Spinal cord stimulation in refractory angina. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

The Role of Palliative Care in Cardiovascular Disease

The American Heart Association has recommended that palliative care be integrated into the care of all patients with advanced cardiac illnesses. Notwithstanding, the number of patients receiving specialist palliative intervention worldwide remains extremely small. This review examines the nature of palliative care and what is known about its delivery to patients with cardiac illness. Most of the published literature on the subject concern advanced heart failure; however, some data also exist regarding patients with heart transplantation, pulmonary hypertension, valvular disease, congenital heart disease, indwelling devices, mechanical circulatory support, and advanced coronary disease. In addition, outcome data, certification requirements, workforce challenges, barriers to implementation, and a potential caveat about palliative care will also be examined. Further work is required regarding appropriate means of implementation, quality control, and timing of intervention.

Long-Term Outcome in Patients With Spinal Cord Stimulation for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A 20-Year Audit of a Single Center

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective, observational study.

INTRODUCTION

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has found its application in chronic pain treatment, with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) as one of the most important indications. However, to date, little is known about the long-term effectiveness of the treatment. The aim of this study is to analyze retrospectively the long-term outcomes of SCS treatment in a single multidisciplinary pain center on predominant radicular pain, using devices of a single manufacturer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patient data on overall patient satisfaction, pain intensity, and adverse events were retrospectively collected in our clinical practice between January 1998 and January 2018, for 191 patients who received a permanent SCS implant. Secondary health measures included the influence of opioid and nicotine use on pain reduction after therapy.

RESULTS

The trial-to-implant ratio was 93.6%. At a mean follow-up of 10.6 years, 78.5% of the patients were satisfied with the treatment outcome, with a significant pain reduction of an average three points on a Numeric Rating Scale. Opioid and nicotine usage did not have a significant link with the pain reduction one year after the treatment. Furthermore, devices had an average battery lifespan of 8.4 years. A total of 248 revisions were recorded. A total of 24 patients (11.7%) acquired an infection; 7 of 204 patients had an infection during the trial period, 2 of 191 patients had an infection in the first postoperative year, and 15 of 191 patients had an infection after the first year. The average time to infection, if not in the first year, was 10.1 years.

CONCLUSIONS

A successful long-term outcome regarding pain relief in patients with predominant radicular pain due to FBSS is established with SCS therapy.

Spinal cord stimulation for refractory pericarditis: a case report and a review of the mechanism of action

Background and objectives

In recent years, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has emerged as a promising management option for chronic pain of multiple etiologies. While its effectiveness has been strongly suggested in many patients, the exact mechanism of action of SCS is incompletely understood. This article reviews the leading mechanisms underlying the analgesic and cardiovascular effects of SCS and reports its novel benefits in a case of recurrent pericarditis.

Literature review

Throughout history, the analgesic properties of SCS were thought to arise via stimulation of the spinothalamic tract. Although this mechanism has been thoroughly reported, new research and patient outcomes from SCS have revealed various additional properties that cannot be fully explained by this mechanism alone. Evidence suggests that SCS enhances calcitonin gene-related peptide release and modulates inflammatory cytokine secretion, sympathetic tone, and inhibitory neurotransmitter secretion. These distinct mechanisms likely collectively contribute to the therapeutic effects of SCS on the cardiovascular system and pain management.

Case report

We report the case of a 48-year-old male patient with recurrent pericarditis, characterized by refractory angina-like pain and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). After 1 year of having a spinal cord stimulator implanted, the patient is free from pain and narcotics, with a reduction of 428 mg equivalent dose of morphine. The patient's LVEF increased from 40% to 45% without changes to his previous medical treatment. This is the first reported case of refractory pericarditis managed with spinal cord stimulation.

Conclusion

Recognizing the improved pain management, reduced narcotic usage, and improved LVEF in our patient following SCS is critical to paving the way toward a complete understanding of the mechanism of action of SCS. This case reveals the therapeutic potential of SCS for cardiovascular pathologies other than refractory angina pectoris.

Perioperative and anesthetic considerations for the management of neuromodulation systems

The use of neuromodulation systems is increasing for the treatment of various pathologies ranging from movement disorders to urinary incontinence to chronic pain syndromes. While the type of neuromodulation devices varies, they are largely categorized as intracranial (eg, deep brain stimulation), neuraxial (eg, spinal cord stimulation, dorsal root ganglion stimulation, and intrathecal drug delivery systems), or peripheral (eg, sacral nerve stimulation and peripheral nerve stimulation) systems. Given the increasing prevalence of these systems in the overall population, it is important for anesthesiologists, surgeons, and the perioperative healthcare team to familiarize themselves with these systems and their unique perioperative considerations. In this review, we explore and highlight the various neuromodulation systems, their general perioperative considerations, and notable special circumstances for perioperative management.

