Evaluation of Patient's Quality of Life before and after Implantation of Abbott's Proclaim™ XR Spinal Cord Stimulator with BurstDR™ Stimulation in Chronic Pain Syndrome.

Background and Objectives: In case of the ineffectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments in managing chronic neuropathic pain, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) with BurstDR™ stimulation may reduce pain and increase the quality of life. The term "burst" refers to a series of stimulation impulses that are compressed into small packets and separated by intervals of latency. Materials and Methods: A group of 30 consecutive patients who received the BurstDR™ stimulator using the minimally invasive percutaneous method was selected. Patients selected for our study underwent numerous spinal surgeries before SCS implantation. In the study, analgesics and co-analgesics and their doses used by patients before and 6 months after SCS implantation were examined and compared. Using the visual analogue scale (VAS), pain was compared before and after the procedure. Patients` quality of life was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Results: We observed a significant reduction in opioid daily doses by an average of 32.4% (±36.1%) and a reduction in paracetamol daily doses by an average of 40% (±33.4%). There was a reduction in pregabalin doses as well. Ketoprofen daily dose reduction was 85.4 mg. The mean VAS difference before and after procedure was 3.9 (±2.3), and the mean difference in ODI was 12.9 (±9), which benefits operative treatment. The VAS and ODI results were statistically significant as well. Conclusions: According to our research, BurstDR™ stimulation improves the quality of life by reducing doses of analgesics and the level of pain.

The Added Value of Intraoperative Hypnosis during Spinal Cord Stimulation Lead Implantation under Awake Anesthesia in Patients Presenting with Refractory Chronic Pain.

To improve pain relief for refractory pain condition, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) needs to target the dedicated neuronal fibers within the dorsal columns. Intraoperative feedback from the patient can optimize lead placement but requires "awake surgery", allowing interaction between patient and surgeon. This can produce negative effects like anxiety and stress. To better manage these aspects, we propose to combine intraoperative hypnosis with awake anesthesia. Seventy-four patients (35 females, 22-80 years) presenting with chronic refractory pain, were offered intraoperative hypnosis during awake SCS lead implantation. Interactive conversational hypnosis was used as well as interactive touch, which was enhanced during painful moments during the lead intraoperative programming. All patients participated actively during the intraoperative testing which helped to optimize the lead positioning. They kept an extremely positive memory of the surgery and of the hypnotic experience, despite some painful moments. Pain could be reduced in these patients by using interactions and touch, which works on Gate Control modulation. Positive memory was reinforced by congratulations to create self-confidence and to induce positive expectations, which could reinforce the Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Controls at the spinal level. Cooperation was improved because the patient was actively participating and thus, much more alert when feedback was required. Combining intraoperative hypnosis with awake anesthesia appears helpful for SCS lead implantation. It enhances patient cooperation, allows optimization of lead positioning, and leads to better pain control, positive and resourceful memory.

High-frequency spinal cord stimulation in failed back surgery syndrome patients with predominant low back pain-single-center experience.

Treatment of patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) with predominant low back pain (LBP) remains challenging. High-frequency spinal cord stimulation (HF10 SCS) is believed to achieve significant pain reduction. We aimed to evaluate the real-life efficacy of HF-10 SCS in a tertiary spine center. A prospective observational study of all patients with FBSS and predominant LBP who underwent HF-10 SCS surgery was performed between 2016 and 2018. Patients > 18 years with Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores of ≥ 5 for LBP and pain duration > 6 months under stable medication were implanted percutaneous under general anesthesia and a trial phase of 7-14 days was accomplished. Primary end point was a successful trial defined as ≥ 50% VAS score reduction for LBP. Thirty-four of 39 (85%) subjects had a successful trial. Fifty-three percent were female and the mean age was 69 years. Median follow-up lasted for 10 months. Devices were removed after a median of 10 months in 5 cases. Remaining 29 patients stated significant VAS score reduction for LBP from 8.1 to 2.9 and VAS for leg pain from 4.9 to 2.2. Twenty-four percent of all patients were able to discontinue their opioids. Eight of 9 patients (89%) with signs of adjacent disc disease and 7 of 10 (70%) patients with hardware failure were successfully implanted with significant VAS reduction for LBP. HF-10 SCS achieves significant pain reduction in most patients with FBSS and predominant LBP. It might be an efficient alternative to revision surgery.

