical Systematic Review on Modulation of the Central Inflammatory Response in Neuropathic Pain

ObjectivesSpinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a last-resort treatment for patients with chronic neuropathic pain. The mechanism underlying SCS and pain relief is not yet fully understood. Because the inflammatory balance between pro- and anti-inflammatory molecules in the spinal nociceptive network is pivotal in the development and maintenance of neuropathic pain, the working mechanism of SCS is suggested to be related to the modulation of this balance. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize and understand the effects of different SCS paradigms on the central inflammatory balance in the spinal cord.Materials and MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed. All articles studying the effects of SCS on inflammatory or glial markers in neuropathic pain models were included. A quality assessment was performed on predetermined entities of bias.ResultsA total of 11 articles were eligible for this systematic review. In general, induction of neuropathic pain in rats results in a proinflammatory state and at the same time an increased activity/expression of microglial and astroglial cells in the spinal cord dorsal horn. Conventional SCS seems to further enhance this proinflammatory state and increase the messenger RNA expression of microglial markers, but it also results in a decrease in microglial protein marker levels. High-frequency and especially differential targeted multiplexed SCS can not only restore the balance between pro- and anti-inflammatory molecules but also minimize the overexpression/activation of glial cells. Quality assessment and risk of bias analysis of the studies included make it clear that the results of these preclinical studies must be interpreted with caution.ConclusionsIn summary, the preclinical findings tend to indicate that there is a distinct SCS paradigm–related effect in the modulation of the central inflammatory balance of the spinal dorsal horn.     

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Visceral Pain From Chronic Pancreatitis

Background and Objectives: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) may reduce pain scores and improve function in patients with various chronic abdominal pain syndromes including chronic pancreatitis. Here described is a large clinical experience in SCS for severe chronic pancreatitis. Methods: SCS was trialed in 30 patients with chronic pancreatitis. SCS trials lasted 7–14 days (median 9 days). SCS lead tips were mostly positioned at the T5 (N= 10) or T6 (N= 10) vertebral level. Results: Twenty‐four patients (80%) reported at least 50% pain relief on completion of the trial. Among these, pre‐trial visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores averaged 8 ± 1.6 (standard deviation) and opioid use averaged 165 ± 120 mg morphine sulfate equivalents. During the trial, VAS pain scores decreased to 3.67 ± 2 cm (p < 0.001, Mann–Whitney Rank Sum Test) and opioid use decreased to 105 ± 101 mg morphine equivalent a day. Six patients failed the trial; one was lost to follow‐up; in three patients after the implantation, the system had to be removed due to infection or lead migration; and 20 were followed for the whole year. For 20 patients followed for the whole year, VAS pain scores remained low (3.6 ± 2 cm; p < 0.001) at one year, as did opioid use (48.6 ± 58 mg morphine equivalents). Conclusions: SCS may be a useful therapeutic option for patients with severe visceral pain from chronic pancreatitis. Prospective trial is warranted.