Quantitative assessment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy after high-frequency spinal cord stimulation: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: Randomized trials have demonstrated efficacy of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). Preliminary data suggested that treatment of PDN with high-frequency SCS resulted in improvements on neurological examination. The purpose of the present study was to explore whether patients with PDN treated with high-frequency SCS would have improvements in lower-extremity peripheral nerve function. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study in an outpatient clinical practice at a tertiary care center. METHODS: Patients with PDN were treated with high-frequency SCS and followed up for 12 months after SCS implantation with clinical outcomes assessments of pain intensity, neuropathic symptoms, and neurological function. Small-fiber sudomotor function was assessed with the quantitative sudomotor axon reflex test (QSART), and large-fiber function was assessed with nerve conduction studies (NCS). Lower-extremity perfusion was assessed with laser Doppler flowmetry. RESULTS: Nine patients completed 12-month follow-up visits and were observed to have improvements in lower-extremity pain, weakness, and positive sensory symptoms. Neuropathy impairment scores were improved, and 2 patients had recovery of sensory responses on NCS. A reduction in sweat volume on QSART was observed in the proximal leg but not at other sites. No significant differences were noted in lower-extremity perfusion or NCS as compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: The improvement in pain relief was concordant with improvement in neuropathy symptoms. The findings from this study provide encouraging preliminary data in support of the hypothesis of a positive effect of SCS on peripheral neuropathy, but the findings are based on small numbers and require further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03769675.

Comparison of Spinal Cord Stimulation Trial Reporting Protocols and Long-Term Pain Relief Outcomes Following Implantation.

OBJECTIVES: Appropriate spinal cord stimulation (SCS) candidates are required to undergo an SCS trial before implant, typically with ≥50% pain relief deemed "successful." However, SCS trialing protocols can vary substantially. The primary aim of this retrospective study is to investigate the associations between SCS trial results and long-term SCS pain outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a retrospective single-center review of successful SCS trials from January 1, 2017, to July 1, 2019. A total of 115 patients were included. Group differences in continuous variables were evaluated using t-tests, and group differences in categorical variables were evaluated using the χ2 test. The percentage improvement in long-term pain intensity was analyzed as a binary variable, where long-term success was defined as ≥50% improvement in numeric rating scale pain scores. The level of significance for all tests was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: The mean age was 64.9 years, and 52% of patients were men. The mean pain score at long-term follow-up was 4.7 ± 2.6, and the median time from implantation to follow-up was 13 months (25th-75th interquartile range; 4-22). In the logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, and follow-up time, greater patient-reported percentage improvement in pain scale during the trial was significantly associated with greater odds of experiencing ≥50% improvement in pain scores (p = 0.048; 95% CI 1.00-1.70). All other assessed trial metrics were not significantly associated with greater odds of experiencing >50% improvement in pain scores at last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Given the variability in current assessment techniques, we recommend the patient-reported percentage improvement in pain scale as the posttrial assessment method of choice instead of a calculated percentage improvement. However, our results indicate that current trial assessment methods are generally poor, and improved trial reporting protocols must be sought.

Preoperative hemoglobin A1c and perioperative blood glucose in patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing spinal cord stimulation surgery: A literature review of surgical site infection risk.

AIMS: The aim of our study was to review the surgical literature regarding the relationship between hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (DM), and risk of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI). METHODS: A librarian-assisted literature search was performed with two goals: (1) identify surgical publications related to SSI and HbA1c values, and (2) identify publications reporting infection risk with DM in spinal cord stimulation (SCS), intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDS), and cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation surgeries. Published guidelines on perioperative management of DM are reviewed. RESULTS: We identified 30 studies reporting SSI and HbA1c values. The literature review indicated that for many surgical procedures, elevated HbA1c is not correlated to rate of SSI. We identified 16 studies reporting infection rates within DM cohorts following SCS, IDDS, and CIED implantation surgeries. The data reviewed did not indicate DM as an independent risk factor for SSI. CONCLUSION: Preoperative HbA1c levels in patients with a history of DM is not a singularly sufficient tool to estimate risk of perioperative infection in SCS implantation surgery. Published guidelines on perioperative management of DM do not suggest a specific HbA1c above which surgery should be delayed; intentional perioperative glycemic control is recommended.

