Current Waveforms in Spinal Cord Stimulation and Their Impact on the Future of Neuromodulation: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Neuromodulation is a standard and well-accepted treatment for chronic refractory neuropathic pain. There has been progressive innovation in the field over the last decade, particularly in areas of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and dorsal root ganglion stimulation. Improved outcomes using proprietary waveforms have become customary in the field, leading to an unprecedented expansion of these products and a plethora of options for the management of pain. Although advances in waveform technology have improved our fundamental understanding of neuromodulation, a scoping review describing new energy platforms and their associated clinical effects and outcomes is needed. The authors submit that understanding electrophysiological neuromodulation may be important for clinical decision-making and programming selection for personalized patient care. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to characterize ways differences in mechanism of action and clinical outcomes of current spinal neuromodulation products may affect contemporary clinical decision-making while outlining a possible path for the future SCS. STUDY DESIGN: The study is a scoping review of the literature about newer generation SCS waveforms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature report was performed on PubMed and chapters to include articles on spine neuromodulation mechanism of action and efficacy. RESULTS: A total of 8469 studies were identified, 75 of which were included for the scoping review after keywords defining recent waveform technology were added. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical data suggest that neuromodulation remains a promising tool in the treatment of chronic pain. The evidence for SCS for treating chronic pain seems compelling; however, more long-term and comparative data are needed for a comparison of waveforms when it comes to the etiology of pain. In addition, an exploration into combination waveform therapy and waveform cycling may be paramount for future clinical studies and the development of new technologies.

Predicting the Collapse of Pain Medicine Using the Economic Recession of 2008 as a Comparator: Lessons Remain Unlearned.

The last decade has seen a boom in pain medicine, basic science and interventional pain management. Concomitantly, there is a need to educate trainees, young attendings, and seasoned attendings on these innovations. There has been a growth in the number of societies that represent pain medicine physicians, each with its own philosophy and guiding principles. The variety of thought within pain management, within the various groups that practice this field, and amongst the societies which protect those missions inherently creates divergence and isolation within these different communities. There is the enormous opportunity for our field to grow, but we need the voices of all different specialties and sub-specialties which practice pain medicine to collectively design the future of our emerging field. The explosion of revolutionary percutaneous surgeries, medications, psychotherapy, and research and development in our field has outpaced the ability of payers to fully embrace them. There is an increased number of pain practitioners using novel therapies, postgraduate training programs do not adequately train users in these techniques thereby creating a potential for sub-optimal outcomes. In part, this is a reason why payers for many of our more novel treatments have decreased patient access or eliminated remuneration for some of them. We believe that society-based collaborative regulation of education, research, and treatment guidelines is needed to improve visibility for payers and end users who provide these treatments. Furthermore, postgraduate chronic pain fellowship education has been deemed by many to be insufficient to educate on all of the necessary requirements needed for the independent practice of pain medicine, especially the consummation of newer technologies. Here, we draw comparison with this tenuous stage in pain management history with the last United States recession to remind us of how poor institutional regulation and neglect for long-term growth hampers a community.

Radiofrequency ablation of the hip: review.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the articular branches of the femoral and obturator nerves (the innervation of the anterior capsule of the hip) is an emerging treatment for chronic hip pain. Body mass index (BMI) greater than 30, older age, large acetabular/femoral head bone marrow lesions, chronic widespread pain, depression, and female sex increase the risk of developing hip pain. Chronic hip pain is a common condition with a wide range of etiologies, including hip osteoarthritis (OA), labral tears, osteonecrosis, post total hip arthroplasty (THA), post-operative dislocation/fracture, and cancer. The most common and well studied is hip OA. Management of chronic hip pain includes conservative measures (pharmacotherapy and exercise), surgery, and percutaneous procedures such as RFA. While surgery is effective, those whose medical comorbidities preclude surgery, those who do not wish to have surgery, and those whose pain persists after surgery (11-36% of patients) could benefit from RFA. Because of the aforementioned circumstances, hip RFA is often a palliative intervention. Hip RFA is an effective treatment, one recent retrospective study of 138 patients found 69% had >50% pain relief at 6 months. The most frequent adverse event reported for hip RFA is pain from needle placement. No serious bleeding events have been reported, despite the valid concern of the procedure's proximity to vasculature. This descriptive review details the pathophysiology of hip pain, its etiologies, its clinical presentation, conservative management, the anatomy/technique of hip RFA, hip RFA efficacy, and RFA adverse events.