The deep and the deeper: Spinal cord and deep brain stimulation for neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain occurs in people experiencing lesion or disease affecting the somatosensorial system. It is present in 7 % of the general population and may not fully respond to first- and second-line treatments in up to 40 % of cases. Neuromodulation approaches are often proposed for those not tolerating or not responding to usual pharmacological management. These approaches can be delivered surgically (invasively) or non-invasively. Invasive neuromodulation techniques were the first to be employed in neuropathic pain. Among them is spinal cord stimulation (SCS), which consists of the implantation of epidural electrodes over the spinal cord. It is recommended in some guidelines for peripheral neuropathic pain. While recent studies have called into question its efficacy, others have provided promising data, driven by advances in techniques, battery capabilities, programming algorithms and software developments. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is another well-stablished neuromodulation therapy routinely used for movement disorders; however, its role in pain management remains limited to specific research centers. This is not only due to variable results in the literature contesting its efficacy, but also because several different brain targets have been explored in small trials, compromising comparisons between these studies. Structures such as the periaqueductal grey, posterior thalamus, anterior cingulate cortex, ventral striatum/anterior limb of the internal capsule and the insula are the main targets described to date in literature. SCS and DBS present diverse rationales for use, mechanistic backgrounds, and varying levels of support from experimental studies. The present review aims to present their methodological details, main mechanisms of action for analgesia and their place in the current body of evidence in the management of patients with neuropathic pain, as well their particularities, effectiveness, safety and limitations.

Miniature battery-free epidural cortical stimulators

Miniaturized neuromodulation systems could improve the safety and reduce the invasiveness of bioelectronic neuromodulation. However, as implantable bioelectronic devices are made smaller, it becomes difficult to store enough power for long-term operation in batteries. Here, we present a battery-free epidural cortical stimulator that is only 9 millimeters in width yet can safely receive enough wireless power using magnetoelectric antennas to deliver 14.5-volt stimulation bursts, which enables it to stimulate cortical activity on-demand through the dura. The device has digitally programmable stimulation output and centimeter-scale alignment tolerances when powered by an external transmitter. We demonstrate that this device has enough power and reliability for real-world operation by showing acute motor cortex activation in human patients and reliable chronic motor cortex activation for 30 days in a porcine model. This platform opens the possibility of simple surgical procedures for precise neuromodulation.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) technology has been recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). The treatment involves surgical implantation of electrodes and a power source that delivers electrical current to the spinal cord. This treatment decreases the perception of pain in many chronic pain conditions, such as PDN. The number of patients with PDN treated with SCS and the amount of data describing their outcomes is expected to increase given four factors: (1) the large number of patients with this diagnosis, (2) the poor results that have been obtained for pain relief with pharmacotherapy and noninvasive non-pharmacotherapy, (3) the results to date with investigational SCS technology, and (4) the recent FDA approval of systems that deliver this treatment. Whereas traditional SCS replaces pain with paresthesias, a new form of SCS, called high-frequency 10-kHz SCS, first used for pain in 2015, can relieve PDN pain without causing paresthesias, although not all patients experience pain relief by SCS. This article describes (1) an overview of SCS technology, (2) the use of SCS for diseases other than diabetes, (3) the use of SCS for PDN, (4) a comparison of high-frequency 10-kHz and traditional SCS for PDN, (5) other SCS technology for PDN, (6) deployment of SCS systems, (7) barriers to the use of SCS for PDN, (8) risks of SCS technology, (9) current recommendations for using SCS for PDN, and (10) future developments in SCS.

Incidence of Lead Migration With Loss of Efficacy or Paresthesia Coverage After Spinal Cord Stimulator Implantation: Systematic Review and Proportional Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies and Randomized Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this meta-analysis was to approximate the incidence of overall lead migration, clinically significant lead migration, and asymptomatic lead migration in patients who have undergone spinal cord stimulator implantation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed for studies published before May 31, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies with more than ten patients were included. Two reviewers analyzed the articles from the literature search for final inclusion, after which, study characteristics and outcome data were extracted. The primary dichotomous categorical outcome variables were the incidence of overall lead migration, clinically significant lead migration (defined as lead migration resulting in loss of efficacy), and asymptomatic lead migration (defined as lead migration discovered incidentally on follow-up imaging) in patients with spinal cord stimulator implant. Freeman-Tukey arcsine square root transformation for meta-analysis of proportions using random effects (DerSimonian and Laird method) was used to calculate incidence rates for the outcome variables. Pooled incidence rates and 95% CIs were calculated for the outcome variables.

