Device-Related Complications Associated with Cylindrical Lead Spinal Cord Stimulator Implants: A Comprehensive Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an increasingly utilized therapy for the treatment of neuropathic pain conditions. Though minimally invasive and reversable, there are several important device-related complications that physicians should be aware of before offering this therapy to patients. The aim of this review is to synthesize recent studies in device-related SCS complications pertaining to cylindrical lead implantation and to discuss etiologies, symptoms and presentations, diagnostic evaluation, clinical implications, and treatment options. RECENT FINDINGS: Device-related complications are more common than biologic complications. Device-related complications covered in this review include lead migration, lead fracture, lead disconnection, generator failure, loss of charge, generator flipping, hardware related pain, and paresthesia intolerance. The use of SCS continues to be an effective option for neuropathic pain conditions. Consideration of complications prior to moving forward with SCS trials and implantation is a vital part of patient management and device selection. Knowledge of these complications can provide physicians and other healthcare professionals the ability to maximize patient outcomes.

Pain Scales: What Are They and What Do They Mean.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: It is essential to have validated and reliable pain measurement tools that cover a wide range of areas and are tailored to individual patients to ensure effective pain management. The main objective of this review is to provide comprehensive information on commonly used pain scales and questionnaires, including their usefulness, intended purpose, applicability to different patient populations, and associated advantages and disadvantages. RECENT FINDINGS: Acute pain questionnaires typically focus on measuring the severity of pain and the extent of relief achieved through interventions. Chronic pain questionnaires evaluate additional aspects such as pain-related functional limitations, psychological distress, and psychological well-being. The selection of an appropriate pain scale depends on the specific assessment objectives. Additionally, each pain scale has its strengths and limitations. Understanding the differences among these pain scales is essential for selecting the most appropriate tool tailored to individual patient needs in different settings. CONCLUSION: Medical professionals encounter challenges in accurately assessing pain. Physicians must be familiar with the different pain scales and their applicability to specific patient population.

Discrepancy Between Reported and Calculated Pain Reduction in Patients With Spinal Cord Stimulation Therapy and Lack of Agreement Between Patient Satisfaction and Degree of Pain Relief.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine agreement between reported percentage pain reduction (RPPR) and calculated percentage pain reduction (CPPR) in patients with percutaneous spinal cord stimulation (SCS) implants, and to correlate RPPR and CPPR with patient satisfaction. We also sought to determine which patient-reported outcome measures are most improved in patients with SCS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with percutaneous spinal cord stimulator implants with a mean follow-up of 51.1 months were interviewed and surveyed to assess their pain level, impression of degree of pain relief, satisfaction with the therapy, and desire to have the device again. Baseline pain level was obtained from their preimplant records. RESULTS: Overall, RPPR was found to be 53.3%, whereas CPPR was 44.4%. Of all patients, 21 reported <50% pain reduction; however, most of these (12/21, 57%) were satisfied with the outcome of therapy. In terms of individual improvement in outcomes, activities of daily life was the most improved measure at 82%, followed by mood, sleep, medication use, and health care utilization at 74%, 62%, 50%, and 48%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RPPR appears to be a complex outcome measure that may not agree with CPPR. Overall RPPR is greater than the CPPR. On the basis of our data, these independently valid measures should not be used interchangeably. A 50% pain reduction threshold is not a requisite for patient satisfaction and desire to have the device again. Activities of daily living was the most improved measure in this cohort, followed by mood, sleep, medication usage, and decrease in health care utilization.

The Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)®: Recommendations for Spinal Cord Stimulation Long-term Outcome Optimization and Salvage Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: The International Neuromodulation Society (INS) has recognized a need to establish best practices for optimizing implantable devices and salvage when ideal outcomes are not realized. This group has established the Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)® to offer guidance on matters needed for both our members and the broader community of those affected by neuromodulation devices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The executive committee of the INS nominated faculty for this NACC® publication on the basis of expertise, publications, and career work on the issue. In addition, the faculty was chosen in consideration of diversity and inclusion of different career paths and demographic categories. Once chosen, the faculty was asked to grade current evidence and along with expert opinion create consensus recommendations to address the lapses in information on this topic. RESULTS: The NACC® group established informative and authoritative recommendations on the salvage and optimization of care for those with indwelling devices. The recommendations are based on evidence and expert opinion and will be expected to evolve as new data are generated for each topic. CONCLUSIONS: NACC® guidance should be considered for any patient with less-than-optimal outcomes with a stimulation device implanted for treating chronic pain. Consideration should be given to these consensus points to salvage a potentially failed device before explant.

The contralateral oblique fluoroscopic view is associated with a lower incidence of postdural puncture headache in patients undergoing percutaneous spinal cord stimulation.

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a minimally invasive therapy that is increasingly used to treat refractory neuropathic pain. Although this technique has a low incidence of serious long-term adverse sequelae, the risk of complications such as inadvertent dural puncture remains. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this article was to determine the impact of the contralateral oblique (CLO) fluoroscopic view incidence of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) during spinal cord stimulator implantation as compared to lateral fluoroscopic view. METHODS: This was a single academic institution retrospective analysis of electronic medical records spanning an approximate 20-year time period. Operative and postoperative notes were reviewed for details on dural puncture, including technique and spinal level of access, the development of a PDPH, and subsequent management. RESULTS: Over nearly two decades, a total of 1637 leads inserted resulted in 5 PDPH that were refractory to conservative measures but responded to epidural blood patch without long-term complications. The incidence of PDPH per lead insertion utilizing loss of resistance and lateral fluoroscopic guidance was 0.8% (4/489). However, adoption of CLO guidance was associated with a lower rate of PDPH at 0.08% (1/1148), p < 0.02. CONCLUSIONS: The incorporation of the CLO view to guide epidural needle placement can decrease the odds of a PDPH during percutaneous SCS procedures. This study further provides real-world data supporting the potential enhanced accuracy of epidural needle placement in order to avoid unintentional puncture or trauma to deeper spinal anatomic structures.

Government Legislation in Response to the Opioid Epidemic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Opioid misuse and abuse in the USA has evolved into an epidemic of tragic pain and suffering, resulting in the estimated death of over 64,000 people in 2016. Governmental regulation has escalated alongside growing awareness of the epidemic's severity, both on the state and federal levels. RECENT FINDINGS: This article reviews the timeline of government interventions from the late 1990s to today, including the declaration of the opioid crisis as a national public health emergency and the resultant changes in funding and policy across myriad agencies. Aspects of the cultural climate that fuel the epidemic, and foundational change that may promote sustained success against it, are detailed within as well. As a consequence of misuse and abuse of opioids, governmental regulation has attempted to safeguard society, and clinicians should appreciate changes and expectations of prescribers.

High-Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation at 10 kHz for the Treatment of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A Case Series of Patients With or Without Previous Spinal Cord Stimulator Implantation.

BACKGROUND: High-frequency spinal cord stimulation at 10 kHz (HF10-SCS) has been demonstrated to provide enhanced and durable pain relief in patients with chronic back and radiating leg pain. Patients with pain related to complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) in the chronic stages are commonly challenging to treat and often receive traditional spinal cord stimulation (SCS). Very little information is currently available about the therapeutic outcomes following application of high-frequency stimulation in this cohort of patients. METHODS: The purpose of the retrospective case series was to report on the initial experience of HF10-SCS in 13 patients with CRPS, some of whom had been exposed to low-frequency SCS. A temporary trial of HF10-SCS was carried out for 1 week, and those achieving a minimum of 50% pain intensity reduction underwent implantation. Successful responders were those who achieved a 50% decrease in pain intensity on subsequent follow-up. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were trialed, 12 of whom went on to receive a permanent implant. Of the patients receiving permanent implants, the responder rate (50% pain relief) was 67% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34 to 0.90), with an average follow-up period of 12.1 ± 4.6 months. Of the 5 patients who had sympathetically independent pain, 3 were responders, and of the 7 patients who had sympathetically mediated pain, 5 were responders. There were no adverse events. CONCLUSION: This small case series suggests that HF10-SCS may be a viable option for patients with CRPS who have chronic intractable pain, including those who had suboptimal results from traditional SCS.