Role of patient selection and trial stimulation for spinal cord stimulation therapy for chronic non-cancer pain: a comprehensive narrative review

Background/importance

Patient selection for spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapy is crucial and is traditionally performed with clinical selection followed by a screening trial. The factors influencing patient selection and the importance of trialing have not been systematically evaluated.

Objective

We report a narrative review conducted to synthesize evidence regarding patient selection and the role of SCS trials.

Evidence review

Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for reports (any design) of SCS in adult patients, from their inception until March 30, 2022. Study selection and data extraction were carried out using DistillerSR. Data were organized into tables and narrative summaries, categorized by study design. Importance of patient variables and trialing was considered by looking at their influence on the long-term therapy success.

Findings

Among 7321 citations, 201 reports consisting of 60 systematic reviews, 36 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 41 observational studies (OSs), 51 registry-based reports, and 13 case reports on complications during trialing were included. Based on RCTs and OSs, the median trial success rate was 72% and 82%, and therapy success was 65% and 61% at 12 months, respectively. Although several psychological and non-psychological determinants have been investigated, studies do not report a consistent approach to patient selection. Among psychological factors, untreated depression was associated with poor long-term outcomes, but the effect of others was inconsistent. Most RCTs except for chronic angina involved trialing and only one RCT compared patient selection with or without trial. The median (range) trial duration was 10 (0–30) and 7 (0–56) days among RCTs and OSs, respectively.

Conclusions

Due to lack of a consistent approach to identify responders for SCS therapy, trialing complements patient selection to exclude patients who do not find the therapy helpful and/or intolerant of the SCS system. However, more rigorous and large studies are necessary to better evaluate its role.

Short- and long-term effects of conventional spinal cord stimulation on chronic pain and health perceptions: A longitudinal controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness and long-term outcomes of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) are not fully established, especially considering that data from patients who withdrew from the trial are rarely analysed, which may lead to overestimation of SCS efficacy. We evaluated short- and long-term effects of SCS on chronic pain and perceived health, beyond natural variability in these outcomes.

METHODS

In a prospective design, 176 chronic pain patients referred to SCS were evaluated five times (baseline; retest ~6 weeks later; post-SCS trial; 8 and 28 weeks post-permanent implantation). Patients whose SCS trial failed (Temp group) were followed up and compared to those who underwent permanent SCS (Perm group).

RESULTS

Analyses revealed a non-linear (U-shaped) trend significantly different between the two groups. In the Perm group, a significant improvement occurred post-SCS implantation in pain severity, pain interference, health-related quality of life and self-rated health, which was followed by gradual worsening and return to baseline values at end of follow-up. In the Temp group, only minor changes occurred in these outcomes over time. On average, baseline and end of follow-up values in the Perm and Temp groups were similar: ~40% in each group exhibited an increase in pain severity over time and 38% and 33%, respectively, exhibited reductions in pain severity over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Since the greatest improvement in the outcome measures occurred from baseline to post-SCS trial (T1-T3) followed by a gradual decline in the effect, it appears that SCS may not be effective for the majority of chronic pain patients.

SIGNIFICANCE

This longitudinal study evaluated short and long term effects of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) on chronic pain outcome measures, beyond their natural variation in time. Despite significant short term improvements, by the end of the seven months' follow-up, the outcomes in the treatment group (people who received the permanent implantation) were similar to those of the control group (people whose SCS trial failed and did not continue to permanent implantation) suggesting SCS may not be cost-effective for chronic pain patients.

Son of a Lesser God: The Case of Cell Therapy for Refractory Angina

In the last decades, various non-pharmacological solutions have been tested on top of medical therapy for the treatment of patients affected by refractory angina (RA). Among these therapeutics, neuromodulation, external counter-pulsation and coronary sinus constriction have been recently introduced in the guidelines for the management of RA in United States and Europe. Notably and paradoxically, although a consistent body of evidence has proposed cell-based therapies (CT) as safe and salutary for RA outcome, CT has not been conversely incorporated into current international guidelines yet. As a matter of fact, published randomized controlled trials (RCT) and meta-analyses (MTA) cumulatively indicated that CT can effectively increase perfusion, physical function and well-being, thus reducing angina symptoms and drug assumption in RA patients. In this review, we (i) provide an updated overview of novel non-pharmacological therapeutics included in current guidelines for the management of patients with RA, (ii) discuss the Level of Evidence stemmed from available clinical trials for each recommended treatment, and (iii) focus on evidence-based CT application for the management of RA.