RESULTS

Fifty-three studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 2932 patients having received spinal cord stimulator implants. The pooled incidence of overall lead migration was 9.97% (95% CI of 7.62%-12.59%). Only 24 of the included studies commented on the clinical significance of reported lead migrations, of which every lead migration was clinically significant. In these 24 studies, 96% of the reported lead migrations required a revision procedure or explant. Unfortunately, no studies that reported lead migration commented on asymptomatic lead migrations; therefore, the incidence of asymptomatic lead migrations could not be defined.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis found that the rate of lead migration in patients who have received spinal cord stimulator implants is approximately one in ten patients. This likely closely approximates the incidence of clinically significant lead migration owing to the included studies not routinely performing follow-up imaging. Therefore, lead migrations were primarily discovered owing to loss of efficacy, and no included studies clearly reported asymptomatic lead migration. The results of this meta-analysis can be used to inform patients more accurately on the risks and benefits of spinal cord stimulator implantation.

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.

Wireless High-Frequency Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Chronic Refractory Knee Pain Post-total Knee Replacement

The number of joint replacement surgeries, especially knee replacement surgeries, is rising with the rising geriatric population. Chronic unremitting knee pain post-total knee replacement surgery is a common phenomenon. Usually, the pain responds to conservative measures, including physical therapy and medical management. In some patients, the pain post-knee replacement surgery can be refractory and unremitting. In such scenarios, peripheral nerve stimulation, or neuromodulation, can be an effective option.

Non-Invasive Treatments for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive procedures in relieving chronic pain due to Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS).

METHODS

Since patients who suffered from FBBS are often non-responders to analgesics, we compared Visual Analogical Scale for low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, trial success rate, adverse events and complications between conservative treatment groups and control groups.

RESULTS

The included studies were 15. Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) was performed in 11 trials; 4 studies assessed the efficacy of different epidural injections; one study evaluated repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation. All the studies reported back and leg pain relief after treatment with SCS, with a significant superiority in high frequences (HFS) group, compared to low frequences (LFS) group. Moreover, disability decreased with each non-invasive treatment evaluated. Epidural injections of steroids and hyaluronidase have shown controversial results. Adverse events were described in 7 studies: lead migration, hardware-related events, infection and incisional pain were the most reported. Finally, trial success rate showed better outcomes for HFS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review highlights the efficacy of conservative treatments in FBSS patients, with an improvement in pain scores and a decrease in disability index, especially after SCS with HFS. However, due to the lack of homogeneity among trials and population characteristics, further studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of non-invasive interventions in patients affected by FBSS.

Real world experience with minimally invasive wireless percutaneous neuromodulation in a tertiary care centre

Background

Wireless percutaneous nerve stimulation (PNS) for chronic pain is rapidly evolving in the ever expanding neuromodulation paradigm. Safety and lower risks with a potential of long-term analgesia cannot be over emphasised especially with the ongoing opioid pandemic. PNS with an implanted pulse generator (IPG) has also been shown to provide good benefit, without often unpleasant widespread paraesthesia from conventional spinal cord stimulators.

Aim and Methods

We retrospectively extracted data on all wireless PNS implants in our highly specialised pain neuromodulation centre since initiation of wireless PNS service in August 2019. Patient demographics, pain history, analgesic intake and details on implant follow-up data within 1 year post-implant including pain relief, EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) and Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scores were extracted. The cases are presented in a narrative format.

Result

A total of five patients were implanted with wireless (Stimwave^®) PNS from August 2019 to February 2020. Neuropathic pain was the most common presenting diagnosis. All patients showed >50% pain relief at 3 months. EQ-5D and PGIC did not show any improvement in the subjects. Two of the patients managed to decrease their analgesics after implantation. Similar sustained benefits could not be demonstrated after 1 year.

