6. Persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2.

INTRODUCTION: Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome (PSPS) refers to chronic axial pain and/or extremity pain. Two subtypes have been defined: PSPS-type 1 is chronic pain without previous spinal surgery and PSPS-type 2 is chronic pain, persisting after spine surgery, and is formerly known as Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS) or post-laminectomy syndrome. The etiology of PSPS-type 2 can be gleaned using elements from the patient history, physical examination, and additional medical imaging. Origins of persistent pain following spinal surgery may be categorized into an inappropriate procedure (eg a lumbar fusion at an incorrect level or for sacroiliac joint [SIJ] pain); technical failure (eg operation at non-affected levels, retained disk fragment, pseudoarthrosis), biomechanical sequelae of surgery (eg adjacent segment disease or SIJ pain after a fusion to the sacrum, muscle wasting, spinal instability); and complications (eg battered root syndrome, excessive epidural fibrosis, and arachnoiditis), or undetermined. METHODS: The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of PSPS-type 2 was retrieved and summarized. RESULTS: There is low-quality evidence for the efficacy of conservative treatments including exercise, rehabilitation, manipulation, and behavioral therapy, and very limited evidence for the pharmacological treatment of PSPS-type 2. Interventional treatments such as pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) of the dorsal root ganglia, epidural adhesiolysis, and spinal endoscopy (epiduroscopy) might be beneficial in patients with PSPS-type 2. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been shown to be an effective treatment for chronic, intractable neuropathic limb pain, and possibly well-selected candidates with axial pain. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of PSPS-type 2 is based on patient history, clinical examination, and medical imaging. Low-quality evidence exists for conservative interventions. Pulsed radiofrequency, adhesiolysis and SCS have a higher level of evidence with a high safety margin and should be considered as interventional treatment options when conservative treatment fails.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Intractable Visceral Pain Originating from the Pelvic and Abdominal Region: A Narrative Review on a Possible New Indication for Patients with Therapy-Resistant Pain.

Aim: Visceral pain, characterized by pain that is diffuse and challenging to localize, occurs frequently and is difficult to treat. In cases where the pain becomes intractable despite optimal medical management, it can affect patients' Quality of Life (QoL). Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) has emerged as a potential solution for intractable visceral pain. Purpose: In this narrative review, we collected all evidence regarding the efficacy of SCS for visceral pain across various underlying conditions. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science in which articles published from October 1st, 1963 up to March 7th, 2023 were identified. Results: Seventy articles were included in this review of which most were retrospective cohort studies, case series and case reports. The studies, often with a small number of participants, reported on SCS for chronic pancreatitis, anorectal pain and bowel disorders, gynaecological diagnoses, visceral pelvic pain, urological disorders and finally general visceral pain. They found positive effects on pain and/or symptom relief, opioid consumption, anxiety and depression and QoL. Complications occurred frequently but were often minor and reversible. Conclusion: Better screening and selection criteria need to be established to optimally evaluate eligible patients who might benefit from SCS. A positive outcome of a sympathetic nerve block appears to be a potential indicator of SCS effectiveness. Additionally, women receiving SCS for endometriosis had a better outcome compared to other indications. Finally, SCS could also relief functional symptoms such as voiding problems and gastroparesis. Complications could often be resolved with revision surgery. Since SCS is expensive and not always covered by standard health insurance, the incorporation of cost-analyses is recommended. In order to establish a comprehensive treatment plan, including selection criteria for SCS, rigorous prospective, possibly randomized and controlled studies that are diagnosis-oriented, with substantial follow-up and adequate sample sizes, are needed.