The Prevalence of Elevated Impedances and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Ineligibility Following Implantation of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation Devices: A Retrospective Review.

OBJECTIVES: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is increasingly utilized in the treatment of multiple chronic pain conditions. However, patients will continue to experience other medical issues and the potential for future magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) needs must not be overlooked. SCS devices have device-specific MRI conditional labeling and if impedances are elevated the patient may not be able to obtain an MRI. With 10 kHz SCS devices specifically, an impedance value above 10,000 ohms (Ω) is MRI ineligible. The primary objective of this article was to report the incidence of elevated impedances with a multilumen lead design per electrode, per lead, and to describe the total number of MRI ineligible patients due to elevated impedances using 10 kHz SCS cutoff values. The secondary objective was to determine whether certain patient demographics or surgery characteristics put patients at increased risk of elevated impedances. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 327 patients who were implanted with a 10 kHz SCS device between January 2015 and November 2020. Regression models were fitted to determine associations between MRI ineligibility status with clinical characteristics including age, sex, BMI, lead location, implantable pulse generator (IPG) location, and time since implant. RESULTS: We found elevated impedances with subsequent MRI ineligibility in 13 patients (4.0%). Regression analysis did not identify any associations with MRI ineligibility and patient risk factors including age, sex, body mass index, lead location, IPG location, and follow-up time since implant. CONCLUSION: We found the prevalence of elevated impedances above 10,000 Ω to be 4% of implanted patients. This information is important for patients and physicians alike and should be considered when device selection is occurring in the pre-operative visits.

Infectious Complications of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Incidence.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) is a newer form of neuromodulation that targets the dorsal root ganglion. DRGS has superior efficacy in complex regional pain syndrome compared to spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and may have efficacy in other forms of chronic pain. While decades of safety data are available for SCS, there is less available safety information for DRGS. The objectives of this systematic review and pooled analysis of incidence are to determine the overall incidence of DRGS infections, incidence at each stage (trial vs implant vs revision), infection characteristics, and outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive search of databases from January 1980 to January 2021 was conducted. RESULTS: Ten studies met inclusion criteria. Eight studies reported patients with trial data (n = 291), ten studies reported patients with implant data (n = 250), and seven studies reported data with revisions (n = 26). The pooled incidence of trial infections was 1.03% (95% CI 0.35-2.99%), implant infections was 4.80% (95% CI 2.77-8.20%), revision infections was 3.85% (95% CI 0.20-21.59%), and overall infections was 2.82% (95% CI 1.62-4.54%). There was a statistically significant difference in infection rates between the trial, implant, and revision stages, X2 (2, N = 567) = 8.9839, p = 0.01. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first systematic review and pooled analysis that followed PRISMA guidelines to report infectious complications of DRGS by stage (trial vs implant vs revision). DRGS trial appears to be low risk for infection but that risk is significantly increased with DRGS implant. Our findings highlight the need for further study of infectious complications, their risks, and optimal prophylaxis.