The dimensions of "failed back surgery syndrome": what is behind a label?

BACKGROUND: The term failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) has been criticized for being too unspecific and several studies have shown that a variety of conditions may underlie this label. The aims of the present study were to describe the specific symptoms and to investigate the primary and secondary underlying causes of FBSS in a contemporary series of patients who had lumbar spinal surgery before. METHODS: We used a multilevel approach along three different axes defining symptomatic, morphological, and functional pathology dimensions. RESULTS: Within the study period of 3 years, a total of 145 patients (74 f, 71 m, mean age 51a, range 32-82a) with the external diagnosis of FBSS were included. Disk surgery up to 4 times and surgery for spinal stenosis up to 3 times were the commonest index operations. Most often, the patients complained of low back pain (n = 126), pseudoradicular pain (n = 54), and neuropathic pain (n = 44). Imaging revealed osteochondrosis (n = 61), spondylarthrosis (n = 48), and spinal misalignment (n = 32) as the most frequent morphological changes. The majority of patients were assigned at least to two different symptomatic subcategories and morphological subcategories, respectively. According to these findings, one or more functional pathologies were assigned in 131/145 patients that subsequently enabled a specific treatment strategy. CONCLUSIONS: FBSS has become rather a vague and imprecisely used generic term. We suggest that it should be avoided in the future both with regard to its partially stigmatizing connotation and its inherent hindering to provide individualized medicine.

Dextrose injections for failed back surgery syndrome: a consecutive case series.

PURPOSE: Patients with chronic low back pain, who do not respond to conservative treatment methods, generally undergo surgical revision operations, and sometimes an undesirable condition called failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) may be inevitable. Hereby, dextrose is one of the regenerative methods that has gained popularity in the treatment of many musculoskeletal problems, and we aimed to present and evaluate the outcomes of 5% dextrose for the treatment of FBSS. METHODS: It has been designed as a consecutive case series. A total of 79 patients with FBSS, who had minimum 6 months of symptoms and did not respond to 3 months of conservative methods between May 2014 and March 2016, participated in the study. Prolotherapy injections were applied in posterior and lateral approaches. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used for the pre- and post-treatment evaluations. Patient satisfaction was assessed with using a 5-point Likert scale by phone contacting. RESULTS: There was statistically significant difference between repeated VAS and ODI measurements. CONCLUSIONS: These results may be the first step giving a lead to an undiscovered field. This treatment method should be kept in mind for FBSS patients before giving a decision of revision surgery. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Impact of Insurance Provider on Overall Costs in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Cost Study of 122,827 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) affects 40% of patients following spine surgery with estimated costs of $20 billion to the US health care system. The aim of this study was to assess the cost differences across the different insurance providers for FBSS patients. METHODS: A retrospective longitudinal study was performed using the Truven MarketScan® database to identify FBSS patients from 2001 to 2012. Patients were grouped into Commercial, Medicaid, or Medicare cohorts. We collected one-year prior to FBSS diagnosis (baseline), then at year of spinal cord stimulation (SCS)-implantation and nine-year post-SCS implantation cost outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 122,827 FBSS patients, with 117,499 patients who did not undergo an SCS-implantation (Commercial: n = 49,075, Medicaid: n = 23,180, Medicare: n = 45,244) and 5328 who did undergo an SCS implantation (Commercial: n = 2279, Medicaid: n = 1003, Medicare: n = 2046). Baseline characteristics were similar between the cohorts, with the Medicare-cohort being significantly older. Over the study period, there were significant differences in overall cost metrics between the cohorts who did not undergo SCS implantation with the Medicaid-cohort had the lowest annual median (interquartile range) total cost (Medicaid: $4530.4 [$1440.6, $11,973.5], Medicare: $7292.0 [$3371.4, $13,989.4], Commercial: $4944.3 [$363.8, $13,294.0], p < 0.0001). However, when comparing the patients who underwent SCS implantation, the commercial-cohort had the lowest annual median (interquartile range) total costs (Medicaid: $4045.6 [$1146.9, $11,533.9], Medicare: $7158.1 [$3160.4, $13,916.6], Commercial: $2098.1 [$0.0, $8919.6], p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates a significant difference in overall costs between various insurance providers in the management of FBSS, with Medicaid-insured patients having lower overall costs compared to Commercial- and Medicare-patients. SCS is cost-effective across all insurance groups (Commercial > Medicaid > Medicare) beginning at two years and continuing through nine-year follow-up. Further studies are necessary to understand the cost differences between these insurance providers, in hopes of reducing unnecessary health care expenditures for patients with FBSS.