Introduction of a Post-Anaesthesia Care Unit in a Teaching Hospital Is Associated with a Reduced Length of Hospital Stay in Noncardiac Surgery: A Single-Centre Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: A post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) may improve postoperative care compared with intermediate care units (IMCU) due to its dedication to operative care and an individualized duration of postoperative stay. The effects of transition from IMCU to PACU for postoperative care following intermediate to high-risk noncardiac surgery on length of hospital stay, intensive care unit (ICU) utilization, and postoperative complications were investigated. METHODS: This single-centre interrupted time series analysis included patients undergoing eleven different noncardiac surgical procedures associated with frequent postoperative admissions to an IMCU or PACU between January 2018 and March 2019 (IMCU episode) and between October 2019 and December 2020 (PACU episode). Primary outcome was hospital length of stay, secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and ICU admissions. RESULTS: In total, 3300 patients were included. The hospital length of stay was lower following PACU admission compared to IMCU admission (IMCU 7.2 days [4.2-12.0] vs. PACU 6.0 days [3.6-9.1]; p < 0.001). Segmented regression analysis demonstrated that the introduction of the PACU was associated with a decrease in hospital length of stay (GMR 0.77 [95% CI 0.66-0.91]; p = 0.002). No differences between episodes were detected in the number of postoperative complications or postoperative ICU admissions. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a PACU for postoperative care of patients undergoing intermediate to high-risk noncardiac surgery was associated with a reduction in the length of stay at the hospital, without increasing postoperative complications.

The effectiveness of a transitional pain service in patients undergoing surgery with an increased risk of developing chronic postsurgical pain (TRUSt study). A randomized clinical trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Poorly controlled acute postsurgical pain is associated with delayed recovery, chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP), chronic opioid use and impaired functioning in daily activities. The aim was to determine the effectiveness of a transitional pain service (TPS) to improve quality of recovery for patients at risk of CPSP. We hypothesized that a TPS improves the quality of recovery in patients at risk of CPSP. DESIGN: Single-center, pragmatic, randomized, superiority trial. SETTING: Tertiary hospital in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: Assessed for eligibility if ≥18 years of age, undergoing elective surgery, and had an increased risk of developing CPSP. After being stratified for sex, 176 patients were included. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to receive TPS or standard of care (SOC). TPS was a multidisciplinary intervention providing a patient-tailored perioperative pain management plan, throughout all phases of surgery. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the difference in quality of recovery on the third postoperative day, measured by the Quality of Recovery (QoR)-15 questionnaire. Secondary outcomes include the between group differences in opioid consumption. MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was available in 169 (96.0%) patients. No difference between groups was found in QoR-15 on the third postoperative day (mean difference 2.0, 95% CI -5.5 to 9.4, p = 0.607). A decrease in opioid usage (compared to baseline) was observed in chronic opioid users, the median [IQR] reduction in total daily oral morphine milligram equivalents (MME) for TPS was -30 [-60, 0] at three and - 29.3 [-65.6, 0] at six months, whereas SOC had a median reduction of 0 [-56, 0] at three, and 0 [-60, 7.5] at six months. CONCLUSIONS: TPS did not significantly affect short-term quality of recovery but might improve long-term outcomes, such as the incidence of chronic pain, opioid consumption, and functioning in daily life. However, sample size in the present study was too small to provide solid evidence for this positive signal.

The Effect of Preoperative Disability, Cognitive Impairment, Frailty and Opioid Use on Acute Postoperative Pain in Older Patients Undergoing Surgery A Prospective Cohort Study.