Paresthesia-Based Versus High-Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Retrospective, Real-World, Single-Center Comparison.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has become a common treatment modality for chronic pain of various etiologies. Over the past two decades, significant technological evolution has occurred in the SCS space, and this includes high-frequency (10 kHz) stimulation. Level I evidence exists reporting superiority of 10 kHz SCS over traditional SCS, however, conflicting reports have been published. The primary objective was to report site-collected real-world patient reported percentage improvement in pain scale (PR-PIPS) with traditional SCS and 10 kHz SCS from a single, academic medical center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a single-center retrospective review to determine PR-PIPS of traditional SCS and 10 kHz SCS in those patients implanted for at least 12 months. Data were collected by two independent physicians not involved with the implant surgery to minimize bias in the data collection process. PR-PIPS and other clinical variables were abstracted either via chart review or via phone call for patients who were at least 12 months post-implant at the last clinical follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 163 implanted patients (traditional stimulation n = 85; high-frequency stimulation n = 78) were identified. Twenty-two explants (traditional stimulation n = 10; high-frequency stimulation n = 12) were performed (13.5%). Seventy-five total remaining SCS implants utilizing traditional stimulation and 66 total remaining SCS implants utilizing high-frequency stimulation were included. There was no difference in PR-PIPS between traditional stimulation (50.6% ± 30.1%) and high-frequency stimulation (47.6% ± 31.5%) in the adjusted linear regression model in a variety of implant indications (p = 0.399). There was no difference in frequency of patient categorization into various thresholds of percentage pain relief based on type of stimulation. The most common reasons for explant were loss of efficacy (50.0%) and infection (40.0%) in the traditional cohort, and loss of efficacy (58.3%) in the high-frequency cohort. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds further evidence to the published literature that successful long-term results can be achieved with SCS. Our retrospective analysis did not find a statistically significant difference in PR-PIPS between traditional stimulation and high-frequency stimulation in a variety of indications over an average follow-up of nearly two years. Notably, there were statistically significant differences in treatment indications and primary sites of pain between the two patient cohorts, and this should be considered when interpreting the results.

Systematic Literature Review of Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients With Chronic Back Pain Without Prior Spine Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Low back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide and one of the most common reasons for seeking healthcare. Despite numerous care strategies, patients with low back pain continue to exhibit poor outcomes. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an evidence-based therapeutic modality for patients with failed back surgery syndrome. For patients without a surgical lesion or history, minimally invasive interventions that provide long-term reduction of chronic back pain are needed. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the evidence on SCS therapy in patients with chronic back pain who have not undergone spinal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies reporting outcomes for SCS in chronic back pain patients (with or without secondary radicular leg pain) without prior surgery using date limits from database inception to February 2021. Study results were analyzed and described qualitatively. RESULTS: A total of ten primary studies (16 publications) were included. The included studies consistently demonstrated favorable outcomes in terms of pain reduction and functional improvement following SCS therapy. Improvements also occurred in quality of life scores; however, not all studies reported statistically significant findings. Additionally, the studies reported that SCS resulted in high patient satisfaction, reductions in opioid use, and an acceptable safety profile, although these data were more limited. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that SCS is a promising, safe, minimally invasive, and reversible alternative option for managing chronic back pain in patients who have not undergone spinal surgery.

Explantation of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation Devices: A Retrospective Review of 744 Patients Followed for at Least 12 Months.

OBJECTIVES: High-frequency 10 kHz spinal cord stimulation (10 kHz-SCS) has achieved analgesia superior to traditional SCS in a number of studies. However, there is concern regarding long-term outcomes of 10 kHz-SCS. Prior work has suggested that explant rates are higher with 10 kHz-SCS. Our primary objective was to determine the explant rate of 10 kHz-SCS in a large patient cohort from multiple centers followed for at least 12 months after implant surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients who received a 10 kHz-SCS implant before July 1, 2019. We abstracted patient demographics, implant date, primary site of pain, implant indication, explant date, and reason for explant. A total of 744 patients were included in the study analysis. RESULTS: Average age of the overall cohort was 65.53 years and 407 (54.7%) were women. Average follow-up for all patients was 793 days. There were a total of 76 explants (10.2%). The most common reason for explant was loss of efficacy, which accounted for 39 explants (51.3% of total explants, 5.2% of overall cohort). Female sex and radiculopathy as the SCS indication were associated with statistically significant decreased risk of 10 kHz-SCS explant. CONCLUSIONS: We found 10 kHz-SCS explant rates to be similar to prior reported explant rates for traditional SCS devices. Patient-related factors including female sex and radiculopathy as the primary SCS indication may be protective factors against explantation.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation and Clinical Outcomes: A Retrospective Case Series.

