Dual electrode spinal cord stimulation in chronic leg and back pain

Relief of Central Poststroke Pain Affecting Both the Arm and Leg on One Side by Double-independent Dual-lead Spinal Cord Stimulation Using Fast-acting Subperception Therapy Stimulation: A Case Report

Central poststroke pain is a chronic, intractable, central neuropathic pain. Spinal cord stimulation is a neuromodulation therapy for chronic neuropathic pain. The conventional stimulation method induces a sense of paresthesia. Fast-acting subperception therapy is one of the latest new stimulation methods without paresthesia. A case of achieving pain relief of central poststroke pain affecting both the arm and leg on one side by double-independent dual-lead spinal cord stimulation using fast-acting subperception therapy stimulation is presented. A 67-year-old woman had central poststroke pain due to a right thalamic hemorrhage. The numerical rating scale scores of the left arm and leg were 6 and 7, respectively. Using dual-lead stimulation at the Th 9-11 levels, a spinal cord stimulation trial was performed. Fast-acting subperception therapy stimulation achieved pain reduction in the left leg from 7 to 3. Therefore, a pulse generator was implanted, and the pain relief continued for 6 months. Then, two additional leads were implanted at the C 3-5 levels, and pain in the arm decreased from 6 to 4. Independent setting and adjustments of the dual-lead stimulation were required because the thresholds of paresthesia perception were significantly different. To achieve pain relief in both the arm and leg, double-independent dual-lead stimulation placed at cervical and thoracic levels is an effective treatment. Fast-acting subperception therapy stimulation may be effective for central poststroke pain, especially in cases where the paresthesia is perceived as uncomfortable or the conventional stimulation itself is ineffective.

Predictive Factors Associated with Pain Relief of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Central Post-stroke Pain

The efficacy and predictive factors associated with successful spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for central post-stroke pain (CPSP) have yet to be definitively established. Thus, this study evaluated the rates of pain relief found after more than 12 months and the predictive factors associated with the success of SCS for CPSP. The degree of pain after SCS in 18 patients with CPSP was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale preoperatively, at 1, 6 and 12 months after surgery, and at the time of the last follow-up. After calculating the percentage of pain relief (PPR), patients were separated into two groups. The first group exhibited continuing PPR ≥30% at more than 12 months (effect group) while the second group exhibited successful/unsuccessful trials followed by decreasing PPR <30% within 12 months (no effect group). Pain relief for more than 12 months was achieved in eight out of 18 (44.4%) patients during the 67.3 ± 35.5 month follow-up period. Statistically significant differences were found for both the age and stroke location during comparisons of the preoperative characteristics between the two groups. There was a significantly younger mean age for the effect versus the no effect group. Patients with stoke in non-thalamus were significantly enriched in effect group compared with those with stoke in thalamus. Multivariable analysis using these two factors found no statistical differences, suggesting that these two factors might possibly exhibit the same behaviors for the SCS effect. These results suggest that SCS may be able to provide pain relief in young, non-thalamus stroke patients with CPSP.

Long-term Effect and Predictive Factors of Motor Cortex and Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Neuropathic Pain

The long-term effects of motor cortex stimulation (MCS) and spinal cord stimulation (SCS) remain unknown. To identify the long-term effects after MCS or SCS and determine any associated predictive factors for the outcomes. Fifty patients underwent MCS (n = 15) or SCS (n = 35) for chronic neuropathic pain. The degree of pain was assessed preoperatively, at 1, 6, and 12 months after surgery, and during the time of the last follow-up using Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Percentage of pain relief (PPR) was calculated, with “long-term effect” defined as PPR ≥ 30% and the presence of continued pain relief over 12 months. Outcomes were classified into excellent (PPR ≥ 70%) and good (PPR 30–69%) sub-categories. Long-term effects of MCS and SCS were observed in 53.3% and 57.1% of the patients, respectively. There were no predictive factors of long-term effects identified for any of the various preoperative conditions. However, the VAS at 1 month after surgery was significantly associated with the long-term effects in both MCS and SCS. All patients with an excellent outcome at 1 month after the surgery continued to exhibit these effects. In contrast, patients with the good outcome at 1 month exhibited a significant decrease in the effects at 6 months after surgery. The long-term effects of MCS and SCS were approximately 50% during the more than 8.5 and 3.5 years of follow-up, respectively. The VAS at 1 month after surgery may be a postoperative predictor of the long-term effects for both MCS and SCS.

