Evaluation of the Effect of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of Motor Cortex on Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Pain Control in the Short Term.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the short-term efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) on the treatment of failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). METHODS: In this prospective clinical trial study, 13 patients with FBSS were selected to undergo rTMS, including 5 sessions of stimulation of the primary motor cortex of 90 trains with a frequency of 10 Hz for 2 seconds and an intertrain interval of 20 seconds with a total pulse rate of 1800 per session. The time of each session was 30 minutes with an intensity of 80% of the motor threshold. The severity of pain before and after the intervention was measured by the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire and visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: The mean of pain severity was 26.54 ± 6.78 and 14.92 ± 10.1 before and after rTMS, respectively. The severity of pain was significantly decreased after the intervention (p = 0.001). According to the McGill Pain Questionnaire, the severity of pain in the patients was decreased by 44.09 ± 27.32. The mean of the severity of pain according to VAS was 77.31 ± 16.66 before rTMS and 53.46 ± 22.49 after rTMS, which showed that pain intensity was significantly decreased after the intervention (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The use of rTMS of the primary motor cortex in patients who have undergone lumbosacral spine surgery and suffer from pain related to FBSS is associated with a significant reduction in the severity of pain. Because rTMS is a noninvasive treatment method, it can be used as a suitable treatment in these patients.

Long-term efficacy of spinal cord stimulation for chronic primary neuropathic pain in the contemporary era: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a modern neuromodulation technique extensively proven to be an effective modality for treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. It has been mainly studied for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) and failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and recent data almost uniformly establishes its statistically significant positive therapeutic results. It has also been compared with other available treatment modalities across various studies. However, long term data on maintenance of its efficacious potential remains less explored. Few studies have reported data on long follow-up times (>= 12 months) and have compared its efficacy with other treatment options for chronic pain, respectively. Our study pools and analyzes the available data and compares SCS with other treatment options. It also analyzes the efficacy of SCS in long term management of patients with chronic pain. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We reviewed all the data available on MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL using a search strategy designed to fit our pre-set inclusion and exclusion criteria. Both single-arm and double-arm studies were included. The primary outcome was defined as decrease of visual analogue scale (VAS) by >50% at 6, 12 and/or 24 months after SCS. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: According to the pooled data of double-arm studies, SCS has unanimously proven its superiority over other treatment options at 6 months follow-up; however it fails to prove statistically significant difference in results at longer treatment intervals. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation, a relatively recent technique with the same underlying physiologic mechanisms as SCS, showed far more promising results than SCS. Single-arm studies show around 70% patients experiencing greater than 50% reduction in their VAS scores at 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: SCS is a viable option for management of chronic neuropathic pain secondary to FBSS and CRPS. However, data available for its long term efficacy remains scarce and show no further statistically significant results.

Spinal Cord Stimulation Meets Them All: An Effective Treatment for Different Pain Conditions. Our Experience and Literature Review.

IntroductionSpinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) is an emerging minimally invasive technique which uses neuromodulation to manage different forms of intractable pain. SCS is a well-established option for the treatment of various pain conditions, and nowadays, indications are ever increasing.Materials and MethodsIn this study, we present our case series of 49 patients who underwent SCS at our Institution for the treatment of pain from different etiologies, and discuss our 10-year experience in SCS. For the purpose of this study, we also performed a systematic review of current indications and new perspectives in SCS.ResultsAmong our case series, patients were differentiated into two groups upon prior spinal surgery: patients who had undergone prior spinal surgery for back pain were defined as the "FBSS (failed back surgery syndrome) group," instead patient suffering from different types of pain but who had never undergone surgery were defined as the "naive group." As regards clinical response to SCS, 20 patients out of 36 (55.56%) were classified as responders in the FBSS group; in the "naïve" group, 10 patients out of 13 (76.92%) were classified as responders. Among the "not responders" group, several patients suffered from infections.Of the recent literature about SCS, 2124 records were screened and 37 studies were finally included in the qualitative synthesis for our systematic review.DiscussionIn case of FBSS, surgical revision is often associated with a high morbidity and corresponding low rates of success. Unfortunately, patients affected by chronic pain often become refractory to conservative treatments. Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) is nowadays considered as an effective therapy for several chronic and neuropathic pain conditions, such as failed back surgery syndrome. As regards the economic impact of SCS, implantation of an SCS system results in short-term costs increase, but the annual cumulative costs decrease during the following years after implantation, when compared to the costs of conventional management. Beyond the application for the treatment of FBSS, SCS has also been used for the treatment of other types of chronic non-oncological pain such as neuropathic pain and chronic back pain ineligible for surgical intervention. This evidence paved the way to establishing the potential role of SCS also for the treatment of oncological pain. However, the effectiveness and relative safety of SCS for cancer-related pain has not yet been adequately established.ConclusionsSpinal Cord Stimulation is a well-established treatment option in for FBSS. Beyond that, SCS has also been used for the treatment of "naive" patients, suffering from other types of chronic, both oncological and non-oncological, medical-refractory pain such as neuropathic pain and chronic back pain ineligible for surgical intervention.

Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: No Longer a Surgeon's Defeat-A Narrative Review.

The introduction of the term Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome (PSPS-T1/2), replacing the older term Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS), has significantly influenced our approach to diagnosing and treating post-surgical spinal pain. This comprehensive review discusses this change and its effects on patient care. Various diagnostic methods are employed to elucidate the underlying causes of back pain, and this information is critical in guiding treatment decisions. The management of PSPS-T1/2 involves both causative treatments, which directly address the root cause of pain, and symptomatic treatments, which focus on managing the symptoms of pain and improving overall function. The importance of a multidisciplinary and holistic approach is emphasized in the treatment of PSPS-T1/2. This approach is patient-centered and treatment plans are customized to individual patient needs and circumstances. The review concludes with a reflection on the impact of the new PSPS nomenclature on the perception and management of post-surgical spinal pain.

Efficacy of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome in Elderly Patients: A Retrospective Study.

Objectives: Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) refers to a condition where symptoms such as low back pain, leg pain, and numbness persist or recur after lumbar surgery; it has been reported to occur in 10%-40% of patients who have undergone lumbar surgery. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been reported useful for low back and leg pain due to FBSS. In this study, we studied the efficacy and safety of SCS for FBSS in older adults. Methods: Among FBSS patients who underwent an SCS trial between November 2017 and December 2020, those with at least 50% pain reduction during the trial phase who requested spinal cord stimulator implantation underwent implantation of a stimulator under local anesthesia. The patients were divided into two groups: patients aged <75 years (<75-year-old group) and patients aged ≥75 years (≥75-year-old group). The male/female ratio, symptom duration, operative duration, visual analog scale (VAS) scores before and after one year of surgery, responder rate (RR), complications one year after surgery, and stimulator removal rate were analyzed. Results: There were 27 cases in the <75-year-old group and 46 in the ≥75-year-old group, with no significant differences in male/female ratio, duration of pain, or operative time between the two groups. VAS scores for low back pain, leg pain, and overall pain one year after surgery were improved significantly from respective preoperative scores in both groups (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in low back pain VAS, leg pain VAS, overall pain VAS, RR, complications one year after surgery, or stimulator removal rate between the two groups. Conclusion: SCS reduced pain effectively in both <75-year-old and ≥75-year-old groups with no differences in complications. Therefore, spinal cord stimulator implantation was considered a viable option for FBSS treatment in older adults because it can be performed under local anesthesia and is associated with a low incidence of complications.

