Targeted Nerve Root Stimulation Alleviates Intractable Chronic Limb Pain Associated with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome - A Prospective Multi-Center Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: There are limited therapeutic options to treat complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Spinal cord stimulation and dorsal root ganglion stimulation are proven therapies for treating chronic low limb pain in CRPS patients. There is limited evidence that stimulation of dorsal nerve roots can also provide relief of lower limb pain in these patients. OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate that electrical stimulation of dorsal nerve roots via epidural lead placement provides relief of chronic lower limb pain in patients suffering from CRPS. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, open label, single arm, multi-center study. SETTING: The study was performed at the Center for Interventional Pain and Spine (Exton, PA), Millennium Pain Center (Bloomington, IL), and the Carolinas Pain Center (Huntersville, NC). It was approved by the Western Institutional Review Board-Copernicus Group Institutional Review Board and is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03954080). METHODS: Sixteen patients with intractable chronic severe lower limb pain associated with CRPS were enrolled in the study. A standard trial period to evaluate a patients' response to stimulation of the dorsal nerve roots was conducted over 3 to 10-days. Patients that obtained 50% or greater pain relief during the trial period underwent permanent implantation of a neurostimulation system. The primary outcome was the evaluated pain level after 3 months of device activation, based on NRS pain score relative to baseline. Patients were followed up for 6 months after activation of the permanently implanted system. RESULTS: At the primary endpoint, patients reported a significant (P = 0.0006) reduction in pain of 3.3 points, improvement in quality of life, improved neuropathic pain characteristics, improved satisfaction, and an overall perception of improvement with the therapy. Improvements were sustained throughout the duration of the study up to the final 6-month visit. LIMITATIONS: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic occurring during patient enrollment, only 16 patients were enrolled and trialed, with 12 being permanently implanted. Nine were able to complete the end of study evaluation at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this short feasibility study confirm the functionality, effectiveness, and safety of intraspinal stimulation of dorsal nerve roots in patients with intractable chronic lower limb pain due to CRPS using commercially approved systems and conventional parameters.

A randomized controlled study of the long-term efficacy of cooled and monopolar radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of chronic pain related to knee osteoarthritis.

Background: Chronic knee pain due to osteoarthritis (OA) is expected to become more prevalent. Although conventional therapies may provide relief they are not long-lasting. Persistent pain may lead to total knee replacement, which is not free of adverse outcomes. Monopolar and cooled radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of genicular nerves is an effective option. However, either method may provide distinctive results depending on expected lesion size, a key aspect considering the anatomical variability of knee innervations. This prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and durability of knee RFA using a cooled probe or a monopolar probe of comparable diameter. Methods: This investigator-initiated, post-market, double-blinded, prospective, randomized controlled trial was approved by the Western IRB. 79 subjects with chronic knee pain due to knee OA were enrolled in multiple locations of a single center. 75 subjects were randomized (1:1) into RFA treatment with either a 4 â€‹mm/17G cooled active tip (CRFA) or a 10 â€‹mm/16G monopolar active tip (MRFA) using conventional procedures. Primary endpoint was change in knee pain level (100 â€‹mm VAS score) from baseline at 24-week post-treatment. Other endpoints include change in functionality, global perceived effect, and frequency of adverse events. Evaluation spanned to 52-week post-treatment. Significance of results (p â€‹< â€‹0.05) was calculated using standard statistical analyses. Results: Both CRFA and MRFA provided significant reduction (41 â€‹mm and 39 â€‹mm, respectively) of chronic knee pain at 24-week. At the 52-week visit, reduction in pain level was sustained for CRFA (42 â€‹mm) but seems to decrease for MRFA (31 â€‹mm). Improvements in functionality were also significant and sustained with both treatments, although tend to decrease with MRFA at 52-week. Most patients also perceived a very good/good effect of treatments along the duration of the study. Conclusion: RFA of knee genicular nerves for the treatment of OA chronic pain is effective for 52 weeks post-ablation when using a CRFA (4 â€‹mm/17G active tip) or MRFA (10 â€‹mm/16G active tip). The benefits of CRFA seems to be better sustained beyond 24 weeks than the ones of MRFA, although no significant differences were observed at 52 weeks.

Safety and Efficacy of Platelet Rich Plasma for Treatment of Lumbar Discogenic Pain: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind Study.