[The assessment of the impact of rehabilitation on the pain intensity level in patients with herniated nucleus pulposus of the intervertebral disc]. / Wplyw rehabilitacji na poziom natezenia dolegliwosci bólowych u chorych z zespolem bólowym kregoslupa po nieskutecznym zabiegu operacyjnym.

Back disorders are very common phenomena in modern society. One of the methods of spinal pain treatment is performing surgery. Unfortunately, this method is not one hundred percent effective. Some patients show no improvement after surgery, the pain persists and even increases. In these cases, it is reasonable to use the term Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS), i.e. back pain syndrome after unsuccessful spine surgery. AIM: The aim of the study is to assess the impact of rehabilitation on the pain intensity level in patients with FBSS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted in a group of 38 patients aged from 32 to 87 (mean age 61 years), including 20 women and 18 men. All patients were operated for spinal pain syndrome. Afterwards, they underwent rehabilitation because of persisting pain after the surgery. For the pain assessment was used The Visual- Analogue Scale and The Laitinen Modified Questionnaire Indicators of Pain. The results were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: The study showed the high efficacy of specialized rehabilitation in patients with FBSS. CONCLUSIONS: The rehabilitation in patients with FBSS has a significant analgesic effect. Rehabilitation should be a gold standard in patients with FBSS.

Neuromodulation in intractable pain management: outcomes and predictors of revisions of spinal cord stimulators.

OBJECTIVE Spinal cord stimulators (SCSs) appear to be safe and efficacious for chronic intractable back pain. Although there are many reports on percutaneous SCSs, there are very few studies on outcomes of paddle lead SCSs. In addition, the predictors of requirement for SCS revision have not been well established. Here, the authors review the outcome of a case series and attempt to identify the predictors of SCS revisions. METHODS The clinical and radiological information of 141 patients with intractable chronic pain who underwent SCS implantation within the past 20 years was retrospectively reviewed. Paddle lead SCSs were used in this series. Statistical analysis was conducted using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional-hazards regression. RESULTS Among 141 cases, 90 (64%) did not require any revision after SCS implantations. Removal of the SCS was required in 14 patients. The average pain score was significantly reduced (preimplantation score of 8 vs postimplantation score of 1.38; p < 0.0001). Younger age, male sex, obesity, a preimplantation pain score ≥ 8, and the presence of neuromuscular pain were identified as predictors of the overall requirement for SCS revision. However, only a preimplantation pain score ≥ 8 was identified as a predictor of early failure of the SCS. CONCLUSIONS Implantation of a paddle lead SCS is a relatively less invasive, safe, and effective procedure for patients with intractable back pain. Revision of the procedure depends on many factors, including younger age, male sex, associated neuromuscular pain, and severity of the pain. Therefore, patients with these factors, for whom implantation of an SCS is planned, should be closely followed for the possible requirement for revision.