Functional Connectivity Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sequences in Patients With Postsurgical Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Type 2 With Implanted Spinal Cord Stimulation Systems: A Safety, Feasibility, and Validity Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain has been associated with alterations in brain connectivity, both within networks (regional) and between networks (cross-network connectivity). Functional connectivity (FC) data on chronic back pain are limited and based on heterogeneous pain populations. Patients with postsurgical persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS) type 2 are good candidates for spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapy. We hypothesize that 1) FC magnetic resonance imaging (fcMRI) scans can be safely obtained in patients with PSPS type 2 with implanted therapeutic SCS devices and that 2) their cross-network connectivity patterns are altered and involve emotion and reward/aversion functions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Resting-state (RS) fcMRI (rsfcMRI) scans were obtained from nine patients with PSPS type 2 implanted with therapeutic SCS systems and 13 age-matched controls. Seven RS networks were analyzed, including the striatum. RESULTS: Cross-network FC sequences were safely obtained on a 3T MRI scanner in all nine patients with PSPS type 2 with implanted SCS systems. FC patterns involving emotion/reward brain circuitry were altered as compared with controls. Patients with a history of constant neuropathic pain, experiencing longer therapeutic effects of SCS, had fewer alterations in their connectivity patterns. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first report of altered cross-network FC involving emotion/reward brain circuitry in a homogeneous population of patients with chronic pain with fully implanted SCS systems, on a 3T MRI scanner. All rsfcMRI studies were safe and well tolerated by all nine patients, with no detectable effects on the implanted devices.

Short-Term Health Care Costs of High-Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Postsurgical Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: High-frequency spinal cord stimulation (HF-SCS) is a treatment option for postsurgical persistent spinal pain syndrome (type 2 PSPS). We aimed to determine the health care costs associated with this therapy in a nationwide cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: IBM Marketscan® Research Databases were used to identify patients who underwent HF-SCS implantation from 2016 to 2019. Inclusion criteria included prior spine surgery or diagnoses of PSPS or postlaminectomy pain syndrome any time within the two years before implantation. Inpatient and outpatient service costs, medication costs, and out-of-pocket costs were collected six months before implantation (baseline) and one, three, and six months after implantation. The six-month explant rate was calculated. Costs were compared between baseline and six months after implant via Wilcoxon sign rank test. RESULTS: In total, 332 patients were included. At baseline, patients incurred median total costs of $15,393 (Q1: $9,266, Q3: $26,216), whereas the postimplant median total costs excluding device acquisition were $727 (Q1: $309, Q3: $1,765) at one month, $2,840 (Q1: $1,170, Q3: $6,026) at three months, and $6,380 (Q1: $2,805, Q3: $12,637) at six months. The average total cost was reduced from $21,410 (SD $21,230) from baseline to $14,312 (SD $25,687) at six months after implant for an average reduction of $7,237 (95% CI = $3212-$10,777, p < 0.001). The median device acquisition costs were $42,937 (Q1: $30,102, Q3: $65,880). The explant rate within six months was 3.4% (8/234). CONCLUSIONS: HF-SCS for PSPS was associated with significant decreases in total health care costs and offsets acquisition costs within 2.4 years. With the rising incidence of PSPS, it will be critical to use clinically effective and cost-efficient therapies for treatment.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: to Trial or Not to Trial?

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a recommended therapy to treat failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). A trial period is practiced to enhance patient selection. However, its fundamental evidence is limited, especially concerning long-term benefit and therapy safety. We compared the long-term (5.3 ± 4.0 years) clinical outcome and therapy safety of a trialed and nontrialed implantation strategy, including multidimensional variables and pain intensity fluctuations over time. A multicenter cohort analysis was performed in 2 comparable groups of FBSS patients. Regarding eligibility, patients had to be treated with SCS for at least 3 months. While the Trial group comprised patients who underwent an SCS implantation after a successful trial, the No-Trial group encompassed patients who underwent complete implantation within 1 session. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity scores and complications. The Trial and No-Trial groups consisted of 194 and 376 patients (N = 570), respectively. A statistically but not clinically significant difference in pain intensity (P = .003; effect = 0.506 (.172-.839)) was found in favor of the Trial group. No interaction between a time dependency effect and pain intensity was noted. Whereas trialed SCS patients were more likely to cease opioid usage (P = .003; OR = .509 (.326-.792)), patients in the No-Trial group endured fewer infections (P = .006; proportion difference = .43 (.007-.083)). Although the clinical relevance of our findings should be proven in future studies, this long-term real-world data study indicates that patient-centered assessments on whether an SCS trial should be performed have to be investigated. According to the current ambiguous evidence, SCS trials should be considered on a case-by-case basis. PERSPECTIVE: The currently available comparative evidence, together with our results, remains ambiguous on which SCS implantation strategy might be deemed superior. An SCS trial should be considered on a case-by-case basis, for which further investigation of its clinical utility in certain patient populations or character traits is warranted.