Discussion

PNS can provide analgesia in appropriately selected cases. Naivety of the technique and procedure might cause some degree of uncertainty. External pulse generator with wireless transmission avoids IPG and tunnelling related side effects, but requires individualised special wearable technology to power the lead. Minimally invasive nature of the technique might be attractive and preferable for patients with complex medical issues, nickel allergy and poor general health who may otherwise be unsuitable for Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) with conventional hardware. Robust prospective controlled studies and RCTs in future might provide further insights on utility in other neuropathic pain diagnosis, long-term outcomes and acceptability compared to conventional SCS.

The Prevalence of Elevated Impedances and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Ineligibility Following Implantation of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation Devices: A Retrospective Review

OBJECTIVES

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is increasingly utilized in the treatment of multiple chronic pain conditions. However, patients will continue to experience other medical issues and the potential for future magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) needs must not be overlooked. SCS devices have device-specific MRI conditional labeling and if impedances are elevated the patient may not be able to obtain an MRI. With 10 kHz SCS devices specifically, an impedance value above 10,000 ohms (Ω) is MRI ineligible. The primary objective of this article was to report the incidence of elevated impedances with a multilumen lead design per electrode, per lead, and to describe the total number of MRI ineligible patients due to elevated impedances using 10 kHz SCS cutoff values. The secondary objective was to determine whether certain patient demographics or surgery characteristics put patients at increased risk of elevated impedances.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 327 patients who were implanted with a 10 kHz SCS device between January 2015 and November 2020. Regression models were fitted to determine associations between MRI ineligibility status with clinical characteristics including age, sex, BMI, lead location, implantable pulse generator (IPG) location, and time since implant.

RESULTS

We found elevated impedances with subsequent MRI ineligibility in 13 patients (4.0%). Regression analysis did not identify any associations with MRI ineligibility and patient risk factors including age, sex, body mass index, lead location, IPG location, and follow-up time since implant.

CONCLUSION

We found the prevalence of elevated impedances above 10,000 Ω to be 4% of implanted patients. This information is important for patients and physicians alike and should be considered when device selection is occurring in the pre-operative visits.

Spinal Cord Stimulation as Treatment for Cancer and Chemotherapy-Induced Pain

Neuropathic pain is a rampant disease exacting a significant toll on patients, providers, and health care systems around the globe. Neuromodulation has been successfully employed to treat many indications including failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), phantom limb pain (PLP), radiculopathies, and intractable pelvic pain, among many others. Recent studies have also demonstrated efficacy for cancer-related pain and chemotherapy induced neuropathy with these techniques. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is the most commonly employed technique and involves implantation of percutaneous or paddle leads targeting the dorsal columns of the spinal cord with the goal of disrupting the pain signals traveling to the brain. Tonic, high frequency, and burst waveforms have all been shown to reduce pain and disability in chronic pain patients. Closed-loop SCS systems that automatically adjust stimulation parameters based on feedback (such as evoked compound action potentials) are becoming increasingly used to help ease the burden placed on patients to adjust their programming to their pain and position. Additionally, dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) is a newer technique that allows for dermatomal coverage especially in patients with pain in up to two dermatomes. Regardless of the technique chosen, neuromodulation has been shown to be cost-effective and efficacious and should be given full consideration in patients with chronic pain conditions.

Concept of the Number Needed to Treat for the Analysis of Pain Relief Outcomes in Patients Treated with Spinal Cord Stimulation

In the rapidly evolving field of spinal cord stimulation (SCS), measures of treatment effects are needed to help understand the benefits of new therapies. The present article elaborates the number needed to treat (NNT) concept and applies it to the SCS field. We reviewed the basic theory of the NNT, its calculation method, and its application to historical controlled trials of SCS. We searched the literature for controlled studies with ≥20 implanted SCS patients with chronic axial back and/or leg pain followed for ≥3 months and a reported responder rate defined as ≥50% pain relief. Relevant data necessary to estimate the NNT were extracted from the included articles. In total, 12 of 1616 records were eligible for inclusion. The records reported 10 clinical studies, including 7 randomized controlled trials, 2 randomized crossover trials, and 1 controlled cohort study. The studies investigated traditional SCS and more recently developed SCS modalities, including 10 kHz SCS. In conclusion, the NNT estimate may help SCS stakeholders better understand the effect size difference between compared treatments; however, interpretation of any NNT should take into account its full context. In addition, comparisons across trials of different therapies should be avoided since they are prone to interpretation biases.