Globally, life expectancy is increasing, leading to more surgeries being performed in older patients. Postoperative pain is associated with complications after surgery. The aim of this study is to explore potential age-related risk factors for acute postoperative pain in older patients undergoing surgery. This was a prospective, single-center study. Patients ≥65 years, with and without disability, as defined by the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0, undergoing elective surgery, were compared. Primary outcome was the postoperative pain (ie, numeric rating scale (NRS) score) on the first postoperative day. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain and pain trajectories in patients with and without mild cognitive impairment (MCI), frailty, preoperative opioid use, and new-onset disability after surgery. Between February 2019 and July 2020, 155 patients were enrolled. On the first day after surgery, postoperative pain did not differ between patients with and without disability. NRS scores differed between patients with-, and without MCI on the first (P = .01), and second postoperative day (P < .01). Patients who used opioids before surgery reported higher median NRS score on the first (P < .001) and second (P < .01) postoperative day. Out of a total of 1816 NRS scores, 2 pain clusters were identified. Acute postoperative pain did not differ between patients with or without preoperative disability and frailty in older patients undergoing surgery. Reduced postoperative pain in older patients with MCI warrants further investigation. The PIANO study (Comparison of Postoperative NeurocognitiveFunction in Older Adult Patients with and without Diabetes Mellitus) was registered with www.clinicaltrialregister.nl (search term: Which can predict memory problems after surgery better; blood sugar levels or memory before surgery?). PERSPECTIVE: This study explored risk factors for acute postoperative pain in older patients. No differences in postoperative pain were observed in patients with or without preexistent disability or frailty, however, patients with mild cognitive impairment experienced reduced pain. We suggest to simplify pain assessment in this group and take functional recovery into account.

Subcutaneous Stimulation as Add-on Therapy to Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients With Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Significantly Increases the Total Electrical Charge per Second: Aspects on Stimulation Parameters and Energy Requirements of the Implanted Neurostimulators.

OBJECTIVE: In our previous multicenter randomized controlled trial, we demonstrated the clinical effectiveness of peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) as add-on therapy to spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for the treatment of chronic back pain in patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS) or failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). To our knowledge, no previous study has investigated the effect of PNFS as an add-on to SCS on the energy consumption of the implanted neurostimulators. Therefore, in this study, we compared the specific stimulation parameters and energy requirements of a previously unreported group of patients with only SCS with those of a group of patients with SCS and add-on PNFS. We also investigated differences that might explain the need for PNFS in the treatment of chronic low back pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 75 patients with complete sets of stimulation parameters, with 21 patients in the SCS-only group and 54 patients in the SCS + PNFS group. Outcome measures were average visual analog scale score, SCS parameters (voltage, frequency, and pulse width), SCS charge per second, and total charge per second. We analyzed baseline characteristics and differences between and within groups over time. RESULTS: Both groups had comparable patient characteristics at baseline and showed a significant decrease in back and leg pain. SCS charge per second did not significantly differ between the groups at baseline or at 12 months. The total charge per second was significantly higher in the active SCS + PNFS group than in the SCS-only group at baseline; in the SCS + PNFS group, this persisted for up to 12 months, and the SCS charge per second and total charge per second increased significantly over time. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that add-on PNFS increases the total charge per second compared with SCS alone, as expected. However, further research is needed because our results do not directly explain why some patients require add-on PNFS to treat low back pain.

Spinal Cord Stimulation With Additional Peripheral Nerve/Field Stimulation Versus Spinal Cord Stimulation Alone on Back Pain and Quality of Life in Patients With Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS) or failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) refers to new or persistent pain following spinal surgery for back or leg pain in a subset of patients. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a neuromodulation technique that can be considered in patients with predominant leg pain refractory to conservative treatment. Patients with predominant low back pain benefit less from SCS. Another neuromodulation technique for treatment of chronic low back pain is subcutaneous stimulation or peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS). We investigated the effect of SCS with additional PNFS on pain and quality of life of patients with PSPS compared with that of SCS alone after 12 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a comparative study of patients with PSPS who responded to treatment with either SCS + PNFS or SCS only following a multicenter randomized clinical trial protocol. In total, 75 patients completed the 12-month follow-up: 21 in the SCS-only group and 54 in the SCS + PNFS group. Outcome measures were pain (visual analog scale), quality of life (36-Item Short Form Survey [SF-36]), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]), overall health (EuroQol Five-Dimension [EQ-5D]), disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), and pain assessed by the McGill questionnaire. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. Both groups showed a significant reduction in back and leg pain at 12 months compared with baseline measurements. No significant differences were found between the groups in effect on both primary (pain) and secondary parameters (SF-36, HADS, EQ-5D, ODI, and McGill pain). CONCLUSION: In a subgroup of patients with chronic back and leg pain, SCS alone provided similar long-term pain relief and quality-of-life improvement as PNFS in addition to SCS. In patients with refractory low back pain not responding to SCS alone, adding PNFS should be recommended. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT01776749.

