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.

Surgical Paddle Electrode Implantation as a Rescue Therapy to Failed Percutaneous Leads in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) to treat failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) can be provided with either percutaneously or surgically implanted electrodes. Percutaneous electrodes are considered the first choice in many pain practices, but surgical paddle electrodes can also be indicated if a percutaneous electrode fails to retain sufficient pain relief or if percutaneous implantation is considered unachievable. Although the current efficacy of surgical paddle electrodes has been based mainly upon pain intensity scores, the evidence on surgical paddle electrodes as a rescue to failed percutaneous electrodes remains even more scarce. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and clinical effectiveness of rescue surgical paddle electrodes in FBSS patients, multidimensionally. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The occurrence of complications, pain intensity scores, psychosocial-related questionnaires, and medication intake were collected. Subsequently, a Quality-of-Life Index (QLI) was calculated. A clinically relevant effect was obtained if the minimal clinically important difference regarding pain intensity was reached. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients were included in the study. The pain intensity scores were significantly reduced (p < 0.001), and clinically relevant reductions occurred during short-term (0-6 months), mid-term (1-3 years), and long-term follow-up (≥4 years). The structural morphine usage and QLI were significantly decreased at short-term follow-up (p = 0.038 and p = 0.036, respectively). Six complications occurred in five patients, of which, four concerned hardware-related problems and two were of biological origin. CONCLUSION: SCS utilizing a surgical paddle electrode as a salvage treatment to failed conventional percutaneous cylindrical lead SCS can be practiced safely and effectively to treat FBSS. Because of potentially improved clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness resulting from fewer reoperations, a SCS treatment algorithm may benefit from expediting surgical paddle electrodes.

[Neuromodulation in severe neuropathic pain]. / Neuromodulatie bij ernstige neuropathische pijn.

Pain relief in patients with chronic neuropathic pain can be difficult to accomplish. If pharmacological treatment combined with a form of physical therapy and psychological support does not lead to improvement, nerve blocks and rehabilitation can be considered. Appropriately screened patients with persistent incapacitating pain may respond to neuromodulation. A specific form of this technique - spinal cord stimulation - delivers electric pulses via an implanted electrode connected to a battery in the epidural space around the spinal cord. We describe three patients, two of whom had persistent leg pain after disc surgery. The third patient suffered from diabetic neuropathy. Despite thorough pre-procedural screening by an anaesthetist-pain specialist, psychologist, physical therapist and specialised nurse, spinal cord stimulation failed in one patient. Psycho-social factors, inadequate coping skills and depression may lead to inadequate improvement and failure of this therapy.

Effectiveness of heparin solution versus normal saline in maintaining patency of intravenous locks in neonates: a double blind randomized controlled study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of heparin versus saline as flush solution for maintaining patency in peripheral intravenous locks in neonates and to investigate whether other variables influence the longevity of intravenous locks. BACKGROUND: Heparin is usually used as a regular flush solution to prevent occlusion of peripheral intravenous locks in neonates. There is no clear recommendation using heparin or saline flushing peripheral intravenous locks in neonates. The disadvantage of heparin cannot be ignored, especially in this patient group. METHODS: In a double blind prospective randomized study, neonates (gestational age >27 weeks) with intravenous locks were randomly assigned to receive heparin or saline as a flush solution in a 21-month period (2002-2004). The main outcome was the duration of patency. RESULTS: Eighty-eight neonates were included. No statistically significant difference was found in patency of peripheral intravenous locks flushed with 0.7 mL heparin (10 units/mL) (N = 42, median 56 hours) or 0.7 mL saline (N = 46, median 61 hours). When the analysis was confined to removed locks because of non-elective events, no statistically significant difference was found in duration of patency (P = 0.27). CONCLUSION: As no difference in patency could be established, using saline as a flush solution is preferable to heparin in peripheral intravenous locks in neonates, given the greater likelihood of complications associated with heparin. Although these data are more than 5 years old, the relevance of the outcome is still important for the clinical practice because of the potential adverse effects of heparin in these vulnerable infants.