The Added Value of Subcutaneous Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation Combined with SCS, as Salvage Therapy, for Refractory Low Back Pain Component in Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Implanted Patients: A Randomized Controlled Study (CUMPNS Study) Based on 3D-Mapping Composite Pain Assessment

While Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) provides satisfaction to almost 2/3 of Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome-Type 2 (PSPS-T2) patients implanted for refractory chronic back and/or leg pain, when not adequately addressed the back pain component, leaves patients in a therapeutic cul-de-sac. Peripheral Nerve field Stimulation (PNfS) has shown interesting results addressing back pain in the same population. Far from placing these two techniques in opposition, we suggest that these approaches could be combined to better treat PSPS-T2 patients. We designed a RCT (CUMPNS), with a 12-month follow-up, to assess the potential added value of PNfS, as a salvage therapy, in PSPS-T2 patients experiencing a "Failed SCS Syndrome" in the back pain component. Fourteen patients were included in this study and randomized into 2 groups ("SCS + PNfS" group/n = 6 vs. "SCS only" group/n = 8). The primary objective of the study was to compare the percentage of back pain surface decrease after 3 months, using a computerized interface to obtain quantitative pain mappings, combined with multi-dimensional SCS outcomes. Back pain surface decreased significantly greater for the "SCS + PNfS" group (80.2% ± 21.3%) compared to the "SCS only" group (13.2% ± 94.8%) (p = 0.012), highlighting the clinical interest of SCS + PNfS, in cases where SCS fails to address back pain.

High Frequency 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation as a First Line Programming Option for Patients With Chronic Pain: A Retrospective Study and Review of the Current Evidence

Introduction Neuromodulation is an evolving and increasingly popular therapy for chronic pain management. Recent data suggest that novel waveforms have demonstrated greater benefit over traditional spinal cord stimulation (SCS). The authors conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing high-frequency 10 kHz SCS at a single tertiary medical center for the purpose of contributing further evidence to this growing body of data. The literature of high-frequency SCS published to date was also reviewed. Methods A retrospective chart review was performed for patients with chronic pain syndrome, including failed back surgery syndrome and sciatica alone, who underwent high-frequency SCS at 10 kHz. This data was analyzed using R software (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) for statistical analysis. The PubMed database was searched for relevant articles using the search terms "high frequency," "10 kHz," and "spinal cord stimulation." All relevant studies conducted to date were included in this literature review. Results Twenty-one patients had complete follow-up data and were included in this study. Of the 21 patients, 85.7% subjectively reported post-operative pain relief while 71.4% of the total patients reported pain relief by ≥ 50%. There was a statistically significant decrease in mean VAS scores from pre-operative to 12-months post-operative (8.52 vs 4.37, p < 0.001). Additionally, 76.5% of patients subjectively reported improvements in sleep and activities of daily living. Recent studies indicate that high-frequency SCS appears to be a viable option for delivering quality pain relief in patients for chronic regional pain syndrome, failed back surgery syndrome, sciatica, and also pain in the upper cervical region of the spine. Conclusion This article provides evidence both with the authors' own institutional data and from the currently published literature for the efficacy of using high-frequency SCS at 10 kHz as a first-line programming option for patients undergoing SCS.

Implantable Pulse Generators for Deep Brain Stimulation: Challenges, Complications, and Strategies for Practicality and Longevity

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) represents an important treatment modality for movement disorders and other circuitopathies. Despite their miniaturization and increasing sophistication, DBS systems share a common set of components of which the implantable pulse generator (IPG) is the core power supply and programmable element. Here we provide an overview of key hardware and software specifications of commercially available IPG systems such as rechargeability, MRI compatibility, electrode configuration, pulse delivery, IPG case architecture, and local field potential sensing. We present evidence-based approaches to mitigate hardware complications, of which infection represents the most important factor. Strategies correlating positively with decreased complications include antibiotic impregnation and co-administration and other surgical considerations during IPG implantation such as the use of tack-up sutures and smaller profile devices.Strategies aimed at maximizing battery longevity include patient-related elements such as reliability of IPG recharging or consistency of nightly device shutoff, and device-specific such as parameter delivery, choice of lead configuration, implantation location, and careful selection of electrode materials to minimize impedance mismatch. Finally, experimental DBS systems such as ultrasound, magnetoelectric nanoparticles, and near-infrared that use extracorporeal powered neuromodulation strategies are described as potential future directions for minimally invasive treatment.