[Chronic spinal stimulation in treatment of lower limb critical ischaemia syndrome]

Obliterating peripheral artery disease is a commonly occurring pathological condition, most often resulting from an atherosclerotic lesion of vessels with progressive narrowing of their lumens. The consequences of decompensation of chronic arterial insufficiency such as ischaemic pain, claudication, and trophic impairments are in some instances difficult to treat, despite using multicomponent medicamentous therapy and/or performing revascularizing interventions. This article describes a clinical case report regarding the use of spinal stimulation in a patient presenting with stage IV chronic lower limb ischaemia according to the Fontaine classification. This is accompanied and followed by depicting the dynamics of the laboratory, instrumental, and clinical parameters over a two-year follow-up period. In order to explain the choice of the intervention and the causes of the described picture, discussed are the existing theories of the mechanisms of action of spinal stimulation. To this is added a literature review of using this method in treatment of lower limb critical ischaemia when performing reconstructive angiosurgical treatment is unavailable. Mention is also made of the incidence and types of probable complications, as well as possibilities and limitations of the method.

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation for the Management of Intractable Painful Polyneuropathy: A Prospective Pilot Study

OBJECTIVES

Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) is a promising neurostimulation modality in the treatment of painful polyneuropathy. The aim of this prospective pilot study was to investigate the effect of DRGS on pain intensity in patients with intractable painful polyneuropathy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nine patients with chronic, intractable painful polyneuropathy in the lower limbs were recruited. In each subject, between two and four DRGS leads were placed at the level of the L5 and S1 dorsal root ganglion. If trial stimulation was successful, a definitive implantable pulse generator (IPG) was implanted. Pain intensity was scored using an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) and reported as median and interquartile range (IQR), and compared to baseline values using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Additionally, patients' global impression of change (PGIC), pain extent, presence of neuropathic pain, physical functioning, quality of life, and mood were assessed.

RESULTS

Eight out of nine patients had a successful trial phase, of which seven received an IPG. Daytime pain decreased from a median (IQR) NRS score of 7.0 (5.9-8.3) to 2.0 (1.0-3.5) and 3.0 (1.6-4.9) in the first week and at six months after implantation, respectively. Similar effects were observed for night time and peak pain scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that DRGS significantly reduces both pain intensity and PGIC in patients with intractable painful polyneuropathy in the lower extremities. Large-scale clinical trials are needed to prove the efficacy of DRGS in intractable painful polyneuropathy.

Palliative care for people living with heart failure: European Association for Palliative Care Task Force expert position statement

Contrary to common perception, modern palliative care (PC) is applicable to all people with an incurable disease, not only cancer. PC is appropriate at every stage of disease progression, when PC needs emerge. These needs can be of physical, emotional, social, or spiritual nature. This document encourages the use of validated assessment tools to recognize such needs and ascertain efficacy of management. PC interventions should be provided alongside cardiologic management. Treating breathlessness is more effective, when cardiologic management is supported by PC interventions. Treating other symptoms like pain or depression requires predominantly PC interventions. Advance Care Planning aims to ensure that the future treatment and care the person receives is concordant with their personal values and goals, even after losing decision-making capacity. It should include also disease specific aspects, such as modification of implantable device activity at the end of life. The Whole Person Care concept describes the inseparability of the physical, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the human being. Addressing psychological and spiritual needs, together with medical treatment, maintains personal integrity and promotes emotional healing. Most PC concerns can be addressed by the usual care team, supported by a PC specialist if needed. During dying, the persons’ needs may change dynamically and intensive PC is often required. Following the death of a person, bereavement services benefit loved ones. The authors conclude that the inclusion of PC within the regular clinical framework for people with heart failure results in a substantial improvement in quality of life as well as comfort and dignity whilst dying.

New advancements in spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To update the recent development of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) technology in the management of chronic pain.