Screening for neuropathic characteristics in failed back surgery syndromes: challenges for guiding treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Neuropathic pain screening tools have shown promise in identifying common neuropathic pain characteristics that derive from diverse etiologies (e.g., diabetic peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia). However, no prior studies have specifically assessed whether these tools are capable of discerning the underlying pain mechanisms in the vast, heterogeneous group of patients diagnosed with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). DESIGN: In this clinical observational study, two tests for neuropathic pain characteristics, the Douleur Neuropathique en 4 (DN4) and Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) questionnaires, were performed on 43 subjects with FBSS. Subjects underwent physical or neurosensory exam components of the DN4 and LANSS in the region of most severe pain (e.g., axial low back or lower extremities). DN4 and LANSS scores were correlated with clinical history and neurologic exam, pain-related quality of life questionnaires, and compared to an independent assessment of pain distribution. RESULTS: The presence of neuropathic characteristics, determined by the DN4 (62% sensitivity, 44% specificity), LANSS (38% sensitivity, 75% specificity; cut-offs of 4 and 12, respectively), or their combination (20% sensitivity, 58% specificity) was associated with higher pain intensity as measured by the visual analog scale (DN4 > 4, P = 0.001; LANSS ≥ 12, P = 0.042), modified Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (DN4 > 4, P = 0.001; LANSS ≥ 12, P = 0.082), and Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (DN4 > 4, P = 0.001; LANSS ≥ 12, P = 0.001), and greater pain-related functional impairment as measured by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (DN4 > 4, P = 0.006; LANSS ≥ 12, P = 0.018). The percentage of subjects characterized as neuropathic by the DN4 and LANSS lacked concordance (67.4 vs. 25.6), and the distribution of most severe symptoms (i.e., axial vs radicular) did not correlate with subjects determined to have neuropathic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike other neuropathic syndromes, the neuropathic component of FBSS is less reliably identified by the LANSS and DN4.

Burst spinal cord stimulation evaluated in patients with failed back surgery syndrome and painful diabetic neuropathy.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used for treating intractable neuropathic pain. Generally, it induces paresthesia in the area covered by SCS. Burst SCS was introduced as a new stimulation paradigm with good pain relief without causing paresthesia. Good results have been obtained in patients who were naive to SCS. In this study we assess the effectiveness of burst stimulation in three groups of chronic pain patients who are already familiar with SCS and the accompanying paresthesia. METHODS: Forty-eight patients with at least six months of conventional, tonic stimulation tested burst stimulation for a period of two weeks. They were classified in three different groups: a cross-section of our population with painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN), a cross-section of our population with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), and FBSS patients who over time had become poor responders (PR) to SCS. Visual analog scale scores for pain were assessed prior to implantation, with tonic stimulation, and after two weeks of burst stimulation. RESULTS: Burst stimulation reduced pain significantly for almost all patients. When compared with tonic stimulation, burst stimulation led to a significant additional pain reduction of on average 44% in patients with PDN (p < 0.001) and 28% in patients with FBSS (p < 0.01). Patients from the PR group benefitted less from burst stimulation on average. In addition, burst stimulation caused little or no paresthesia whereas tonic stimulation did induce paresthesia. Most patients preferred burst stimulation, but several preferred tonic stimulation because the paresthesia assured them that the SCS was working. CONCLUSION: About 60% of the patients with tonic SCS experienced further pain reduction upon application of burst stimulation.

Treating Chronic, Intractable Pain with a Miniaturized Spinal Cord Stimulation System: 1-Year Outcomes from the AUS-nPower Study During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Purpose: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a highly effective treatment for chronic neuropathic pain. Despite recent advances in technology, treatment gaps remain. A small SCS system with a miniaturized implantable pulse generator (micro-IPG; <1.5 cm3 in volume) and an externally worn power source may be preferred by patients who do not want a large, implanted battery. We report here the long-term outcomes from the first-in-human study evaluating the safety and performance of a new neurostimulation system. Patients and Methods: This was a prospective, multi-center, open-label, single-arm study to evaluate this SCS system, in the treatment of chronic, intractable leg and low-back pain. Consented subjects who passed screening continued on to the long-term phase of the study. One-year, patient-reported outcomes (PRO's) such as pain (Numeric Rating Scale, NRS), functional disability, quality of life, and mood were captured. Results: Twenty-six (26) evaluable subjects with permanent implants were included in this analysis. The average leg pain NRS score decreased from 6.8 ± 1.2 at baseline to 1.1 ± 1.2 at the end of the study (p < 0.001), while the average low-back pain NRS score decreased from 6.8 ± 1.2 to 1.5 ± 1.2 (p < 0.001). The responder rate (proportion with ≥50% pain relief) was 91% in the leg(s) and 82% in the low back. There were significant improvements in functional disability (Oswestry Disability Index) and in mood (Beck Depression Inventory), demonstrating a 46% and 62% improvement, respectively (p < 0.001). Eleven-point Likert scales demonstrated the wearable to be very comfortable and very easy to use. Conclusion: There were considerable challenges conducting a clinical study during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as missed study programming visits. Nevertheless, subjects had significant PRO improvements through 1-year. The small size of the implanted device, along with a proprietary waveform, may allow for improved SCS outcomes and a drop in incidence of IPG-pocket pain.

