Paresthesia-Independence: An Assessment of Technical Factors Related to 10 kHz Paresthesia-Free Spinal Cord Stimulation.

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been successfully used to treat chronic intractable pain for over 40 years. Successful clinical application of SCS is presumed to be generally dependent on maximizing paresthesia-pain overlap; critical to achieving this is positioning of the stimulation field at the physiologic midline. Recently, the necessity of paresthesia for achieving effective relief in SCS has been challenged by the introduction of 10 kHz paresthesia-free stimulation. In a large, prospective, randomized controlled pivotal trial, HF10 therapy was demonstrated to be statistically and clinically superior to paresthesia-based SCS in the treatment of severe chronic low back and leg pain. HF10 therapy, unlike traditional paresthesia-based SCS, requires no paresthesia to be experienced by the patient, nor does it require paresthesia mapping at any point during lead implant or post-operative programming. OBJECTIVES: To determine if pain relief was related to technical factors of paresthesia, we measured and analyzed the paresthesia responses of patients successfully using HF10 therapy. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, non-randomized, non-controlled interventional study. SETTING: Outpatient pain clinic at 10 centers across the US and Italy. METHODS: Patients with both back and leg pain already implanted with an HF10 therapy device for up to 24 months were included in this multicenter study. Patients provided pain scores prior to and after using HF10 therapy. Each patient's most efficacious HF10 therapy stimulation program was temporarily modified to a low frequency (LF; 60 Hz), wide pulse width (~470 mus), paresthesia-generating program. On a human body diagram, patients drew the locations of their chronic intractable pain and, with the modified program activated, all regions where they experienced LF paresthesia. Paresthesia and pain drawings were then analyzed to estimate the correlation of pain relief outcomes to overlap of pain by paresthesia, and the mediolateral distribution of paresthesia (as a surrogate of physiologic midline lead positioning). RESULTS: A total of 61 patients participated across 11 centers. Twenty-eight men and 33 women with a mean age of 56 ± 12 years of age participated in the study. The average duration of implantable pulse generator (IPG) implant was 19 ± 9 months. The average predominant pain score, as measured on a 0 - 10 visual analog scale (VAS), prior to HF10 therapy was 7.8 ± 1.3 and at time of testing was 2.5 ± 2.1, yielding an average pain relief of 70 ± 24%. For all patients, the mean paresthesia coverage of pain was 21 ± 28%, with 43% of patients having zero paresthesia coverage of pain. Analysis revealed no correlation between percentage of LF paresthesia overlap of predominant pain and HF10 therapy efficacy (P = 0.56). Exact mediolateral positioning of the stimulation electrodes was not found to be a statistically significant predictor of pain relief outcomes. LIMITATIONS: Non-randomized/non-controlled study design; short-term evaluation; certain technical factors not investigated. CONCLUSION: Both paresthesia concordance with pain and precise midline positioning of the stimulation contacts appear to be inconsequential technical factors for successful HF10 therapy application. These results suggest that HF10 therapy is not only paresthesia-free, but may be paresthesia-independent.