RECENT FINDINGS

Efficacy of SCS therapy has been significantly improved by the recent development of high frequency (HF-10 kHz) stimulation, burst stimulation, and dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation. A few latest SCS modalities are in clinical trial. New approaches to guide lead placement and advances in surgical lead are introduced.

SUMMARY

HF-10 SCS is free of paresthesia and associated with significantly better coverage of axial lower back pain. Burst stimulation invokes minimal paresthesia and provides better coverage of low back pain. DRG stimulation results in better outcomes in patients with complex regional pain syndrome. It requires less energy and delivers consistent stimulation regardless of postural variations. Clinical trials with new SCS modalities, such as Stimwaves, are under way to make SCS wireless. Intraoperative neuromonitoring and paresthesia atlas may be used to guide lead placement. Multicolumn surgical paddle leads enable a combination of independent current control with up to 32 contacts for better programming and better coverage.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Refractory Angina Pectoris: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objectives:

Paresthesia-free stimulation such as high frequency and burst have been demonstrated as effective therapies for neuropathic pain. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of conventional spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in the treatment of refractory angina pectoris (RAP).

Materials and Methods:

Relevant randomized controlled trials that investigated SCS for patients with RAP were comprehensively searched in Medline, Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Five meta-analyses were performed examining the changes in Canadian Cardiovascular Society classes, exercise time, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores of pain, Seattle Angina Questionnaire, and nitroglycerin use in RAP patients after SCS therapy. We analyzed standardized mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome by Review Manager 5.0 and STATA 12.0.

Results:

A total of 12 randomized controlled trials involving 476 RAP patients were identified. A trend of reduction in the angina frequency (MD=−9.03, 95% CI, −15.70 to −2.36) and nitroglycerin consumption (MD=−0.64, 95% CI, −0.84 to −0.45) could be observed in the SCS group. Compared with the control group, SCS showed benefit on increasing exercise time (MD=0.49, 95% CI, 0.13-0.85) and treatment satisfaction (MD=6.87, 95% CI, 2.07-11.66) with decreased VAS scores of pain (MD=−0.50, 95% CI, −0.81 to −0.20) and disease perception (MD=−8.34, 95% CI, −14.45 to −2.23). However, the result did not reach the significance level in terms of physical limitation (95% CI, −8.75 to 3.38; P=0.39) or angina stability (95% CI, −7.55 to 3.67; P=0.50).

Discussion:

The current meta-analysis suggested that SCS was a potential alternative in the treatment of PAP patients. Further investigation for finding the appropriate intensity of stimulation is required before this treatment should be widely recommended and applied.

Spinal Cord Stimulation Improves the Microvascular Perfusion Insufficiency Caused by Critical Limb Ischemia

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective case-controlled study intended to identify the benefits and efficacy of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) as a therapeutic strategy for patients with perfusion problems caused by critical limb ischemia (CLI). The outcomes of patients who received SCS were compared with those of patients who did not receive SCS.

METHODS

This study recruited 78 patients who were diagnosed with perfusion problems over the period of 2003-2011. Lower-limb Thallium-201 (²⁰¹ Tl) scintigraphy revealed that the patients exhibited a perfusion difference of <0.95. Thirty-seven of the recruited patients received SCS treatment and 41 did not receive SCS treatment. All patients received the same medication: 100 mg aspirin once a day and 500 mg paracetamol thrice a day. The outcomes of walking distance, walking time, and sleeping quality were measured and recorded. Pain intensities were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) scoring system.

RESULTS

Prior to SCS implantation, patients in the SCS treatment group had worse walking distance (64.86 ± 40.80 vs. 613.70 ± 535.00, p < 0.001), walking time (2.65 ± 1.64 vs. 13.90 ± 11.91, p < 0.001), and sleep quality (1.70 ± 0.78 vs. 3.32 ± 1.17, p < 0.001) than patients in the non-SCS treatment group. At the one-year follow-up, however, patients in the SCS treatment group had significantly better walking distance (1595.00 ± 483.60, p < 0.001), walking time (48.92 ± 14.10, p < 0.001), and sleep quality (4.65 ± 0.92, p < 0.001) than patients in the non-SCS treatment group. Moreover, the VAS score of patients in the SCS treatment group improved one week (8.63 ± 0.54 vs. 4.48 ± 0.59, p < 0.001) and one year after SCS implantation (2.35 ± 0.62, p < 0.001). By contrast, at the one-year follow-up, the walking distance (277.60 ± 374.80, p = 0.002), walking time (9.44 ± 10.73, p = 0.078), sleep quality (2.20 ± 1.10, p < 0.001), and VAS score (7.98 ± 0.43, p = 0.020) of patients in the non-SCS treatment group worsened. Furthermore, lower-limb ²⁰¹ Tl scintigraphy revealed that microcirculation intensity increased in the lower extremities of patients in the SCS treatment group after SCS implantation relative to that before SCS implantation. Most importantly, 10 of the 41 patients in the non-SCS treatment group required the use of wheelchairs, whereas none of the patients in the SCS treatment group required the use of wheelchairs.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of CLI patient with SCS improved patient's walking ability, pain severity, and sleep quality. SCS should be considered as an effective treatment toward limb salvage in CLI.