Long-term outcomes of spinal cord stimulation with percutaneously introduced paddle leads in the treatment of failed back surgery syndrome and lumboischialgia.

OBJECTIVE: The study aims to evaluate the long-term clinical and technical efficacy of recently developed percutaneously introducible plate electrodes for spinal cord stimulation. METHODS: Twenty-one patients diagnosed with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) or lumboischialgia were implanted with a small profile plate-type electrode. Patients were followed-up long term and were asked at baseline, after trial, and during each follow-up visit to score their pain on a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain now, worst pain last week, least pain last week, and mean pain last week. Pain location, electrophysiologic parameters, and number of reprogrammings were collected as well. Furthermore, each patient was asked if he/she would redo the procedure post trial and at each of the follow-up visits. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients were prospectively followed up long term. With a mean follow-up of 40.8 months, a significant mean reduction in patient self-reported pain from baseline to postoperative of 75.79% pain reduction was seen at follow-up 1 and 62.52% at follow-up 2. A significant decrease was obtained for, respectively, pain at the present moment, VAS pain worst last week, VAS pain least last week, and VAS pain mean last week in comparison with baseline VAS scores. All patients indicated that they would redo the procedure. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous implantation of small profile paddle leads in patients with FBSS and lumboischialgia produces favorable results over the long term that are at least comparable with surgical implanted paddle leads. The percutaneous approach also allows nonsurgically trained pain physicians to introduce paddle leads. Indices like if patients would redo the procedure may be more appropriate for analyzing long-term outcomes than the arbitrarily taking 50% reduction in VAS scores.

Effect of high-frequency alternating current on spinal afferent nociceptive transmission.

OBJECTIVE: The study was performed to test the hypothesis that high-frequency alternating current (HFAC) ranging from 2 to 100 kHz delivered to the spinal dorsal roots reduces activity of spinal wide dynamic range (WDR) dorsal horn neurons (DHNs) during noxious peripheral stimulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This hypothesis was tested in both small and large animal in vivo preparations. Single-unit extracellular spinal DHN recordings were performed in seven adult rats and four adult goats while testing various parameters of HFAC delivered to the nerve roots or dorsal root entry zone using various electrode types. Frequencies tested ranged from 2 to 100 kHz but focused on the 3 to 50 kHz range. This study investigated the ability of HFAC to inhibit WDR neuronal activity evoked by noxious mechanical (pinch), and electrical stimuli was tested but was primarily focused on electrical stimulation. RESULTS: Rat Study: Effects of HFAC were successfully tested on 11 WDR neurons. Suppression or complete blockade of evoked activity was observed in all 11 of these neurons. Complete data sets for neurons systematically tested with 15 baseline and post-HFAC stimulus sweeps were obtained in five neurons, the nociceptive activity of which was suppressed by an average of 69 ± 9.7% (p < 0.0001). Goat Study: HFAC was successfully tested on 15 WDR neurons. Conclusive suppression or complete nociceptive blockade was observed for 12/15 and complete data sets with at least 20 baseline and post-HFAC stimulus sweeps were obtained from eight DHNs. For these neurons the mean activity suppression was 70 ± 10% (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of HFAC to the region of epidural nerve root or nerve root entry inhibited afferent nociceptive input and therefore may have potential to serve as an alternative to traditional spinal cord stimulation without sensory paresthesia as neuronal activation cannot occur at frequencies in this range.

Should we Oppose or Combine Waveforms for Spinal Cord Stimulation in PSPS-T2 Patients? A Prospective Randomized Crossover Trial (MULTIWAVE Study).