Intraoperative Spinal Cord Stimulation Mitigates Central Sensitization After Spine Surgery in Mice.

STUDY DESIGN: Double-blinded, prospective laboratory animal study. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether intraoperative spinal cord stimulation (SCS) inhibits the development of spine surgery-induced hypersensitivity. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Managing postoperative pain after spine surgery is challenging, and as many as 40% of patients may develop failed back surgery syndrome. Although SCS has been shown to effectively reduce chronic pain symptoms, it is unknown whether intraoperative SCS can mitigate the development of central sensitization that causes postoperative pain hypersensitivity and potentially leads to failed back surgery syndrome after spine surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mice were randomly stratified into three experimental groups: (1) sham surgery, (2) laminectomy alone, and (3) laminectomy plus SCS. Secondary mechanical hypersensitivity was measured in hind paws using von Frey assay one day before and at predetermined times after surgery. In addition, we also performed a conflict avoidance test to capture the affective-motivational domain of pain at selected time points postlaminectomy. RESULTS: Mice that underwent unilateral T13 laminectomy developed mechanical hypersensitivity in both hind paws. Intraoperative SCS applied to the exposed side of the dorsal spinal cord significantly inhibited the development of hind paw mechanical hypersensitivity on the SCS-applied side. Sham surgery did not produce any obvious secondary mechanical hypersensitivity in the hind paws. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that spine surgery for unilateral laminectomy induces central sensitization that results in postoperative pain hypersensitivity. Intraoperative SCS after laminectomy may be able to mitigate the development of this hypersensitivity in appropriately selected cases.

Spinal cord stimulation and return to work of patients with failed back surgery syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic pain has a substantial negative impact on work-related outcomes, which underlines the importance of interventions to reduce the burden. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) efficiently relieves pain in specific chronic pain syndromes and is recommended for treating failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) or post-surgical chronic back pain that is refractory to other treatments. To examine the impact of SCS in patients with FBSS on the return to work (RTW), we determined the RTW rate and the factors positively associated with the RTW. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among 106 patients with FBSS who benefitted from SCS at a single institution in France between September 1999 and March 2010, we retrospectively included 59 who had stopped work at the time of SCS because of disability or sick leave and evaluated the RTW (rate and predictors, estimating odds ratios [ORs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]). RESULTS: The mean (SD) post-surgery follow-up for the 59 patients (34 men; mean [SD] age 46.9 [7.4] years) was 7.5 (3.6) years (range 5-15). The RTW rate was 30.5%, with a median [IQR] recovery time of 5.5 months [3-8.5]. RTW was improved with functional improvement evolution (OR 1.1, 95% CI [1.01-1.1], p = 0.02) and was reduced with unemployment > 3 years (OR 0.1, 95% CI [0.01-0.7], p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our protocol for SCS for patients with FBSS, including a strict selection of patients and a multidisciplinary approach, led to good results, especially for the RTW. RTW should be a therapeutic goal, directly affecting indirect costs related to FBSS.

Cost-effectiveness of 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation therapy compared with conventional medical management over the first 12 months of therapy for patients with nonsurgical back pain: randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This analysis evaluated if spinal cord stimulation (SCS) at 10 kHz plus conventional medical management (CMM) is cost-effective compared with CMM alone for the treatment of nonsurgical refractory back pain (NSRBP). METHODS: NSRBP subjects were randomized 1:1 into the 10-kHz SCS (n = 83) or CMM (n = 76) group. Outcomes assessed at 6 months included EQ-5D 5-level (EQ-5D-5L), medication usage, and healthcare utilization (HCU). There was an optional crossover at 6 months and follow-up to 12 months. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated with cost including all HCU and medications except for the initial device and implant procedure, and cost-effectiveness was analyzed based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of < $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. RESULTS: Treatment with 10-kHz SCS resulted in a significant improvement in quality of life (QOL) over CMM (EQ-5D-5L index score change of 0.201 vs -0.042, p < 0.001) at a lower cost, based on reduced frequency of HCU resulting in an ICER of -$4964 at 12 months. The ICER was -$8620 comparing the 6 months on CMM with postcrossover on 10-kHz SCS. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with 10-kHz SCS provides higher QOL at a lower average cost per patient compared with CMM. Assuming an average reimbursement for device and procedure, 10-kHz SCS therapy is predicted to be cost-effective for the treatment of NSRBP compared with CMM within 2.1 years.