Trends in Clinical Trials for Spinal Cord Stimulation

BACKGROUND

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a neuromodulation technology widely used in the treatment of intractable chronic pain syndromes. SCS is now being applied more broadly as a possible therapy for a range of indications, including neurological, cardiac, and gastrointestinal disorders. Ongoing research in this field is critical in order to gain further insights into the mechanisms of SCS, determine its role in new indications, and refine programming techniques for the optimization of therapeutic outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the state of SCS-related human research by cataloging and summarizing clinical trials that have been recently completed or are currently underway in this field.

METHODS

A search was conducted for clinical trials pertaining to SCS using the ClinicalTrials.gov database. Trials were analyzed to generate a detailed overview of ongoing SCS-related research. Specifically, trials were categorized by intervention, trial start date, study completion status, clinical phase, projected subject enrollment, condition, country of origin, device manufacturer, funding source, and study topic.

RESULTS

In total, 212 relevant clinical trials were identified. 175 trials (82.5%) involved invasive SCS, while the remaining 37 trials (17.5%) used noninvasive forms of spinal stimulation. Most trials examined the efficacy of SCS for chronic pain syndromes or new indications, while others assessed different stimulation parameters. The studies spanned >27 different disorders, with almost 20% of trials pertaining to conditions other than chronic pain syndromes. The majority of SCS trials were US-based (55.7% of studies), but many countries (e.g., Belgium and UK) are becoming increasingly active. The ratio of investigator-sponsored to industry-sponsored trials was 2:1. Emphasizing the need to optimize therapeutic outcomes of SCS, one-quarter of trials predominantly focused on the assessment of alternative stimulation parameters such as burst or high-frequency stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

A large number of clinical trials of SCS are underway. Improvements in the treatment of pain and novel indications for SCS constitute the majority of studies. This overview of SCS-related clinical trials provides a window into future new indications, novel stimulation techniques, and a heightened understanding of the mechanisms of action.

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for neuropathic pain: Systematic review and French recommendations

Neuropathic pain remains a significant unmet medical need. Several recommendations have recently been proposed concerning pharmacotherapy, neurostimulation techniques and interventional management, but no comprehensive guideline encompassing all these treatments has yet been issued. We performed a systematic review of pharmacotherapy, neurostimulation, surgery, psychotherapies and other types of therapy for peripheral or central neuropathic pain, based on studies published in peer-reviewed journals before January 2018. The main inclusion criteria were chronic neuropathic pain for at least three months, a randomized controlled methodology, at least three weeks of follow-up, at least 10 patients per group, and a double-blind design for drug therapy. Based on the GRADE system, we provide weak-to-strong recommendations for use and proposal as a first-line treatment for SNRIs (duloxetine and venlafaxine), gabapentin and tricyclic antidepressants and, for topical lidocaine and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation specifically for peripheral neuropathic pain; a weak recommendation for use and proposal as a second-line treatment for pregabalin, tramadol, combination therapy (antidepressant combined with gabapentinoids), and for high-concentration capsaicin patches and botulinum toxin A specifically for peripheral neuropathic pain; a weak recommendation for use and proposal as a third-line treatment for high-frequency rTMS of the motor cortex, spinal cord stimulation (failed back surgery syndrome and painful diabetic polyneuropathy) and strong opioids (in the absence of an alternative). Psychotherapy (cognitive behavioral therapy and mindfulness) is recommended as a second-line therapy, as an add-on to other therapies. An algorithm encompassing all the recommended treatments is proposed.

Spinal cord stimulation in chronic pain: technical advances

Chronic severe pain results in a detrimental effect on the patient’s quality of life. Such patients have to take a large number of medications, including opioids, often without satisfactory effect, sometimes leading to medication abuse and the pain worsening. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is one of the most effective technologies that, unlike other interventional pain treatment methods, achieves long-term results in patients suffering from chronic neuropathic pain. The first described mode of SCS was a conventional tonic stimulation, but now the novel modalities (high-frequency and burst), techniques (dorsal root ganglia stimulations), and technical development (wireless and implantable pulse generator-free systems) of SCS are becoming more popular. The improvement of SCS systems, their miniaturization, and the appearance of new mechanisms for anchoring electrodes results in a significant reduction in the rate of complications and revision surgeries, and the appearance of new waves of stimulation allows not only to avoid the phenomenon of addiction, but also to improve the long-term results of chronic SCS. The purpose of this review is to describe the current condition of SCS and up-to-date technical advances.