A Comparison of 1000 Hz to 30 Hz Spinal Cord Stimulation Strategies in Patients with Unilateral Neuropathic Leg Pain Due to Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Crossover Clinical Study (HALO).

INTRODUCTION: Multicenter, randomized, double-blinded crossover study. The Netherlands (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02112474). We hypothesized that the pain suppressive effects of 1000 Hz and 30 Hz spinal cord stimulation (SCS) strategies are equally effective in patients with chronic, neuropathic, unilateral leg pain after back surgery. METHODS: Thirty-two patients (18-70 years, minimum leg pain 50 mm on 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS), minimal back pain) were randomized (1:1) to start 1000 Hz or 30 Hz neurostimulation for 9 days. After a 5-day washout, they crossed over, for another 9 days. Primary outcome was pain suppression (mean of VAS scores 4×/day) during the crossover period. The main investigators were blinded to strategy allocation, patients were blinded to the outcome, a blinded assessor analyzed the primary outcome. RESULTS: The primary outcome was analyzed in 26 patients. There was no period effect (delta 4 mm, p = 0.42, 95% CI [- 5, 13]), allowing direct intrapatient comparison of the treatment effect (delta 1 mm, p = 0.92, 95% CI [- 13, 14]). Ninety-two percent of patients in both periods experienced greater than 34% pain suppression (minimal clinically important difference, MCID). Secondary outcomes (22 patients): pain suppression and improved quality of life were sustained at 12 months; both were statistically significant and clinically relevant. Fifty percent of patients had greater than 80% pain suppression (p < 0.001). At study termination, all events were resolved; no unanticipated events were reported. Medtronic provided a grant for additional study costs. CONCLUSION: We conclude that our hypothesis regarding the effect of 1000 Hz and 30 Hz stimulation strategies on pain suppression was confirmed. Both stimulation strategies led to a large, sustainable, clinically relevant pain suppression and improvement in quality of life.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Sciatica in the Netherlands: A Survey among Neurologists and Anesthesiologists.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess how Dutch neurologists and anesthesiologists diagnose and treat people with sciatica in secondary care and to evaluate their adherence to the newest guidelines. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey. Respondents were asked about their current clinical practice related to sciatica. Three authors rated the respondents' adherence to the guidelines on a three-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Eighty neurologists and 44 anesthesiologists completed the questionnaire. Neurologists diagnose their sciatica patients primarily using a magnetic resonance imaging (89%). Selective diagnostic nerve blocks are considered useful by 81% of the neurologists. Neurologists primarily treat patients with pain medication, and 40% of them think epidural steroid injections are effective in 40-60% of injected patients. Twenty-nine percent of neurologists refer patients to a neurosurgeon after 4 months. Anesthesiologists consider a selective diagnostic nerve root block to have a higher diagnostic value than mapping. The most reported side effect of epidural injections is exacerbation of pain (82%). Pulse radiofrequency is applied in 9-11% of acute cases. The results also indicate that Dutch neurologists and anesthesiologists follow an evidence-based approach that is strictly or broadly in line with the guideline. CONCLUSIONS: Neurologists treat sciatica patients initially with pain medication and physiotherapy, followed by epidural steroid injections and referral for surgery. Anesthesiologists treat sciatica patients with one or more steroid injections or may perform a selective nerve root block. Imaging, selective nerve root blocks, medication, physiotherapy, and pulse radiofrequency are topics of further research.

10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Failed Back Surgery Syndrome with Predominant Leg Pain: Results from a Prospective Study in Patients from the Dutch Healthcare System.