PURPOSE: Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is a rapidly expanding field within neuromodulation; however, there is limited data on therapeutic efficacy. This study describes the indications and clinical outcomes for patients undergoing PNS for chronic pain states. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective case series of adults undergoing PNS implantation from 2004 to 2017 at an academic medical center. The primary outcomes were changes in numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores, opioid utilization in oral morphine milligram equivalent (MME), and self-reported patient functioning at 6 months postoperatively. Infectious and device-related complications were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients underwent PNS implantation, including 59 patients that received a preceding PNS trial (59/78; 76% progression rate) and 13 that did not receive a PNS trial. The most common indication for stimulation was occipital neuralgia (47%) followed by lower-extremity neuropathies (17%). PNS implantation was associated with 6-month reductions in pain scores (7 [6, 8] baseline vs. 4 [2, 5] 6 months; P < 0.001) and opioid utilization (eg, median 60 [31, 104] vs. 18 [0, 52] MME among those with baseline opioid use; P < 0.001). Median functional improvement was 73% (50%, 88%). Seven patients (10%) suffered a postoperative surgical site infection at a median of 50 (30, 124) days, of which five devices were removed. CONCLUSION: Peripheral nerve stimulation was associated with reduced pain scores, lower opioid utilization, and improved patient function at 6 months. These data support PNS as a potentially effective nonopioid analgesic modality in chronic pain, though prospective multicenter evaluation is warranted to evaluate longer-term outcomes.

Spinal Cord Stimulator Infection: Approach to Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention.

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is the most utilized invasive electrical neuromodulation treatment for the management of refractory chronic pain syndromes. Infection is one of the most dreaded complications related to SCS implantation and may prevent patients from receiving adequate pain treatment, adding to the initial cost and disability. Most SCS infections present as generator pocket infection. However, delay in diagnosis may lead to complications such as meningitis, epidural abscess, and/or vertebral osteomyelitis. Early recognition of SCS-related infections and associated complications is based on clinical suspicion, laboratory testing, and appropriate diagnostic imaging. While superficial surgical site infection following SCS implant may be treated with antibiotic therapy alone, deep infection involving implant warrants device removal to achieve cure. Duration of antimicrobial therapy depends on severity of clinical presentation and presence or absence of associated complications. Several preventive strategies can be incorporated in surgical practice to reduce the risk of SCS infection.

Scrambler therapy for chemotherapy neuropathy: a randomized phase II pilot trial.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a prominent clinical problem, with limited effective therapies. Preliminary non-randomized clinical trial data support that Scrambler Therapy is helpful in this situation. METHODS: Patients were eligible if they had CIPN symptoms for at least 3 months and CIPN-related tingling or pain at least 4/10 in severity during the week prior to registration. They were randomized to receive Scrambler Therapy versus transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for 2 weeks. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were utilized to measure efficacy and toxicity daily for 2 weeks during therapy and then weekly for 8 additional weeks. RESULTS: This study accrued 50 patients, 25 to each of the 2 study arms; 46 patients were evaluable. There were twice as many Scrambler-treated patients who had at least a 50% documented improvement during the 2 treatment weeks, from their baseline pain, tingling, and numbness scores, when compared with the TENS-treated patients (from 36 to 56% compared with 16-28% for each symptom). Global Impression of Change scores for "neuropathy symptoms," pain, and quality of life were similarly improved during the treatment weeks. Patients in the Scrambler group were more likely than those in the TENS group to recommend their treatment to other patients, during both the 2-week treatment period and the 8-week follow-up period (p < 0.0001). Minimal toxicity was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this pilot trial were positive, supporting the conduct of further investigations regarding the use of Scrambler Therapy for treating CIPN.

A Systematic Literature Review of Spine Neurostimulation Therapies for the Treatment of Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic literature review of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for pain. DESIGN: Grade the evidence for SCS. METHODS: An international, interdisciplinary work group conducted literature searches, reviewed abstracts, and selected studies for grading. Inclusion/exclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with intractable pain of greater than one year's duration. Full studies were graded by two independent reviewers. Excluded studies were retrospective, had small numbers of subjects, or existed only as abstracts. Studies were graded using the modified Interventional Pain Management Techniques-Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment, the Cochrane Collaborations Risk of Bias assessment, and the US Preventative Services Task Force level-of-evidence criteria. RESULTS: SCS has Level 1 evidence (strong) for axial back/lumbar radiculopathy or neuralgia (five high-quality RCTs) and complex regional pain syndrome (one high-quality RCT). CONCLUSIONS: High-level evidence supports SCS for treating chronic pain and complex regional pain syndrome. For patients with failed back surgery syndrome, SCS was more effective than reoperation or medical management. New stimulation waveforms and frequencies may provide a greater likelihood of pain relief compared with conventional SCS for patients with axial back pain, with or without radicular pain.