Use of Spinal Cord Stimulation in Elderly Patients with Multi-Factorial Chronic Lumbar and Non-Radicular Lower Extremity Pain

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment for chronic back and limb pain. The criteria for use of SCS for specific problems such as failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), peripheral neuropathic pain and residual pain after joint replacement is well established. With an aging population, there are more patients presenting with a combination of various multi-factorial chronic pain problems rather than from a single clear cause. It is not uncommon to see patients with chronic back pain years after spine surgery with new additional pain in the area of joint replacement or due to peripheral neuropathy. In most of these patients, one area is the primary cause of their pain, while the other more secondary. Multiple chronic problems complicate the pain management of the primary cause and also can diminish the effect of SCS that only targets the primary problem. The primary and secondary causes of pain were ranked by the patient including the duration of their chronic pain for each area. This helped establish criteria for use of SCS in these complex pain patients. The patients were evaluated initially with an epidural stimulator trial and if they obtained 50% or greater pain relief to the primary pain generating area, permanent implantation of one or more arrays of spinal cord electrodes was performed but planned to cover also the secondary pain areas. Post-implant follow-up evaluation at one, three and six months included measurement of visual analog scale (VAS), use of pain medication and degree of functional activity and behavior. This report looks at the effectiveness of using multiple overlapping electrodes for SCS in patients with multi-factorial chronic pain.

Late Spontaneous Migration of a Dorsal Column Stimulator Paddle Lead

The most frequently encountered complication of dorsal column stimulators is lead migration. The vast majority of these events are seen in the first few weeks to months. Late paddle lead migration is a very uncommon occurrence in this setting. We describe a case of a 51-year-old male with a history of reflex sympathetic dystrophy having undergone dorsal column stimulator insertion at the level of C1-C2. A good clinical benefit was appreciated in the postoperative period once the stimulator was turned on. Approximately six months postoperatively, the patient suddenly lost coverage. Radiographic imaging revealed that the lead had migrated caudally to the C3-C4 level. Subsequent revision surgery took place. This description highlights a common complication, but occurring outside the expected time frame after surgery.

Spinal cord stimulation with implanted epidural paddle lead relieves chronic axial low back pain

Introduction

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) provides significant relief for lumbosacral radiculopathy refractory to both medical and surgical treatment, but historically only offers limited relief for axial low back pain (LBP). We aim to evaluate the response of chronic axial LBP treated with SCS using a surgically implanted epidural paddle lead.

Materials and methods

This is a retrospective review of a consecutive series of patients with exclusive LBP or predominant LBP associated with lower extremity (LE) pain evaluated and treated with SCS using an implanted paddle lead within the dorsal thoracic epidural space. Baseline LBP, and if present LE pain, were recorded using the visual analogue scale (VAS) at an initial evaluation. At a follow-up visit (a minimum of 12 months later), LBP and LE pain after a spinal cord stimulator implantation were again recorded using the VAS. Patients were also asked to estimate total LBP pain relief achieved.

Results

Patients with either exclusive (n=7) or predominant (n=2) axial LBP were treated with SCS by implantation of a paddle lead at an average spine level of T9. The baseline VAS score for LBP was 7.2; after a follow-up of 20 months, the score decreased to 2.3 (P=0.003). The LE pain VAS score decreased from 7.5 to 0.0 (P=0.103). Patients also reported a subjective 66.4% decrease of their LBP at follow-up. There were no surgical complications.

Conclusions

Axial LBP is refractory to many treatments, including SCS. SCS using a surgically implanted paddle electrode provides significant pain relief for chronic axial LPB, and is a safe treatment modality.

Dorsal column stimulator applications

Background:

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used to treat neuropathic pain since 1967. Following that, technological progress, among other advances, helped SCS become an effective tool to reduce pain.

Methods:

This article is a non-systematic review of the mechanism of action, indications, results, programming parameters, complications, and cost-effectiveness of SCS.

Results:

In spite of the existence of several studies that try to prove the mechanism of action of SCS, it still remains unknown. The mechanism of action of SCS would be based on the antidromic activation of the dorsal column fibers, which activate the inhibitory interneurons within the dorsal horn. At present, the indications of SCS are being revised constantly, while new applications are being proposed and researched worldwide. Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is the most common indication for SCS, whereas, the complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is the second one. Also, this technique is useful in patients with refractory angina and critical limb ischemia, in whom surgical or endovascular treatment cannot be performed. Further indications may be phantom limb pain, chronic intractable pain located in the head, face, neck, or upper extremities, spinal lumbar stenosis in patients who are not surgical candidates, and others.

Conclusion:

Spinal cord stimulation is a useful tool for neuromodulation, if an accurate patient selection is carried out prior, which should include a trial period. Undoubtedly, this proper selection and a better knowledge of its underlying mechanisms of action, will allow this cutting edge technique to be more acceptable among pain physicians.