A Feasibility Study Exploring Measures of Autonomic Function in Patients With Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Undergoing Spinal Cord Stimulation.

OBJECTIVES: Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is associated with impaired autonomic tone, characterized by sympathetic prevalence and vagal withdrawal. Although spinal cord stimulation (SCS) alleviates pain in FBSS, there is limited research investigating how SCS affects measures of autonomic function. This was a prospective, open-label, feasibility study exploring measures of autonomic function in patients with FBSS receiving SCS therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 14 patients with FBSS were recruited for baseline measurements and underwent a trial of 10-kHz SCS. There were three failed trials, resulting in the remaining 11 participants receiving a fully implanted 10-kHz SCS system. One participant requested an explant, resulting in ten participants completing both baseline and follow-up (three to six months after SCS implant) measurements. Autonomic function was assessed using time- and frequency-domain heart rate variability (HRV), baroreceptor reflex sensitivity (BRS), and muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) using microneurography. Because this was a feasibility study, most of the analysis was descriptive. However, paired t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests tested for differences between baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: In the whole (N = 14) and final (N = 10) samples, there was between-participant variation in baseline and follow-up measures. This, combined with a small sample, likely contributed to finding no statistically significant differences in any of the measures between baseline and follow-up. However, plotting baseline and follow-up scores for individual participants revealed that those who showed increases in MSNA frequency, square root of the mean of the squared differences between adjacent RR intervals (RMSSD), percentage of the number of RR intervals >50 ms (pRR50), total power, and up BRS between baseline and follow-up had distinct clustering of baseline values compared with those who showed decreases in these measures. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this feasibility study will aid with informing hypotheses for future research. A key aspect that should be considered in future research concerns exploring the role of baseline measures of autonomic function in influencing change in autonomic function with SCS therapy.

Exceptional Cases of Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Refractory Cancer-Related Pain.

OBJECTIVES: Cancer pain has traditionally been managed with opioids, adjuvant medications, and interventions including injections, neural blockade, and intrathecal pump (ITP). Spinal cord stimulation (SCS), although increasingly used for conditions such as failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome, is not currently recommended for cancer pain. However, patients with cancer-related pain have demonstrated benefit with SCS. We sought to better characterize these patients and the benefit of SCS in exceptional cases of refractory pain secondary to progression of disease or evolving treatment-related complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective case series at a tertiary cancer center. Adults ≥18 years old with active cancer and evolving pain secondary to disease progression or treatment, whose symptoms were refractory to systemic opioids, and who underwent SCS trial followed by percutaneous implantation between 2016 and 2021 were included. Descriptive statistics included mean, SD, median, and interquartile range (IQR). RESULTS: Eight patients met the inclusion criteria. The average age at SCS trial was 60.0 (SD: ±11.6) years, and 50% were men. Compared with baseline, the median (IQR) change in pain score by numeric rating scale (NRS) after trial was -3 (2). At an average of 14 days after implant, the median (IQR) change in NRS and daily oral morphine equivalents were -2 (3.5) and -126 mg (1095 mg), respectively. At a median of 63 days after implant, the corresponding values were -3 (0.75) and -96 mg (711 mg). There was no significant change in adjuvant therapies after SCS implantation at follow-up. Six patients were discharged within two days after implantation. Two patients were readmitted for pain control within the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cancer-related pain, SCS may significantly relieve pain, reduce systemic daily opioid consumption, and potentially decrease hospital length of stay and readmission for pain control. It may be appropriate to consider an SCS trial before ITP in select cases of cancer-related pain.

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.