Intrathecal Gadolinium Use for the Chronic Pain Physician.

INTRODUCTION: The approach to intrathecal (IT) drug delivery malfunction is complicated, particularly for iodine-allergic patients. In these situations, the current literature has not addressed the use of IT gadolinium. Case reports exist showing severe neurotoxic manifestations with IT gadolinium use. We sought to provide a resource for chronic pain physicians treating an iodine-allergic patient and considering the use of IT gadolinium. METHODS: A thorough literature search identified 11 published cases of gadolinium-induced neurotoxicity due to IT injection and those cases are described in detail. The literature was also reviewed for safe dosages of IT gadolinium. RESULTS: After thorough review, a safe IT gadolinium dose is provided. Additionally, an algorithm was developed for the workup of an IT pump malfunction in iodine allergic patients. CONCLUSION: Herein, we provide guidance on IT gadolinium usage and a framework for IT pump malfunction in iodine allergic patients.

Utilization of Leads After Permanent Implant in Spinal Cord Stimulator Systems.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine the frequency and clinical indications associated with implantation of single vs. dual percutaneous lead spinal cord stimulator (SCS) systems and to look further into how these leads are utilized for treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of all patients undergoing SCS implantation between January 2001 and December 2013 with a minimum of 2 years of clinical follow-up was performed. Number of trial leads and implanted leads was recorded. For patients with dual-lead systems, it was noted if and when the second lead was used, along with the clinical indication for lead activation. RESULTS: In the 259-patient cohort, 15.8% (n = 41) patients underwent placement of a single-lead system, 83.0% (n = 215) underwent placement of a dual-lead system, and 1.2% (n = 3) underwent placement of 3-lead systems. Placement of dual-lead systems was similar among all indication groups. Of those patients with a dual-lead system in place, 88.1% utilized both leads and average time to programming of the second lead was 2.3 months. The most common reason to activate the second lead was inadequate stimulation coverage. Five of the 41 patients with single-lead systems underwent an additional surgery to implant a second lead due to inadequate stimulation with 1 lead. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the first descriptive analysis of the frequency of single- and dual-lead SCS systems. This report indicates that dual-lead systems are most often placed and both leads are required for optimal patient therapy.

Surgical Site Infections in Cancer Patients with Intrathecal Drug Delivery Devices.

Objectives: Our purpose was to determine the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) in cancer patients receiving an intrathecal drug delivery system (IDDS) and compare that rate with the incidence of SSI in the general population receiving an IDDS or spinal cord stimulator. We attempted to describe risk factors for SSIs in cancer patients treated with IDDS in terms of exposure to cancer treatments. Design: Retrospective review. Setting: Large tertiary care center. Patients: Cancer patients receiving an IDDS in 2006-2013. Methods: The incidence of SSI was determined according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition. Medication regimens and current cancer treatment were investigated to identify immunocompromised patients during IDDS placement. Microbacteriology, treatment, and overall outcomes were investigated. Results: Sixty-four patients had an IDDS implanted in 2006-2013. SSI developed in four patients (6.2%). All four patients had received chemotherapy or radiotherapy within three months before implantation. Three of the three were receiving dexamethasone, and three of the four required explantation of the IDDS. Conclusion: The incidence of SSI was at the upper end of the published infection rates for IDDS. The risk of SSI may be increased in this population because of factors that alter the patient's immune status, including concomitant corticosteroid use, radiotherapy near the SSI, and presence of immunomodulators. The identification and mitigation of certain risk factors for this population may prevent infection in future patients.

Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Intrathecal Drug Delivery System Implantation.