Contralateral Oblique View Is Superior to the Lateral View for Lumbar Epidural Access.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to perform a comparative analysis of the contralateral oblique (CLO) view and the lateral view for lumbar interlaminar epidural access. DESIGN: After the epidural space was accessed, fluoroscopic images at eight different angles (antero-posterior view, multiple CLO, and lateral view) were prospectively obtained. Visualization and location of needle tip relative to bony landmarks were analyzed. The epidural location of the needle was subsequently confirmed by contrast injection and analysis in multiple views. RESULTS: Visualization of the needle tip and the relevant radiologic landmarks was superior in the CLO view. The needle tip location in the epidural space was most consistent at a CLO angle of 45°. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the CLO view for lumbar interlaminar epidural access offers clear advantages over the lateral view on many clinically important grounds: the needle tip visualization is better, the important radiological landmarks are better visualized, and the needle tip when placed in the epidural space presents a more precise relationship to these landmarks. All of these differences were highly significant. Thus, when using this view, the needle may be directly placed in very close vicinity to the epidural space and true loss of resistance expected soon thereafter. In addition, this view provides the ability to plot the cranio-caudad needle trajectory. The combination of these factors is likely to improve the ease and efficiency of epidural access. The crisp visualization of the final moments of epidural access could also translate to improved safety and accuracy. In light of this, it is suggested that a CLO view at 45° be considered the preferred view for gauging needle depth during interlaminar lumbar epidural access.

The Incidence and Management of Postdural Puncture Headache in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Lead Placement for Spinal Cord Stimulation.

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is rapidly expanding therapy for the treatment of refractory neuropathic pain. Although technical issues such as battery life and lead migration have been well studied and improved, little is known about the incidence and management of inadvertent dural puncture and consequent headache. OBJECTIVES: The goals of this article were to determine the incidence of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) per lead insertion at the various regions of the spine and to detail the use of conservative management and epidural blood patch (EBP). Long-term outcomes are reviewed to validate treatment modalities employed. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of electronic medical records identified by patient implant registry and current procedural terminology data for nearly a 13-year time interval. Operative and postoperative notes were reviewed for details on dural puncture, access technique and spinal level, the development of a PDPH, and the treatment employed with particularly emphasis on the use of (EBP). RESULTS: A total of 745 leads inserted resulted in 6 PDPH that were refractory to conservative measures but responded to EBP without long-term complications. The overall incidence of PDPH per lead insertion was 0.81%. Leads placed anterograde in the thoracolumbar (T11-L3) and Cervicothoracic (C7-T5) regions resulted in an incidence of PDPH per lead of 0.63% and 1.1%, respectively, while 5.9% occurred with lumbar retrograde approach, and none with caudal. CONCLUSIONS: Dural puncture during SCS device placement and can result in a PDPH that is severe and refractory to conservative modes of therapy. Even in the presence of hardware, EBP performed with meticulous aseptic technique was found to be safe and efficacious.

A Survey of Spinal Cord Stimulator Use by Chronic Pain Patients While Driving.