INTRODUCTION: Persistent back/and or leg pain is a common outcome after spinal surgery (otherwise known as failed back surgery syndrome [FBSS]). Studies have shown that spinal cord stimulation (SCS) at 10 kHz provides effective analgesia in FBSS patients with both back and leg pain symptoms and in those with predominant back pain. This study is the first to evaluate the therapy in FBSS patients with predominant leg pain. METHODS: The safety and efficacy of 10 kHz SCS was evaluated in an uncontrolled, open-label, prospective study of FBSS patients with predominant leg pain in the Netherlands. Follow-ups were performed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post implantation. RESULTS: Sixty out of 68 patients (88%) experienced sufficient pain relief during a stimulation trial. Of these, 58 proceeded to permanent implantation of a 10 kHz SCS system. After 12 months of treatment, 80% of patients experienced ≥ 50% reduction in baseline leg pain, and a similar proportion (76%) experienced ≥ 50% reduction in baseline back pain. At least two-thirds of patients were also leg pain and back pain remitters (visual analog scale [VAS] ≤ 2.5 cm). The therapy was also associated with a general improvement in patients' quality of life, as measured by secondary outcomes including disability, perception of health improvement, mental well-being, and satisfaction. A positive impact on opioid consumption was also observed. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous findings, 10 kHz SCS for the treatment of FBSS patients with predominant radicular symptoms is safe and effective and is associated with improved quality of life.

A Prospective Study of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation for Non-Operated Discogenic Low Back Pain.

INTRODUCTION: Disruptions of lumbar intervertebral discs may lead to severe discogenic low back pain (LBP). Severe pain has a deleterious effect on physical function and quality of life. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a robust treatment for many neuropathic pain conditions. New innovations may be well-suited to treat neuropathic chronic LBP, including discogenic pain. The aim of this prospective study was to determine the effect of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation for a well-selected group of patients with discogenic LBP with no history of previous back surgeries. METHODS: Twenty subjects with confirmed discogenic LBP and no prior history of back surgery underwent trials of DRG stimulation and, if successful with at least 50% pain reduction, were permanently implanted. Subjects rated their pain, disability, quality of life, and mood at baseline, and 14 subjects were followed through 12 months of treatment. RESULTS: Treatment with DRG stimulation reduced LBP ratings (68.3% reduction), from mean 7.20 ± 1.3 at baseline to 2.29 ± 2.1 after 12 months (p = < 0.001). Oswestry ratings of disability significantly decreased (p = < 0.001) from 42.09 ± 12.9 at baseline to 21.54 ± 16.4 after six months of treatment and to 20.1 ± 16.6 after 12 months. The average quality of life EQ-5D index score at baseline was 0.61 ± 0.12 and 0.84 ± 0.13 after 12 months. DISCUSSION: DRG stimulation treatment for discogenic LBP improved the level of pain, function, and quality of life. Further research is necessary into efficacy of DRG stimulation in patients with chronic discogenic LBP and to determine the place of SCS in the treatment algorithm.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation as Add-On Therapy to Spinal Cord Stimulation in the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Presently, there is only limited evidence about the cost-effectiveness of peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) and no evidence to date on the cost-effectiveness of PNFS as an add-on therapy to spinal cord stimulation (SCS). In a multicenter randomized controlled trial, PNFS as add-on therapy to SCS demonstrated clinical effectiveness in treating chronic low back pain in failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) patients. We report here the cost-effectiveness of PNFS as additional therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a health-care perspective using the general principles of cost-utility analysis, using empirical data from our multicenter randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of hybrid SCS + PNFS on low back pain in FBSS patients, who were back pain non-responders to initial SCS-therapy, over a time-horizon of three months. Outcome measures were costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Cost and QALYs were integrated using the net monetary benefit (NMB). Differences in costs, effects, and NMB were analyzed using multilevel regression. Uncertainty surrounding the NMB was presented by cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients implanted with both SCS and PNFS, randomly assigned to a group with PNFS either activated or inactive, completed the controlled part of the study. With mean total costs for the SCS + active PNFS group of €1813.86 (SD €109.78) versus €1103.64 (SD €123.43) for the SCS + inactive PNFS group at three months, we found an incremental cost-utility ratio of €25.311 per QALY gained and a probability being cost-effective of more than 80% given a willingness to pay for a QALY of about €40.000. CONCLUSIONS: From a Dutch national health-care context, when the willingness to pay threshold is up to 60.000 Euros per QALY, PNFS as an add-on therapy to SCS for the treatment of low back pain in FBSS patients has a high probability of being cost-effective.

