Chronic Low Back Pain: Restoration of Dynamic Stability.

OBJECTIVES: Electrical stimulation for multifidus muscle contraction is a novel approach for treating chronic low back pain (CLBP). A multicenter, open-label feasibility study investigated this modality in patients with continuing CLBP despite medical management and no prior back surgery and no known pathological cause of CLBP. METHODS: Twenty-six patients with continuing CLBP despite physical therapy and medication were implanted with commercially-available implantable pulse generators and leads positioned adjacent to the medial branch of the dorsal ramus as it crosses the L3 transverse process such that electrical stimulation resulted in contraction of the lumbar multifidus (LM) muscle. Patients self-administered stimulation twice daily for 20 min. Low back pain (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Quality of Life (EQ-5D) scores were collected at three and five months and compared to baseline. Stimulation was withdrawn between months 4 and 5 to test durability of effect. RESULTS: At three months, 74% of patients met or exceeded the minimally important change (MIC) in VAS and 63% for disability. QoL improved in 84% of patients (N = 19) and none got worse. Five of the 11 patients on disability for CLBP (45%) resumed work by three months. Half the patients reported ≥50% VAS reduction by month 5. Twenty-one lead migration events occurred in 13 patients, of which 7 patients are included in the efficacy cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Episodic stimulation to induce LM contraction can reduce CLBP and disability, improve quality of life and enable return to work. A dedicated lead design to reduce risk of migration is required.

Spinal cord stimulation versus re-operation in patients with failed back surgery syndrome: an international multicenter randomized controlled trial (EVIDENCE study).

OBJECTIVE: This paper presents the protocol of the EVIDENCE study, a multicenter multinational randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) with rechargeable pulse generator versus re-operation through 36-month follow-up in patients with failed back surgery syndrome. STUDY DESIGN: Study subjects have neuropathic radicular leg pain exceeding or equaling any low back pain and meet specified entry criteria. One-to-one randomization is stratified by site and by one or more prior lumbosacral operations. The sample size of 132 subjects may be adjusted to between 100 and 200 subjects using a standard adaptive design statistical method with pre-defined rules. Crossover treatment is possible. Co-primary endpoints are proportion of subjects reporting ≥ 50% leg pain relief without crossover at 6 and at 24 months after SCS screening trial or re-operation. Insufficient pain relief constitutes failure of randomized treatment, as does crossover. Secondary endpoints include cost-effectiveness; relief of leg, back, and overall pain; change in disability and quality of life; and rate of crossover. We are collecting data on subject global impression of change, patient satisfaction with treatment, employment status, pain/paresthesia overlap, SCS programming, and adverse events. DISCUSSION: As the first multicenter randomized controlled trial of SCS versus re-operation and the first to use only rechargeable SCS pulse generators, the EVIDENCE study will provide up-to-date evidence on the treatment of failed back surgery syndrome.