Angina and Its Management

Angina pectoris is defined as substernal chest pain, pressure, or discomfort that is typically exacerbated by exertion and/or emotional stress, lasts greater than 30 to 60 seconds, and is relieved by rest and nitroglycerin. There are approximately 10 million people in the United States who have angina, and there are over 500 000 cases diagnosed per year. Several studies now show that angina itself is a predictor of major adverse cardiac events. In addition, angina is a serious morbidity that impedes quality of life and should be treated. In the United States, pharmacologic therapy for angina includes β-blockers, nitrates, calcium channel blockers, and the late sodium current blocker ranolazine. In other countries, additional pharmacologic agents include trimetazidine, ivabradine, nicorandil, fasudil, and others. Revascularization is indicated in certain high-risk individuals and also has been shown to improve angina. However, even after revascularization, a substantial percentage of patients return with recurrent or continued angina, requiring newer and better therapies. Treatment for refractory angina not amenable to usual pharmacologic therapies or revascularization procedures, includes enhanced external counterpulsation, transmyocardial revascularization, and stem cell therapy. Angina continues to be a significant cause of morbidity. Therapy should be geared not only to treating the risk factors for atherosclerotic disease and improving survival but should also be aimed at eliminating or reducing the occurrence of angina and improving the ability of patients to be active.

Advanced Innovations for Pain

Chronic pain represents one of the most important public health problems in terms of both the number of patients afflicted and health care costs. Most patients with chronic pain are treated with medications as the mainstay of therapy, and yet most medically treated patients continue to report ongoing pain. Additionally, adverse effects from pain medications represent a major challenge for clinicians and patients. Spinal cord stimulation and intrathecal drug delivery systems are well-established techniques that have been utilized for over 25 years. Intrathecal drug delivery systems have proven efficacy for a wide variety of intractable pain conditions and fewer adverse effects than systemic medical therapy in patients with refractory cancer-related pain. Spinal cord stimulation is cost-effective and provides improved pain control compared with medical therapy in patients with a variety of refractory pain conditions including complex regional pain syndrome, painful diabetic neuropathy, and chronic radiculopathy. Patients who have intractable pain that has not responded to reasonable attempts at conservative pain care measures should be referred to a qualified interventional pain specialist to determine candidacy for the procedures discussed in this article.

Interventional options for the management of refractory cancer pain--what is the evidence?

PURPOSE

Pain is the most common symptom in cancer patients. Standard pain treatment according to the WHO three-step analgesic ladder provides effective pain management in approximately 70-90% of cancer patients. Refractory pain is defined as not responding to "standard" treatments. Interventional analgesic techniques can be used in an attempt to control refractory pain in patients in whom conventional analgesic strategies fail to provide effective pain relief or are intolerable due to severe adverse effects. This systematic review aims to provide the latest evidence on interventional refractory pain management in cancer patients.

METHODS

Systematic literature search in Cochrane, EMBASE and PubMed including reviews and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised controlled trials in the absence of reviews.

RESULTS

Neuraxial analgesia may play a role in refractory cancer pain management. Paravertebral blocks decrease the incidence of persistent post-surgical pain after breast cancer. Coeliac plexus blocks improve pain scores in refractory pancreatic cancer pain for up to 4 weeks after the intervention with fewer burdensome side effects as compared to opioids. Cordotomy has mainly been studied in mesothelioma, and the case series suggest possible benefit for pain at the expense of a relatively high risk of side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, very few RCTs have been conducted on interventional pain techniques. In reality, it is very difficult to undertake large controlled trials for a number of reasons. Therefore, today's best evidence for practice may be from large case series of comparable patients with careful response and toxicity evaluation and follow-up.