Effectiveness and Safety of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Pain: A Pooled Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Since it became available in the mid-2010s, dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation has become part of the armamentarium to treat chronic pain. To date, one randomized controlled trial, and several studies of moderate sample size and various etiologies have been published on this topic. We conducted a pooled analysis to investigate the generalizability of individual studies and to identify differences in outcome between chronic pain etiologic subgroups and/or pain location. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One prospective, randomized comparative trial and six prospective, single-arm, observational studies were identified that met pre-defined acceptance criteria. Pain scores and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures were weighted by study sample sizes and pooled. Safety data are reported in aggregate form. RESULTS: Our analysis included 217 patients with a permanent implant at 12-month follow-up. Analysis of pooled data showed an overall weighted mean pain score of 3.4, with 63% of patients reporting ≥50% pain relief. Effectiveness sub-analyses in CRPS-I, causalgia, and back pain resulted in a mean reduction in pain intensity of 4.9, 4.6, and 3.9 points, respectively. Our pooled analysis showed a pain score for primary affected region ranging from 1.7 (groin) to 3.0 (buttocks) and responder rates of 80% for foot and groin, 75% for leg, and 70% for back. A substantial improvement in all PROs was observed at 12 months. The most commonly reported procedural or device complications were pain at the IPG pocket site, lead fracture, lead migration, and infection. CONCLUSIONS: DRG stimulation is an effective and safe therapy for various etiologies of chronic pain.

Long-Term Effect of Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation as Add-On Therapy to Spinal Cord Stimulation to Treat Low Back Pain in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Patients: A 12-Month Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: Different approaches in neuromodulation have been used to treat chronic low back pain in failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) patients. We previously randomized 52 FBSS patients to be treated with spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and additional peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) or SCS alone. At three months, we found a significant reduction of back pain in the PNFS-SCS group compared to the SCS group. In the subsequent open phase part of the study, all patients received optimal SCS and PNFS simultaneously. Here, we present the 12-month follow-up data on back and leg pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data regarding back and leg pain, function, quality of life, patient satisfaction, anxiety and depression, and use of medication were collected by analyzing patients' questionnaires at 12 months and compared with data collected at baseline. Data were analyzed using multilevel regression models. RESULTS: A combined group of 50 subjects completed the 12-month follow-up. Back pain, measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS), significantly decreased over this period by 30.0 mm (95% CI: [-37.7/-22.4]; p < 0.001), while leg pain decreased by 43.7 mm (95% CI: [-51.5/-36.2]; p < 0.001). We observed statistically significant improvement in almost all secondary outcome measurements. CONCLUSIONS: At 12-month follow-up, PNFS in addition to SCS continues to provide a statistically significant and clinically relevant relief of low back pain in FBSS patients in whom SCS alone is effective for relief of leg pain only.