OBJECTIVE: The study aims to assess utilization of spinal cord stimulator (SCS) devices while driving a vehicle and potential association with motor vehicle accidents (MVAs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A telephone survey study was conducted in two phases, from 2001 to 2008 and from 2009 to 2011. Patients selected for the survey were age 18 or older and at least one year post-SCS implantation, demonstrating stable analgesic use for at least six months, and reporting a minimum of 50% pain relief and enhancement of activities of daily living. Both phases of the study evaluated for degree of utilization of SCS while driving a motor vehicle as well as associated accidents. Additionally, patients with active SCS use while driving were further asked in the second phase of the study about mileage per week and first activation of the device postimplant. RESULTS: Ninety-seven percent of the 78 patients contacted were active drivers and of these, 80% reported chronic and consistent use of SCS for the analgesic benefit while operating a motor vehicle. Eleven percent reported MVAs, which were not related to SCS. In the second phase of the study, participants reported a median of 100 miles driven per week with the SCS device on and began use of the device at a median of 21 days postimplant for up to 49 months. CONCLUSION: Because of the perceived benefits of pain reduction, there is high utilization of active SCS while driving a motor vehicle and that does not seem predispose toward MVAs.

Contralateral oblique view is superior to lateral view for interlaminar cervical and cervicothoracic epidural access.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability of the lateral fluoroscopic view and several contralateral oblique (CLO) views at different angles in visualizing and accurately predicting the position of the needle tip at the point of access in the posterior cervical and cervicothoracic epidural space. DESIGN: After the epidural space was accessed but before confirmation with contrast fluoroscopy, we prospectively obtained fluoroscopic images at eight different angles. Subsequent contrast injection confirmed epidural spread. Needle tip visualization and location of needle relative to bony landmarks were analyzed. RESULTS: The needle tip was clearly visualized in all CLO projections in all 24 subjects. CLO view at 50 degrees and at obliquity measured on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) images provided the most consistent needle tip location. In these views, the epidural space was accessed at or just beyond the ventral laminar margin at the ventral interlaminar line or within the proximal half of the predefined CLO area in all patients. The needle tip was poorly visualized in the lateral view and the location of the needle tip was less well defined and independent of the needle location in the anteroposterior (AP) view. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that during cervical and cervicothoracic epidural access, the CLO view at 50 degrees and at MRI-measured obliquity is superior to the lateral view for the purpose of needle tip visualization and in providing a consistent landmark for accessing the epidural space. This article also introduces the concept of zones to describe needle position in the cervical and cervicothoracic spine in AP, lateral, and oblique views.

Clinical practice patterns of opioid prescribing by physicians -performing percutaneous spinal cord stimulation trials and implants.

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective therapy for neuropathic pain. Outcomes of SCS may be influenced by peri-implant opioid management; however, to date, standard practices of opioid management in this scenario remain undefined and unreported. METHODS: A survey inquiring SCS management practices in the peri-implant period was sent to the members of the Spine Intervention Society and the American Society of Regional Anesthesia. The results of three questions pertaining to peri-implant opioid management are presented here. RESULTS: For each of the three questions examined, there were between 181 and 195 responses. Among respondents, 40 percent encouraged reduction of opioids prior to SCS trial, and 17 percent mandated reduction. After a SCS trial, 87 percent of respondents did not provide any additional opioids for periprocedure pain. After implant, the majority of respondents provided 1-7 days of opioids for post-operative pain. CONCLUSION: Based upon survey results and current literature, it is advisable to recommend or attempt opioid reduction before SCS and to not provide additional opioid for post-operative pain after trial lead insertion. Routine prescribing for the pain of the SCS implant beyond 7 days is not favored.

Comparative Descriptive Analysis of Physician Versus Patient-Directed Gabapentin Usage In Chronic Pain - A Preliminary Report.