Comparison of tonic spinal cord stimulation, high-frequency and burst stimulation in patients with complex regional pain syndrome: a double-blind, randomised placebo controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) is a disabling disease that is sometimes difficult to treat. Although spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can reduce pain in most patients with CRPS, some do not achieve the desired reduction in pain. Moreover, the pain reduction can diminish over time even after an initially successful period of SCS. Pain reduction can be regained by increasing the SCS frequency, but this has not been investigated in a prospective trial. This study compares pain reduction using five SCS frequencies (standard 40 Hz, 500 Hz, 1200 Hz, burst and placebo stimulation) in patients with CRPS to determine which of the modalities is most effective. DESIGN: All patients with a confirmed CRPS diagnosis that have unsuccessfully tried all other therapies and are eligible for SCS, can enroll in this trial (primary implantation group). CRPS patients that already receive SCS therapy, or those previously treated with SCS but with loss of therapeutic effect over time, can also participate (re-implantation group). Once all inclusion criteria are met and written informed consent obtained, patients will undergo a baseline assessment (T0). A 2-week trial with SCS is performed and, if successful, a rechargeable internal pulse generator (IPG) is implanted. For the following 3 months the patient will have standard 40 Hz stimulation therapy before a follow-up assessment (T1) is performed. Those who have completed the T1 assessment will enroll in a 10-week crossover period in which the five SCS frequencies are tested in five periods, each frequency lasting for 2 weeks. At the end of the crossover period, the patient will choose which frequency is to be used for stimulation for an additional 3 months, until the T2 assessment. DISCUSSION: Currently no trials are available that systematically investigate the importance of variation in frequency during SCS in patients with CRPS. Data from this trial will provide better insight as to whether SCS with a higher frequency, or with burst stimulation, results in more effective pain relief. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN36655259.

Barriers to investigator-initiated deep brain stimulation and device research.

The success of device-based research in the clinical neurosciences has overshadowed a critical and emerging problem in the biomedical research environment in the United States. Neuroprosthetic devices, such as deep brain stimulation (DBS), have been shown in humans to be promising technologies for scientific exploration of neural pathways and as powerful treatments. Large device companies have, over the past several decades, funded and developed major research programs. However, both the structure of clinical trial funding and the current regulation of device research threaten investigator-initiated efforts in neurologic disorders. The current atmosphere dissuades clinical investigators from pursuing formal and prospective research with novel devices or novel indications. We review our experience in conducting a federally funded, investigator-initiated, device-based clinical trial that utilized DBS for thalamic pain syndrome. We also explore barriers that clinical investigators face in conducting device-based clinical trials, particularly in early-stage studies or small disease populations. We discuss 5 specific areas for potential reform and integration: (1) alternative pathways for device approval; (2) eliminating right of reference requirements; (3) combining federal grant awards with regulatory approval; (4) consolidation of oversight for human subjects research; and (5) private insurance coverage for clinical trials. Careful reformulation of regulatory policy and funding mechanisms is critical for expanding investigator-initiated device research, which has great potential to benefit science, industry, and, most importantly, patients.

Occlusal dysesthesia: a qualitative systematic review of the epidemiology, aetiology and management.

Occlusal dysesthesia refers to a persistent complaint of uncomfortable bite sensation with no obvious occlusal discrepancy. This systematic review aimed to draw a picture of such patients, to present an agreement of previously reported diagnostic criteria and to analyse the evidence level of the recommended management approaches. An electronic search for all relevant reports on occlusal dysesthesia was thoroughly performed based on previous nomenclatures (e.g. phantom bite, occlusal hyperawareness) in PubMed and The Cochrane Library in July, 2011. A total of 84 reports were matched, among which only 11 studies were included after a two-step (abstract and detailed full-text revision) screening process. Additionally, a thorough manual review of reference lists of the included reports enabled the inclusion of two additional studies. Data analysis revealed that 37 occlusal dysesthesia patients presented a mean age of 51.7 ± 10.6 years and were predominantly women (male/female: 1/5.1) with symptom duration of more than 6 years (average: 6.3 ± 7.5 years) and with concomitant psychological disturbances (e.g. mood disorders, somatoform disorders, personality disorders). Only four authors presented diagnostic criteria for occlusal dysesthesia, which served as the basis for an agreement in the diagnostic criteria. Treatment approaches included psychotherapy, cognitive/behaviour therapy, splint therapy and prescription of anti-depressants or anti-anxiety drugs. Classification of evidence level of management approaches, however, revealed that most of them were expert opinions with single- or multiple-case report(s). Future studies are necessary for a deeper understanding of the mechanisms behind the occlusal dysesthesia symptoms, and consequently, for improvements in evidence-based management approaches.