Prospective Cohort Analysis of DRG Stimulation for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Pain Following Lumbar Discectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical lumbar discectomy is a commonly performed routine spinal procedure that is usually undertaken to alleviate lumbar radicular symptoms caused by a herniated intervertebral disc. Surgical lumbar discectomy can also lead to chronic postsurgical leg and/or back pain (failed back surgery syndrome [FBSS]), a condition that can be refractory to conventional medical management. Early clinical results on the use of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation for FBSS have supported the use of this treatment alternative. METHODS: A multicenter, single-arm, observational cohort study enrolled patients who had chronic pain following surgical lumbar discectomy, had failed conservative treatments, and reported pain intensity of at least 6 out of 10 in the primary region of pain. Data were collected on pain, quality of life, disability, and mood at baseline and through 12 months. RESULTS: Thirteen patients underwent a trial of DRG stimulation; 11 (84.6%; 95% confidence interval = 57.8% to 95.7%) had good outcomes and underwent permanent device placement. Pain was reduced from a score of 8.64 (±0.92) at baseline to 2.40 (±2.38; n = 9) after 12 months of treatment, a 72.05% average reduction (P < 0.001). Similar improvements were observed across the secondary clinical measures, and safety data were in line with published rates. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that DRG stimulation induces pain relief in subjects diagnosed with FBSS. These reductions in pain were also associated with improvements in quality of life and disability. Additional prospective studies are warranted to further investigate this potential application of DRG stimulation, as well as to optimize patient selection, lead placement, and programming strategies.

No Transfer of Pressure to Adjacent Discs During Human Low-Pressure Controlled Discography: A Prospective Clinical Study.

Background: A substantial part of low back pain (LBP) originates from degeneration of the intervertebral disc. To confirm the diagnosis of discogenic pain, provocation discography seems the best available tool. However, provocation discography is also considered to be a controversial and subjective test because the patient's personal pain response is the most crucial for the result of the test. Recently, an in vivo porcine study and a study in nine human subjects showed passing of pressure to the adjacent discs during discography. This could mean that the concordant pain the patient describes originates from an adjacent disc. The object of this study is to assess if during human lumbar pressure-controlled provocation discography there is pressure transmission to adjacent discs. Methods: Consecutive patients between age 18 and 65 years with intractable low back pain and at least 50% preserved height of the suspected painful disc were included. Exclusion criteria were prior lumbar surgery of the suspected level, use of anticoagulants, pregnancy, local infection, and iodine allergy. An arterial blood pressure monitoring system simultaneously assessed the pressure in the adjacent discs while low-speed flow, pressure-controlled discography was performed. Results: In 50 patients with a positive discography, the average intradiscal peak pressure was 15.1 psi (SD = 11.1). In 48 procedures, no pressure rise in the adjacent discs was found. A small pressure rise (1.1 psi) in the adjacent disc during discography was recorded in two patients. Conclusions: Pressure rise in adjacent discs does not seem to occur during low-speed flow pressure-controlled lumbar provocation discography. False-positive pain reactions caused by potentially painful adjacent discs are therefore unlikely during pressure-controlled discography.

Multimodal intrathecal analgesia in refractory cancer pain.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cancer pain treatment has improved over the last decades. The majority of this population can be treated effectively with analgesics following the Guidelines of the original World Health Organisation (WHO). Unfortunately 10-15% of these patients still suffer from severe and refractory cancer pain, especially in the terminal phases of disease and require additional pain management modalities. Therefore, end-stage clinical interventions are particularly needed to minimize the perception of pain. With intrathecal therapy (ITT), drugs are delivered close to their site of action in the central nervous system avoiding first-pass metabolism and blood-brain barrier. It may improve analgesia with a smaller dose and possibly achieve a reduction in systemic or cerebral side effects compared to oral supplied medication alone. Multimodal analgesia enables further dose reduction with improved analgesia and fewer side effects. METHODS: In this retrospective research we investigated the effectiveness and side-effect profile of intrathecal morphine, bupivacaine and clonidine. Patients were followed until death occurred. Pain scores and side effects were recorded before initiating ITT (T0), just after initiating ITT (T1), at hospital discharge (T2), in the ambulant setting (T3) and the last obtained scores before death occurred (T4). RESULTS: Nine patients were included who suffered from severe and refractory cancer pain, not reacting to conventional pain management or had intolerable side effects. Primary tumour location was pancreatic (4), urothelial (3) and prostate (2). Primary pain was considered neuropathic or mixed neuropathic-nociceptive. The treatment team consisted of an anaesthetist, specialized nurse in coordination with primary physician, treating oncologist and specialized home care. All patients were free of pain after initiation of the intrathecal therapy. The average follow-up period was 11 weeks in which there was a slight increase in NRS-score. In the last days before death occurred, half the patients were still free of pain. There were no problems during insertion of the catheter, device malfunction or infection. No severe adverse events defined as hypotension requiring inotropes, respiratory depression or neurological deficits were observed. Three patients experienced mild hypotension which gradually decreased after clonidine dose adjustment. Lower extremity weakness occurred in three patients as well. After bupivacaine dose adjustment the weakness disappeared in two patients and in one patient the lower extremity weakness persisted as a result of conus compression by tumour. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Multimodal IT treatment with morphine, bupivacaine and clonidine is effective and safe for treating refractory cancer pain in the terminal phase of disease. The study offers an important contribution to literature where there is still lack of convincing evidence about the benefits and harms of this type of pain management in patients with otherwise refractory cancer pain.