BACKGROUND: Gabapentin is one of the most common medications employed in Pain Medicine, specifically targeting the management of neuropathic pain. We are most familiar with the incremental dosing strategy where a ceiling dose is eventually attained guided by efficacy and patient tolerance, after which a fixed dosing regimen is prescribed. We propose that autonomous short-term dose variations per patient could have rapid clinically significant effects in the management of chronic pain. OBJECTIVES: This study examines the frequency at which patients take gabapentin on a fixed vs variable schedule and how the pattern of gabapentin use correlates with efficacy, side effects, and patient satisfaction. STUDY DESIGN: Single institution, cross-sectional observational survey study with data collection performed over 2 phases as a pilot for proof of concept. SETTING: Remote contact via telephone with researchers calling from a quiet, private location within the hospital complex conducive for confidential conversation. METHODS: Patients recently prescribed gabapentin were queried on the patterns of use and self-perceived efficacy, satisfaction, and side effects in accordance to a standardized oral script. Patients selected met the criteria of being new patients freshly prescribed gabapentin who have been consistently on the medication for at least a month, while having chronic pain symptoms for over 3 months. Responses were collected in the form of a 5-point Likert scale. Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism. RESULTS: Of the 222 patients, 92 patients agreed to participate in the survey for a response rate of 41.4. Of these, 51% had terminated the medication for various reasons. Of the patients still taking gabapentin, 73% were on a fixed schedule, while 27% were on a variable dosing schedule. Variable dosing cohort reported better efficacy (P = 0.027) and satisfaction (P = 0.036), while the side-effect profile between the 2 groups was similar. LIMITATIONS: The study is limited by its nature of being a pilot, single-institution study performed on a relatively small sample size. None of the patients we surveyed had been given the autonomy to adjust gabapentin doses by their providers and this could significantly reduce the proportion of patients who would be encouraged to run a variable dosing regimen. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that a significant portion of patients choose to administer variable doses of gabapentin and associate this with better efficacy and satisfaction. A larger study is needed to confirm this supposition. Based upon this pilot study, the variable dosing option may be an option for improved therapeutic efficacy or as an alternative to those whose lifestyles do not allow for fixed dosing regimens. Discussion of the risks of gabapentin, including respiratory depression, and clear dosage parameters of use, would need to be outlined when considering a variable dose regimen.

Notalgia Paresthetica Review: Update on Presentation, Pathophysiology, and Treatment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Notalgia paresthetica (NP) is a chronic cutaneous neuropathy primarily characterized by localized pruritus and associated dysesthesias, including sensations of pain, numbness, and tingling. The sensory neuropathy characteristic of NP is thought to result from spinal nerve entrapment caused by degenerative changes in the spine or musculoskeletal compression. This review summarizes the current medical literature with a focus on the past five years regarding NP, its pathophysiology, presentation, and current treatment options. RECENT FINDINGS: Though treatments exist with varying efficacy, to date, there exists no definitive treatment for NP. Treatment options for NP are varied and range from topical and oral agents to interventional procedures and physical therapy. Of the treatments evaluated, topical capsaicin remains the most efficacious treatment for NP. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of established treatment guidelines makes treating NP complicated as it dramatically affects patients' quality of life. Further research with larger sample sizes is needed to evaluate better the most effective treatment and dosing regimen for patients afflicted with NP.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Neurotomy in Managing Chronic Neck Pain.

BACKGROUND: Extensive research into potential sources of neck pain and referred pain into the upper extremities and head has shown that the cervical facet joints can be a potential pain source confirmed by precision, diagnostic blocks. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, quality assessment of the included studies, conventional and single-arm meta-analysis, and best evidence synthesis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of radiofrequency neurotomy as a therapeutic cervical facet joint intervention in managing chronic neck pain. METHODS: Available literature was included. Methodologic quality assessment of studies was performed from 1996 to September 2021. The level of evidence of effectiveness was determined. RESULTS: Based on the qualitative and quantitative analysis with single-arm meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system of appraisal, with inclusion of one randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 12 patients in the treatment group and eight positive observational studies with inclusion of 589 patients showing positive outcomes with moderate to high clinical applicability, the evidence is level II in managing neck pain with cervical radiofrequency neurotomy. The evidence for managing cervicogenic headache was level III to IV with qualitative analysis and single-arm meta-analysis and GRADE system of appraisal, with the inclusion of 15 patients in the treatment group in a positive RCT and 134 patients in observational studies. An overwhelming majority of the studies produced multiple lesions. LIMITATIONS: There was a paucity of literature and heterogeneity among the available studies. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis shows level II evidence with radiofrequency neurotomy on a long-term basis in managing chronic neck pain with level III to IV evidence in managing cervicogenic headaches.