Refractory persistent spinal pain syndrome after surgery (PSPS-T2) can be successfully addressed by spinal cord stimulation (SCS). While conventional stimulation generates paresthesia, recent systems enable the delivery of paresthesia-free stimulation. Studies have claimed non-inferiority/superiority of selected paresthesia-free stimulation compared with paresthesia-based stimulation, but the comparative efficacy between different waveforms still needs to be determined in a given patient. We designed a randomized controlled 3-month crossover trial to compare pain relief of paresthesia-based stimulation versus high frequency versus burst in 28 PSPS-T2 patients implanted with multiwave SCS systems. Our secondary objectives were to determine the efficacy of these 3 waveforms on pain surface, quality of life, functional capacity, psychological distress, and validated composite multidimensional clinical response index to provide holistic comparisons at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 15-month post-randomization. The preferred stimulation modality was documented during the follow-up periods. No difference between the waveforms was observed in this study (P = .08). SCS led to significant pain relief, quality of life improvement, improvement of multidimensional clinical response index, and of all other clinical outcomes at all follow-up visits. Forty-four percent of the patients chose to keep the paresthesia-based stimulation modality after the 15-month follow-up period. By giving the possibility to switch and/or to combine several waveforms, the overall rate of SCS responders further increased with 25%. In this study, high frequency or burst do not appear superior to paresthesia-based stimulation, wherefore paresthesia-based stimulation should still be considered as a valid option. However, combining paresthesia-based stimulation with paresthesia-free stimulation, through personalized multiwave therapy, might significantly improve SCS responses. PERSPECTIVE: This article assesses clinical SCS efficacy on pain relief, by comparing paresthesia-based stimulation and paresthesia-free stimulation (including high frequency and burst) modalities in patient presenting with PSPS-T2. Switching and/or combining waveforms contribute to increasing the global SCS responders rate.

Can Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Be Healed by Transverse Myelitis?

Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is a condition characterized by persistent or recurring back pain following spinal surgery. Etiological factors for FBSS are being studied by investigators and clinicians in an attempt to organize them based on their temporal relation to the surgery event. However, many questions regarding the pathophysiology of FBSS remain, which has resulted in a lack of efficacy among its treatment options. In this report, we present a remarkable case of longitudinally extensive transverse myelitis (LETM) in a patient with a medical history of FBSS who was taking multiple pain medications but had persisting pain. The patient, a 56-year-old woman, presented with an incomplete motor injury (American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale D) and a neurological level of C4. Investigations revealed an idiopathic LETM that was unresponsive to high doses of corticosteroids. An inpatient rehabilitation program was initiated, resulting in favorable clinical progress. The patient no longer complained of back pain, and her pain medication was gradually discontinued. At the time of discharge, the patient was able to walk with a stick, dress and groom herself independently, and eat with an adapted fork without experiencing pain. As the pain mechanisms underlying FBSS are complex and not yet fully understood, this clinical case aims to contribute to the discussion of possible pathological mechanisms implicated in LETM that may have contributed to the shutdown of pain perception in a patient with a history of FBSS. By doing so, we hope to identify new and effective ways to treat FBSS.

The Subjective and Objective Improvement Using Chiropractic Biophysics® Protocols.

The aim of this study is to describe the Chiropractic BioPhysics® (CBP®) (Chiropractic BioPhysics, Eagle, USA) technique in alleviating the persistent spine pain syndrome (PSPS) and dysfunction in a 50-year-old female who suffered for many years. The purpose of this study is to provide clinicians with a potential treatment option for failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and PSPS that doesn't respond to other treatments. The patient did not receive benefits from pharmaceutical and conservative therapies following a low back lifting injury in 2004. After several years of suffering from widespread spinal pain and dysfunction, she received a lumbosacral pedicle screw surgical fixation. The initial surgery was unsuccessful and a follow-up revision and expansion of the fusion failed to alleviate the pain and dysfunction as well. After treatment using CBP, the patient received subjective, objective, and radiographic improvements with long-term stability measured at follow-up. Given that spine pain and low back pain are the number one cause of disability in the world, having economical, repeatable, and measurable techniques to improve even difficult cases is important for astute clinicians treating spine pain.

Pathogenesis, etiology and treatment of failed back surgery syndrome.

Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is associated with persistent lower back pain after and despite one or more surgical interventions. A number of factors underlie and maintain FBSS and successful management of pain chiefly depends on identifying them. Pharmacological, surgical, and non-surgical therapeutic measures are taken to treat the pain. Spinal cord stimulation and nerve stimulation have been widely practiced in this regard and enhanced pain reduction and patient satisfaction. In hernia and recurrent disc degeneration and sagittal imbalance, discectomy and/or fusion are indicated. The present review focuses on FBSS and its underlying components and on available treatment options.