Epiduroscopy for patients with lumbosacral radicular pain.

Lumbosacral radicular pain is a pain in the distribution area of one of the nerves of the lumbosacral plexus, with or without sensory and/or motor impairment. A major source of lumbosacral radicular pain is failed back surgery, which is defined as persistent or recurrent pain, mainly in the region of the lower back and legs even after technically, anatomically successful spine surgeries. If lumbosacral radicular neuropathic pain fails to respond to conservative or interventional treatments, epiduroscopy can be performed as part of a multidisciplinary approach. Epiduroscopy aids in identifying painful structures in the epidural space, establishing a diagnosis and administering therapy. The novelty consists in the use of an epiduroscope to deliver therapies such as adhesiolysis and targeted administration of epidural medications. Clinical trials report favorable treatment outcomes in 30% to 50% of patients. Complications are rare and related to the rate or volume of epidural fluid infusion or inadvertent dural puncture. In patients with lumbosacral radicular pain, especially after back surgery, epiduroscopy with adhesiolysis may be considered (evidence rating 2 B+).

Targeted methylprednisolone acetate/hyaluronidase/clonidine injection after diagnostic epiduroscopy for chronic sciatica: a prospective, 1-year follow-up study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: It has been claimed that epiduroscopy offers an ideal combination of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in one session. We prospectively evaluated whether abnormalities at the lumbar level as diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are confirmed by epiduroscopy, and assessed if targeted epidural injection of medication alleviates sciatic pain. METHODS: A flexible, 0.9-mm fiberoptic endoscope was introduced through a disposable steering shaft into the caudal epidural space and advanced until the targeted spinal nerve was identified. Adhesions were mechanically mobilized under direct vision, and a mixture of 120 mg methylprednisolone acetate, 600 IU hyaluronidase, and 150 microg clonidine was applied locally. Pain scores were measured by visual analog scale (VAS) and global subjective efficacy rating. RESULTS: Nineteen of 20 patients studied showed adhesions via epiduroscopy. In 8 patients, 6 of whom had never undergone surgery, these were not detected with earlier magnetic resonance imaging. Six patients showed concomitant signs of active root inflammation. Of 20 patients treated with a targeted epidural injection, 11 patients (55%) experienced significant pain relief at 3 months. This was maintained at 6, 9, and 12 months for 8 (40%), 7 (35%), and 7 (35%) patients, respectively. Mean VAS at 3 months was significantly reduced (n = 20; DeltaVAS = 3.55; P <.0001), and this persisted at 12 months (DeltaVAS = 1.99, P =.0073). CONCLUSIONS: Epiduroscopy is of value in the diagnosis of spinal root pathology. In sciatica, adhesions unreported by MRI can be identified. Targeted epidural medication, administered near the compromised spinal nerve, results in substantial and prolonged pain relief.