BACKGROUND: Interventions for chronic discogenic spine pain are currently insufficient in lowering individual patient suffering and global disease burden. A 2016 study of platelet rich plasma (PRP) for chronic discogenic pain previously demonstrated clinically significant response among active group patients compared with controls. OBJECTIVES: To replicate the previous research to move this intervention forward as a viable option for patient care. STUDY DESIGN: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: Multicenter private practices. METHODS: Twenty-six (12 men, 14 women) human patients, ages 25 to 71 with a diagnosis of chronic lumbar discogenic pain, were randomly assigned to active (PRP) or control (saline) groups in a ratio of 2 active to 1 control. Baseline and follow-up Oswestry Disability Index and Numeric Pain Rating Scale questionnaires were obtained to track patient outcomes at 8 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS: Within group assessment showed clinically significant improvement in 17% of PRP patients and clinically significant decline in 5% (1 patient) of the active group. Clinically significant improvement was seen in 13% of placebo group patients and no placebo patients had clinically significant decline secondary to the procedure. LIMITATIONS: Possible explanations may include a range of factors including differences in patient demographics, outcome-measure sensitivity, or misalignment of statistical analyses. CONCLUSIONS: These findings are markedly different than the highly promising results of the 2016 PRP study. This study posits necessary caution for researchers who wish to administer PRP for therapeutic benefit and may ultimately point to necessary redirection of interventional research for discogenic pain populations.

The Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC): Recommendations on Best Practices for Cervical Neurostimulation.

INTRODUCTION: The International Neuromodulation Society convened a multispecialty group of physicians based on expertise with international representation to establish evidence-based guidance on the use of neurostimulation in the cervical region to improve outcomes. This Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC) project intends to provide evidence-based guidance for an often-overlooked area of neurostimulation practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Authors were chosen based upon their clinical expertise, familiarity with the peer-reviewed literature, research productivity, and contributions to the neuromodulation literature. Section leaders supervised literature searches of MEDLINE, BioMed Central, Current Contents Connect, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed from 2017 (when NACC last published guidelines) to the present. Identified studies were graded using the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria for evidence and certainty of net benefit. Recommendations are based on the strength of evidence or consensus when evidence was scant. RESULTS: The NACC examined the published literature and established evidence- and consensus-based recommendations to guide best practices. Additional guidance will occur as new evidence is developed in future iterations of this process. CONCLUSIONS: The NACC recommends best practices regarding the use of cervical neuromodulation to improve safety and efficacy. The evidence- and consensus-based recommendations should be utilized as a guide to assist decision making when clinically appropriate.

Pain relief and opioid usage in upper limb and neck pain patients after 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation treatment: subanalysis of USA studies.

Aim: It is argued that chronic pain patients who reduce/eliminate their opioids may have compromised pain relief. This study therefore aimed to analyze if reduced opioid consumption associated with 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation adversely affected pain relief. Methods: Post hoc analysis was performed on data from two prospective studies in subjects with upper limbs and neck pain conducted in USA. Results & conclusion: A 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation treatment was associated with reduction in mean visual analog scale scores for upper limbs and neck pain and mean daily opioid consumption. Pain scores decreased in subjects who decreased opioid use and in those who maintained/increased use. Opioid reduction and pain relief was also achieved in subjects taking >90 mg morphine equivalents of opioids at baseline.

Clinical Effectiveness and Mechanism of Action of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Treating Chronic Low Back and Lower Extremity Pain: a Systematic Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of the present systematic review is to provide a current understanding of the mechanism of action and the evidence available to support clinical decision-making. The focus is to summarize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized or observational studies of spinal cord stimulation in chronic pain to understand clinical effectiveness and the mechanism of action. RECENT FINDINGS: Several recent studies have demonstrated the benefit of spinal cord stimulation in managing chronic pain. Until recently, the mechanism of action was founded on a central paradigm derived from gate control theory, which is the need to stimulate the dorsal column of the spinal cord to generate paresthesia. The recent development of new therapies that do not rely on paresthesia has left the field without a clear mechanism of action that could serve as a strong foundation to further improve clinical outcomes. Consequently, multiple theories have emerged to explain how electrical pulse applied to the spinal cord could alleviate pain, including activation of specific supraspinal pathways, and segmental modulation of the neurological interaction. Recent systematic reviews also have shown the clinical effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation in managing chronic spinal pain, phantom limb pain, complex regional pain syndrome, and other chronic painful conditions. Spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of chronic pain is rapidly evolving with technology at its forefront. This comprehensive focused review evaluated 11 RCTs and 7 nonrandomized/observational studies which provided levels of evidence ranging from I to II.

Prospective, Multicenter Feasibility Study to Evaluate Differential Target Multiplexed Spinal Cord Stimulation Programming in Subjects With Chronic Intractable Back Pain With or Without Leg Pain.