Contralateral and Lateral Views: Analysis of the Technical Aspects of Spinal Cord Stimulator Lead Insertion.

Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an established treatment modality for neuropathic pain. The critical part of this technique is safe access to the epidural space for lead placement. There have been innovations in radiological views, improving access to the epidural space. Objectives: This study analyzes the adoption of these technical advantages in daily practice. Methods: We conducted a survey of members in the Spine Intervention Society and American Society of Regional Anesthesia in regard to the practice patterns in SCS therapy. Here we present our findings regarding the use of contralateral oblique (CLO) and lateral views as well direct upper thoracic or cervicothoracic access for SCS lead insertion. Results: A total of 195 unique responses were received between March 20, 2020 and June 26, 2020. Forty-five percent of respondents "always used" the lateral view technique while 15% "always used" CLO view for SCS lead insertion. Overall, sixty-five percent of respondents used the CLO view with varying frequency. Cervical and upper thoracic approach for cervical SCS lead placement is always or often used by 66.8% of the respondents. Conclusions: A depth view (CLO or lateral) is always used by only 45 - 60% of the respondents and CLO view has been rapidly adopted in clinical practice for SCS lead insertion. Direct cervicothoracic and upper thoracic is the preferred approach for cervical lead placement by the majority.

Impact Of COVID-19 Pandemic and Updated Utilization Patterns of Sacroiliac Joint Injections from 2000 to 2020 in The Fee-For-Service (FFS) Medicare Population.

BACKGROUND: Among the multiple causes of low back and lower extremity pain, sacroiliac joint pain has shown to be prevalent in 10% to 25% of patients with persistent axial low back pain without disc herniation, discogenic pain, or radiculitis. Over the years, multiple Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes have evolved with the inclusion of intraarticular injections, nerve blocks, and radiofrequency neurotomy, in addition to percutaneous sacroiliac joint fusions. Previous assessments of utilization patterns of sacroiliac joint interventions only included sacroiliac joint intraarticular injections, since the data was not available prior to the introduction of new codes. A recent assessment revealed an increase of 11.3%, and an annual increase of 1.2% per 100,000 Medicare population from 2009 to 2018, showing a decline in growth patterns. During the past 2 years, the COVID-19 pandemic has also had significant effects on the utilization patterns of sacroiliac joint interventions. STUDY DESIGN: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and analysis of growth patterns of sacroiliac joint interventions (intraarticular injections, nerve blocks, radiofrequency neurotomy, arthrodesis and fusion) was evaluated from 2010 to 2019 and 2010 to 2020, with a comparative analysis from 2019 to 2020 to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVES: To update utilization patterns of sacroiliac joint interventions with assessment of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary (PSPS) Master dataset was utilized in the present analysis. RESULTS: The results of this evaluation demonstrated a significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic with a 19.2% decrease of utilization of sacroiliac joint intraarticular injections from 2019 to 2020. There was a 23.3% increase in sacroiliac joint arthrodesis and a 5.3% decrease for sacroiliac joint fusions with small numbers from 2019 to 2020. However, data was not available for sacroiliac joint nerve blocks and sacroiliac joint radiofrequency neurotomy as these codes were incorporated in 2020. Overall, from 2010 to 2019, sacroiliac joint intraarticular injections showed an annual increase of 0.9% per 100,000 Medicare population. Sacroiliac joint arthrodesis and fusion showed an annual increase from 2010 to 2020 per 100,000 Medicare population of 29% for arthrodesis and 13.3% for fusion. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of this study include a lack of inclusion of Medicare Advantage patients constituting approximately 30% to 40% of the overall Medicare population. As with all claims-based data analyses, this study is retrospective and thus potentially limited by bias. Finally, patients who are non-Medicare are not part of the dataset. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic with a significant decrease of intraarticular injections of 19.2% from 2019 to 2020 per 100,000 Medicare population. These decreases of intraarticular injections are accompanied by a 5.3% decrease of fusion, but a 23.3% increase of arthrodesis from 2019 to 2020 per 100,000 Medicare population. Overall, the results showed an annual increase of 0.9% per 100,000 Medicare population for intraarticular injections, a 35.4% annual increase for sacroiliac joint arthrodesis and an increase of 15.5% for sacroiliac joint fusion from 2010 to 2019.