INTRODUCTION: Intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDSs) have dramatically improved analgesia and the functional status of cancer patients and those with chronic pain states. However, given the close proximity to the neuraxis and frequent concomitant use of antiplatelet or anticoagulant medications, this intervention is not without risk. The goal of this investigation was to determine the incidence of bleeding complications following IDDS placement. METHODS: This is a retrospective review from 2005 through 2014 of adult patients undergoing IDDS implantation or revision at a tertiary care center. The primary outcome was a bleeding-related neurological complication requiring emergency medicine, neurology, or neurosurgical evaluation within 31 days. RESULTS: A total of 247 procedures were performed on 216 unique patients. Patients received aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) within seven days of needle placement for 64 procedures (25.9%). A preprocedural platelet count or international normalized ratio (INR) was available within 30 days for 138 procedures (55.9%). Of these, two patients had a platelet count lower than 100 x 109/L and one patient had an INR of 1.5 or higher at the time of the procedure. One neurological complication was identified (0.4%) that was not related to procedural bleeding. Similarly, three patients (1.2%) received a periprocedural red blood cell transfusion, none of which were related to procedural bleeding. CONCLUSION: No cases of bleeding-related neurological complications were identified following IDDS placement or revision, including in those receiving aspirin or NSAIDs. Future investigations with larger numbers are needed to further explore the safety of antithrombotic therapy continuation or discontinuation periprocedurally.

Spinal Cord Stimulator Related Infections: Findings From a Multicenter Retrospective Analysis of 2737 Implants.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical site infection is a potential complication of spinal cord stimulator (SCS) implantation. Current understanding of the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of these infections is based largely on small clinical studies, many of which are outdated. Evidence-based guidelines for management of SCS-related infections thus rely instead on expert opinion, case reports, and case series. In this study, we aim to provide a large scale retrospective study of infection management techniques specifically for SCS implantation. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study of SCS implants performed over a seven-year period at 11 unique academic and non-academic institutions in the United States. All infections and related complications in this cohort were analyzed. RESULTS: Within our study of 2737 SCS implant procedures, we identified all procedures complicated by infection (2.45%). Localized incisional pain and wound erythema were the most common presenting signs. Laboratory studies were performed in the majority of patients, but an imaging study was performed in less than half of these patients. The most common causative organism was Staphylococcus aureus and the IPG pocket was the most common site of an SCS-related infection. Explantation was ultimately performed in 52 of the 67 patients (77.6%). Non-explantation salvage therapy was attempted in 24 patients and was successful in resolving the infection in 15 patients without removal of SCS hardware components. DISCUSSION: This study provides current data regarding SCS related infections, including incidence, diagnosis, and treatment.

Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulator Trials and Implantations.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulators (SCS) are indicated for the management of multiple pain states with strong evidence. Recent guidelines recommend discontinuing aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the described procedures. The goal of this investigation is to assess the rate of bleeding and neurologic sequelae in patients undergoing SCS trials and implantation. METHODS: This is a retrospective review from 2005 through 2014 of all patients 18 years or older undergoing the following procedures: Percutaneous SCS implantations, SCS revisions, and SCS trials. Baseline characteristics, antiplatelet and anticoagulation medications, coagulation parameters, and procedural details were extracted. The primary outcome was the presence of a bleeding complication within 31 days of the procedure requiring emergency medicine, neurology, or neurosurgical evaluation. The neurological complication was independently categorized for its potential relationship to procedural bleeding, and periprocedural red blood cell transfusion requirements were analyzed as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 642 percutaneous SCS procedures were performed on 421 unique patients, including 346 SCS trials, 255 SCS implantations, and 41 revision surgeries. Patients had received aspirin or NSAIDs within 7 days of needle placement for 101 procedures (15.7%). There were no bleeding or neurological complications identified in this cohort. CONCLUSION: Although the incidence of epidural hematoma is low, the development of bleeding complications following SCS lead placement can be devastating. In the present investigation, we identified no cases of epidural hematoma following percutaneous SCS lead placement, including more than 100 patients receiving aspirin or NSAIDs. Future investigations with larger numbers are needed to better define the relationships between periprocedural aspirin and NSAID utilization and bleeding complications.