Examining the Duration of Carryover Effect in Patients With Chronic Pain Treated With Spinal Cord Stimulation (EChO Study): An Open, Interventional, Investigator-Initiated, International Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVES: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a surgical treatment for severe, chronic, neuropathic pain. It is based on one to two lead(s) implanted in the epidural space, stimulating the dorsal column. It has long been assumed that when deactivating SCS, there is a variable interval before the patient perceives the return of the pain, a phenomenon often termed echo or carryover effect. Although the carryover effect has been problematized as a source of error in crossover studies, no experimental investigation of the effect has been published. This open, prospective, international multicenter study aimed to systematically document, quantify, and investigate the carryover effect in SCS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with a beneficial effect from their SCS treatment were instructed to deactivate their SCS device in a home setting and to reactivate it when their pain returned. The primary outcome was duration of carryover time defined as the time interval from deactivation to reactivation. Central clinical parameters (age, sex, indication for SCS, SCS treatment details, pain score) were registered and correlated with carryover time using nonparametric tests (Mann-Whitney/Kruskal-Wallis) for categorical data and linear regression for continuous data. RESULTS: In total, 158 patients were included in the analyses. A median carryover time of five hours was found (interquartile range 2.5;21 hours). Back pain as primary indication for SCS, high-frequency stimulation, and higher pain score at the time of deactivation were correlated with longer carryover time. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the existence of the carryover effect and indicates a remarkably high degree of interindividual variation. The results suggest that the magnitude of carryover may be correlated to the nature of the pain condition and possibly stimulation paradigms. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT03386058.

Network Meta-analysis and Economic Evaluation of Neurostimulation Interventions for Chronic Nonsurgical Refractory Back Pain.

OBJECTIVES: Different types of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) have been evaluated for the management of chronic nonsurgical refractory back pain (NSRBP). A direct comparison between the different types of SCS or between closed-loop SCS with conventional medical management (CMM) for patients with NSRBP has not been previously conducted, and therefore, their relative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness remain unknown. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review, network meta-analysis (NMA) and economic evaluation of closed-loop SCS compared with fixed-output SCS and CMM for patients with NSRBP. METHODS: Databases were searched to September 8, 2023. Randomized controlled trials of SCS for NSRBP were included. The results of the studies were combined using fixed-effect NMA models. A cost-utility analysis was performed from the perspective of the UK National Health Service with results reported as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: Closed-loop SCS resulted in statistically and clinically significant reductions in pain intensity (mean difference [MD] 32.72 [95% CrI 15.69-49.78]) and improvements in secondary outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] and health-related quality of life [HRQoL]) compared with fixed-output SCS at 6-month follow-up. Compared with CMM, both closed-loop and fixed-output SCS resulted in statistically and clinically significant reductions in pain intensity (closed-loop SCS vs. CMM MD 101.58 [95% CrI 83.73-119.48]; fixed-output SCS versus CMM MD 68.86 [95% CrI 63.43-74.31]) and improvements in secondary outcomes (ODI and HRQoL). Cost-utility analysis showed that closed-loop SCS dominates fixed-output SCS and CMM, and fixed-output SCS also dominates CMM. DISCUSSION: Current evidence showed that closed-loop and fixed-output SCS provide more benefits and cost-savings compared with CMM for patients with NSRBP.

European randomized controlled trial evaluating differential target multiplexed spinal cord stimulation and conventional medical management in subjects with persistent back pain ineligible for spine surgery: 24-month results.

BACKGROUND: Differential target multiplexed spinal cord stimulation (DTM SCS) was shown to be superior to conventional SCS for treating chronic low back pain (CLBP) in subjects with persistent spinal pain syndrome with previous spinal surgery (PSPS-T2) or ineligible for it (PSPS-T1). This study reports 24-month efficacy and safety of DTM SCS vs. conventional medical management (CMM) in PSPS-T1 subjects across four European countries. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial with optional crossover. Subjects randomized 1:1 to DTM SCS or CMM. Primary endpoint was responder rate (% subjects reporting ≥50% CLBP relief) at 6 months. A superiority test compared responder rates between treatments. CLBP and leg pain levels, functional disability, quality of life (QoL), patient satisfaction and global impression of change were evaluated for 24 months. A Composite Responder Index (CRI) was obtained using CLBP relief, disability and QoL. Incidence of study-related adverse events evaluated safety. RESULTS: A total of 55 and 57 subjects were randomized to DTM SCS and CMM respectively. DTM SCS was superior, with CLBP responder rates ≥80% and CLBP relief >5.6 cm (>70% reduction) through the 24-month follow-up. Improvements with DTM SCS in other outcomes were sustained. The CRI was >80% for DTM SCS through 24 months. Opioid medication intake decreased in subjects treated with DTM SCS. Most patients treated with DTM SCS felt satisfied and improved at the end of the study. Safety was congruent with other studies. CONCLUSION: DTM SCS is efficacious and safe during 24 months for the treatment of CLBP and leg pain in PSPS-T1 patients ineligible for spine surgery. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This randomized controlled trial shows that Differential Target Multiplexed SCS (DTM SCS) is an effective and safe long-term treatment for PSPS type 1 patients suffering from axial low back pain with or without leg pain and who are ineligible for spinal surgery. Currently, CMM treatments are their only option and provide limited benefits. Besides superior pain relief, DTM SCS provides significant improvements in functional disability, quality of life, high levels of satisfaction and perceived impression of change.

Large-scale real-world data on a multidisciplinary approach to spinal cord stimulation for persistent spinal pain syndromes: first evaluation of the Neuro-Pain® nationwide screening and follow-up interactive register.

Introduction: Spinal cord stimulation is a common treatment option for neuropathic pain conditions. Despite its extensive use and multiple technological evolutions, long term efficacy of spinal cord stimulation is debated. Most studies on spinal cord stimulation include a rather limited number of patients and/or follow-ups over a limited period. Therefore, there is an urgent need for real-world, long-term data. Methods: In 2018, the Belgian government initiated a nationwide secure platform for the follow-up of all new and existing spinal cord stimulation therapies. This is a unique approach used worldwide. Four years after the start of centralized recording, the first global extraction of data was performed. Results: Herein, we present the findings, detailing the different steps in the centralized procedure, as well as the observed patient and treatment characteristics. Furthermore, we identified dropouts during the screening process, the reasons behind discontinuation, and the evolution of key indicators during the trial period. In addition, we obtained the first insights into the evolution of the clinical impact of permanent implants on the overall functioning and quality of life of patients in the long-term. Discussion: Although these findings are the results of the first data extraction, some interesting conclusions can be drawn. The long-term outcomes of neuromodulation are complex and subject to many variables. Future data extraction will allow us to identify these confounding factors and the early predictors of success. In addition, we will propose further optimization of the current process.