A Survey on the Choice of Spinal Cord Stimulation Parameters and Implantable Pulse Generators and on Reasons for Explantation.

Objective: Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) is a vital treatment for chronic intractable pain. In the last few years, the field has undergone dramatic changes in new waveform and frequency introduction as well as device miniaturization. It is important to understand contemporary practice patterns regarding these parameters. Methods: We surveyed the active membership of Spine Intervention Society (SIS), and American Society of Regional Anesthesia (ASRA) on their practices regarding various aspects of Spinal Cord Stimulation therapy. Here we report on SCS waveform usage, battery types, and causes of explant in this cohort of providers. Results: There was similar degree of usage of tonic, burst, and 10 kHz usage at 71.5%, 74.1% and 61.7% respectively. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation was used by 32.6% and other modes of stimulation by 13.5%. Rechargeable systems were often or always used by 67.2% whereas 10% never used a rechargeable system. Most common cause of explant was loss of effectiveness, reported by 53.7%. Conclusion: There has been significant adoption of new waveforms in daily practice of spinal cord stimulation therapy and there is robust mixed usage of new waveforms and frequencies. Rechargeable systems are the most commonly used but primary cell is also used in significant numbers. Loss of efficacy remains the most common cause of explant for the majority of practitioners. This survey establishes practice patterns of SCS usage regarding these important variables against which future changes can be gauged.

Dural Puncture During Spinal Cord Stimulator Lead Insertion: Analysis of Practice Patterns.

Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an important modality for intractable pain not amenable to less conservative measures. During percutaneous SCS lead insertion, a critical step is safe access to the epidural space, which can be complicated by a dural puncture. Objectives: In this review, we present and analyze the practices patterns in the event of a dural puncture during a SCS trial or implantation. Methods: We conducted a survey of the practice patterns regarding spinal cord stimulation therapy. The survey was administered to members of the Spine Intervention Society and American Society of Regional Anesthesia specifically inquiring decision making in case of inadvertent dural puncture during spinal cord stimulator lead insertion. Results: A maximum of 193 responded to a question regarding dural punctures while performing a SCS trial and 180 responded to a question regarding dural punctures while performing a SCS implantation. If performing a SCS trial and a dural puncture occurs, a majority of physicians chose to continue the procedure at a different level (56.99%), followed by abandoning the procedure (27.98%), continuing at the same level (10.36%), or choosing another option (4.66%). Similarly, if performing a permanent implantation and a dural puncture occurs, most physicians chose to continue the procedure at a different level (61.67%), followed by abandoning the procedure (21.67%), continuing at the same level (10.56%), or choosing another option (6.11%). Conclusions: Whereas the goals of the procedure would support abandoning the trial but continuing with the permanent in case of inadvertent dural puncture, we found that decision choices were minimally influenced by whether the dural puncture occurred during the trial or the permanent implant. The majority chose to continue with the procedure at a different level while close to a quarter chose to abandon the procedure. This article sets a time stamp in practice patterns from March 20, 2020 to June 26, 2020. These results are based on contemporary SCS practices as demonstrated by this cohort, rendering the options of abandoning or continuing after dural puncture as reasonable methods. Though more data is needed to provide a consensus, providers can now see how others manage dural punctures during SCS procedures.