The Importance of Initial Epidurography Prior to Any Drug Administration in Three-Day Adhesiolysis Procedure.

Percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis (PEA) is a minimal invasive procedure to relieve sciatalgia caused by post lumbar surgery syndrome (PLSS). Fluoroscopic-guided contrast-epidurography is essential to ensure a safe procedure. We present a case of a 28-year-old male patient who underwent a PEA which was complicated by a dural puncture. We highlight the dangers of such complications and discuss associated risk factors.

Rescue therapy with novel waveform spinal cord stimulation for patients with failed back surgery syndrome refractory to conventional stimulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Conventional spinal cord stimulators (SCSs) have demonstrated efficacy in individuals with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). However, a subgroup of patients may become refractory to the effects of conventional waveforms over time. The objective of this study was to systematically review and evaluate the current literature on the use of novel waveform spinal cord stimulation for the management of FBSS refractory to conventional SCSs. METHODS: A comprehensive electronic search of the literature published in electronic databases, including Ovid MEDLINE and Epub Ahead of Print, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus, was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The outcomes of interest were reduction in back pain and/or leg pain after conversion from conventional to novel SCSs. Risk of bias was assessed with the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. The strength of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria. RESULTS: A total of 6 studies with 137 patients with FBSS were identified. Studies were published between 2013 and 2021. The mean ± SD age of the pooled patient sample was 55 ± 10.5 years. All patients who underwent treatment with conventional SCSs were identified. Two studies evaluated the efficacy of high-density spinal cord stimulation, 3 studies evaluated burst spinal cord stimulation, and 1 study assessed multimodal waveforms. The mean difference in back pain scores after conversion from a standard SCS to a novel waveform SCS was 2.55 (95% CI 1.59-4.08), demonstrating a significant reduction in back pain after conversion to novel stimulation. The authors also performed a subgroup analysis to compare burst stimulation to tonic waveforms. In this analysis, the authors found no significant difference in the average reductions in back pain between the 2 groups (p = 0.534).The authors found an I2 statistic equivalent to 98.47% in the meta-regression model used to assess the effect of follow-up duration on study outcome; this value implied that the variability in the data can be attributed to the remaining between-study heterogeneity. The overall certainty was moderate, with a high risk of bias across studies. CONCLUSIONS: Rescue therapy with novel waveform spinal cord stimulation is a potential option for pain reduction in patients who become refractory to conventional SCSs. Conversion to novel waveform SCSs may potentially mitigate expenses and complications.

Combining Awake Anesthesia with Minimal Invasive Surgery Optimizes Intraoperative Surgical Spinal Cord Stimulation Lead Placement.

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective and validated treatment to address chronic refractory neuropathic pain in persistent spinal pain syndrome-type 2 (PSPS-T2) patients. Surgical SCS lead placement is traditionally performed under general anesthesia due to its invasiveness. In parallel, recent works have suggested that awake anesthesia (AA), consisting of target controlled intra-venous anesthesia (TCIVA), could be an interesting tool to optimize lead anatomical placement using patient intra-operative feedback. We hypothesized that combining AA with minimal invasive surgery (MIS) could improve SCS outcomes. The goal of this study was to evaluate SCS lead performance (defined by the area of pain adequately covered by paraesthesia generated via SCS), using an intraoperative objective quantitative mapping tool, and secondarily, to assess pain relief, functional improvement and change in quality of life with a composite score. We analyzed data from a prospective multicenter study (ESTIMET) to compare the outcomes of 115 patients implanted with MIS under AA (MISAA group) or general anesthesia (MISGA group), or by laminectomy under general anesthesia (LGA group). All in all, awake surgery appears to show significantly better performance than general anesthesia in terms of patient pain coverage (65% vs. 34-62%), pain surface (50-76% vs. 50-61%) and pain intensity (65% vs. 35-40%), as well as improved secondary outcomes (quality of life, functional disability and depression). One step further, our results suggest that MISAA combined with intra-operative hypnosis could potentialize patient intraoperative cooperation and could be proposed as a personalized package offered to PSPS-T2 patients eligible for SCS implantation in highly dedicated neuromodulation centers.