OBJECTIVE: This prospective, open-label, multicenter study evaluated the feasibility of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapy programming for chronic low back pain that uses multiple electrical pulsed signals (Differential Target Multiplexed). METHODS: Twenty-five SCS candidates with low back pain equal to or greater than lower limb pain were enrolled at 7 sites in the United States. The subjects evaluated standard and Differential Target Multiplexed programs, each for 4 ± 1 days. A commercially available SCS trial system was used for standard SCS therapy programming. During the trialing of the multiplexed programs, implanted temporary leads were connected to an investigational external trial stimulator system. RESULTS: Twenty subjects concluded the study. The mean baseline numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) score for low back pain was 7.4, with a mean age of 62.4 years and mean pain duration of 18.0 years. Significant relief in back pain was observed for both treatments, with significantly better response with multiplexed programming. At the end of the trial period, subjects reported a reduction in their mean NPRS score from baseline to 4.2 after standard programming and to 2.4 after Differential Target Multiplexed programming. The difference between standard and multiplexed programming was significant. The responder rate for low back pain relief was 50% for standard programming and 80% for Differential Target Multiplexed programming. Eighty-five percent of subjects who evaluated both programming approaches preferred Differential Target Multiplexed SCS. CONCLUSION: In this difficult-to-treat patient population, subjects reported significant reduction in chronic back pain when using multiplexed programming. A randomized clinical trial is needed to confirm the results from this feasibility study.

Options: A Prospective, Open-Label Study of High-Dose Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients with Chronic Back and Leg Pain.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic approaches to spinal cord stimulation (SCS) continue to evolve and improve patient outcomes in patients receiving SCS therapy secondary to failed back surgery syndrome. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate pain relief and other patient outcomes of SCS using selected high-dose programming parameters. STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. SETTING: This study took place at 11 centers in North America. METHODS: Forty-four SCS-naive patients underwent trialing, starting with 1,000 Hz frequency, 90 µs pulse width followed by 300 Hz frequency, 800 µs pulse width, if pain relief was inadequate. Patients with 50% or greater pain relief were eligible for permanent implantation. Patient's pain rating, global impression of change, health-related quality of life, functional disability, satisfaction/recommendation, stimulation perception, device programming, and adverse events were assessed at 3 months postimplant. RESULTS: There were significant improvements from baseline in mean Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) pain scores for overall pain (7.5 to 3.8; P < 0.01), back pain (7.2 to 3.4; P < 0.01), leg pain (7.2 to 3.1; P < 0.01), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score (51.5 to 32.1; P < 0.01), and European Quality of Life-Five Dimensions, version 5L score (EQ-5D-5L) (0.58 to 0.74; P < 0.01). Twenty-eight of 32 patients (88%) had significant, favorable improvement in Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Eighty-four percent of patients were "satisfied," and 78.1% would "definitely" recommend SCS. Eighteen patients (56%) used 1,000 Hz frequency and 90 µs pulse width exclusively; these patients experienced mean NRS-11 overall pain score improvement of 4.7 points. Device-, therapy-, or procedure-related adverse events were experienced in 19 patients (40%, 19 of 48), and all events resolved without reoperation and were similar to those observed with traditional SCS systems. LIMITATIONS: There was no active or sham comparator group, and therefore the reported effects may not be solely attributable to therapy effects and may be related to other, nonspecific effects of SCS. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in pain relief, PGIC, EQ-5D-5L, ODI, and patient satisfaction were all clinically relevant and statistically significant. Future studies are needed to understand how these high-dose parameters perform versus a standard comparator. KEY WORDS: Spinal cord stimulation, high-frequency electrical stimulation, failed back surgery syndrome, neurostimulation, prospective, nonrandomized study.

Effects of Phase Polarity and Charge Balance Spinal Cord Stimulation on Behavior and Gene Expression in a Rat Model of Neuropathic Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of phase polarity and charge balance of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) waveforms on pain behavior and gene expression in a neuropathic pain rodent model. We hypothesized that differing waveforms will result in diverse behavioral and transcriptomics expression due to unique mechanisms of action. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Rats were implanted with a four-contact cylindrical mini-lead and randomly assigned to two control (no-pain and pain model) and five test groups featuring monophasic, as well as charge-unbalanced and charge-balanced biphasic SCS waveforms. Mechanical and cold allodynia were assessed to measure efficacy. The ipsilateral dorsal quadrant of spinal cord adjacent to the lead was harvested post-stimulation and processed to determine gene expression via real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Gene expression, SCS intensity (mA), and behavioral score as percent of baseline (BSPB) were statistically analyzed and used to generate correlograms using R-Studio. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS22.0, and p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: As expected, BSPB was significantly lower for the pain model group compared to the no-pain group. BSPB was significantly improved post-stim compared to pre-stim using cathodic, anodic, symmetric biphasic, or asymmetric biphasic 1:2 waveforms; however, BSPB was not restored to Sham levels. RT-PCR analysis showed that eight genes demonstrated a significant difference between the pain model and SCS waveforms and between waveforms. Correlograms reveal a linear correlation between regulation of expression of a given gene in relation to mA, BSPB, or other genes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results exhibit that specific SCS waveforms differentially modulate several key transcriptional pathways that are relevant in chronic pain conditions. These results have significant implications for SCS: whether to move beyond traditional paradigm of neuronal activation to focus also on modulating immune-driven processes.