Cost-Effectiveness Model Shows Superiority of Wireless Spinal Cord Stimulation Implantation Without a Separate Trial

Objective

We evaluated the cost‐effectiveness of wireless spinal cord stimulation (Wireless SCS) with single stage “direct to permanent” implantation vs. screening with temporary electrodes and an external pulse generator followed by implantation of a system for long‐term use (IPG SCS).

Materials and Methods

We created a cost model that takes a 2019 United States (U.S.) payer perspective and is based on IPG SCS cost models for subjects with chronic back and/or leg pain. Our six‐month decision tree includes the screening trial period (success ≥50% relief) and leads to various levels of pain relief with or without complications for IPG SCS and Wireless SCS and without complications for conventional medical management (CMM). Every three months in the follow‐on 15‐year Markov model (with costs and quality‐adjusted life years discounted 3.5% annually), subjects remain stable or transition to deteriorated health or death. Subjects who fail SCS receive CMM. After 60 Markov cycles, a 100,000‐sample simulation reveals the impact of maximum willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) from $10,000 to $100,000 per quality‐adjusted life year on net monetary benefit (NMB). Sensitivity analyses considered the impact of the Wireless SCS screening success rate, Wireless SCS device cost, and IPG SCS device longevity.

Results

Compared with IPG SCS, Wireless SCS offers higher clinical effectiveness at a lower cost and a higher NMB for our WTP thresholds and is, thus, dominant. Wireless SCS is also cost‐effective compared with CMM. Results remain robust with 1) Wireless SCS screening success rates as low as 85% (dominant), 2) the cost of the Wireless SCS devices as high as $55,000 (cost‐effective), and 3) IPG SCS devices lasting 12 years (dominant).

Conclusions

In this model, compared with IPG SCS or with CMM, Wireless SCS is a superior strategy.

Redefining Spinal Cord Stimulation "Trials": A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Single-Stage Wireless Permanent Implantable Devices

BACKGROUND

"Traditional" spinal cord stimulation (SCS) trials with percutaneous electrodes externalized to a pulse generator (PG) are typically limited in duration due to risk of infection. Newer miniaturized wireless SCS technology eliminates the percutaneous extension (as well as PGs implanted for chronic use), thus facilitating a single-stage implantation after which the device can remain indefinitely.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate fully implanted wireless SCS devices during a 30-day screening trial in subjects with chronic low back pain and leg pain and a history of lumbosacral spine surgery.

METHODS

In a randomized controlled trial of single-stage wireless SCS using a wireless percutaneous system, 99 subjects received either 10 kHz high frequency stimulation (HFS) or lower frequency stimulation (LFS) below 1500 Hz (Bolash R, Creamer M, Rauck R, et al. Wireless high frequency spinal cord stimulation (10 kHz) compared to multi-waveform low frequency spinal cord stimulation in the management of chronic pain in failed back surgery syndrome subjects: preliminary results of a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled study. Pain Med 2019, https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnz019). In this report, we assess the 30-day trial success rate (≥50% pain relief from baseline) and complications.

RESULTS

The overall trial success rate was 88% (87/99): 92% (46/50) for HFS and 84% (41/49) for LFS (NS). The trial success rate in the 64 subjects with predominant low back pain was 92% (59/64) vs. 80% (28/35) in those with leg pain ≥ low back pain (NS). During the screening trial, one infection occurred (1%) and one subject withdrew and was explanted (1%). Electrode migrations were seen on routine follow-up x-rays in 10 cases (10%).

CONCLUSION

Using wireless SCS devices that allow for an extended trial period and evaluation of various waveforms, we observed a high rate trial success rate with both HFS and LFS waveforms, with minimal incidence of infection. Long-term follow-up will address the cost-effectiveness and morbidity associated with this technology, which facilitates single-stage treatment.