Burst and Tonic Spinal Cord Stimulation Differentially Activate GABAergic Mechanisms to Attenuate Pain in a Rat Model of Cervical Radiculopathy

Characterization of preclinical models to investigate spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite advancements in preclinical and clinical spinal cord stimulation (SCS) research, the mechanisms of SCS action remain unclear. This may result from challenges in translatability of findings between species. Our systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42023457443) aimed to comprehensively characterize the important translational components of preclinical SCS models, including stimulating elements and stimulation specifications. Databases (Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and WikiStim) were searched on October 5, 2023, identifying 78 studies meeting the search criteria. We conducted a post hoc meta-analysis, including subgroup analyses and meta-regression, to assess SCS efficacy on mechanical hypersensitivity in rats subjected to neuropathic pain. Although monopolar electrodes were predominantly used as stimulating elements until 2013, quadripolar paddle and cylindrical leads gained recent popularity. Most research was conducted using 50 Hz and 200 µs stimulation. Motor threshold (MT) estimation was the predominant strategy to determine SCS intensity, which was set to 71.9% of MT on average. Our analysis revealed a large effect size for SCS (Hedge g = 1.13, 95% CI: [0.93, 1.32]) with similar magnitudes of effect between conventional (≤100 Hz) and nonconventional SCS paradigms while sham SCS had nonsignificant effect size. In addition, different stimulation intensity, frequency, and electrode design did not affect effect size. The risk of bias was assessed using Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation criteria and was unclear, and only the frequency subgroup analysis showed publication bias. In summary, our review characterizes the critical components of preclinical SCS models and provides recommendations to improve reproducibility and translatability, thereby advancing the scientific foundation for SCS research.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Spinal Cord Injury-Related Pain: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has emerged as an effective treatment for managing chronic pain that is unresponsive to traditional therapies. While SCS is well documented for conditions like failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), its effectiveness in managing pain related to spinal cord injuries (SCI) is less studied. This study aims to assess the efficacy of SCS in alleviating SCI-related pain and improving patients' quality of life, filling a gap in the existing literature.

METHODS

This cohort study included 15 adult patients with traumatic and non-traumatic SCIs, treated between 2016 and 2022. Patients received SCS implants after either a trial or direct implantation. Pain levels were assessed using visual analog scale (VAS) scores, while quality of life was evaluated using the EuroQol five-dimensional (EQ-5D) scale. The SCS devices were implanted at different spinal levels, with various stimulation protocols applied, including high-frequency stimulation (10 kHz).

RESULTS

In patients with traumatic SCI, the mean VAS score decreased from 8.6 to 4.5, with 71% reporting more than 50% pain relief. Non-traumatic SCI patients experienced a reduction from 8.5 to 2.5, with all showing more than 50% pain relief. EQ-5D scores improved in both groups. A 49% reduction in pain medication usage was also observed, though one patient required revision surgery due to an adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

SCS significantly reduces pain and improves quality of life for SCI patients, particularly with high-frequency protocols. While promising, further research is needed to optimize patient selection and stimulation parameters for better long-term outcomes.

A 3-mV Precision Dual-Mode-Controlled Fast Charge Balancing for Implantable Biphasic Neural Stimulators

This paper 5 presents a novel charge balancing (CB) with a current-control (CC) mode and a voltage-control (VC) mode for implantable biphasic stimulators, which can achieve one-step accurate anodic pulse generating. Compared with the conventional short-pulse-injection-based CB, the proposed method could reduce the balancing time and avoid inducing undesired artifact. The CC operation compensates the majority stimulation charge at high speed, while the VC operation guarantees a high CB precision. In order to eliminate the oscillation during the mode transition, a smooth CC-VC transition method is adopted. In addition, a digital auxiliary monitoring loop is introduced against the variations of the tissue-electrode interface impedance during the stimulation process to meet long-term CB requirement. The proposed stimulator has been fabricated in a 0.18 μm BCD process with 10 V voltage compliance, and the measured CB precision is less than 3 mV. The functionalities of the proposed CB have been verified successfully through in vitro experiments.

Current Waveforms in Spinal Cord Stimulation and Their Impact on the Future of Neuromodulation: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Neuromodulation is a standard and well-accepted treatment for chronic refractory neuropathic pain. There has been progressive innovation in the field over the last decade, particularly in areas of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and dorsal root ganglion stimulation. Improved outcomes using proprietary waveforms have become customary in the field, leading to an unprecedented expansion of these products and a plethora of options for the management of pain. Although advances in waveform technology have improved our fundamental understanding of neuromodulation, a scoping review describing new energy platforms and their associated clinical effects and outcomes is needed. The authors submit that understanding electrophysiological neuromodulation may be important for clinical decision-making and programming selection for personalized patient care.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to characterize ways differences in mechanism of action and clinical outcomes of current spinal neuromodulation products may affect contemporary clinical decision-making while outlining a possible path for the future SCS.

STUDY DESIGN

The study is a scoping review of the literature about newer generation SCS waveforms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature report was performed on PubMed and chapters to include articles on spine neuromodulation mechanism of action and efficacy.

RESULTS

A total of 8469 studies were identified, 75 of which were included for the scoping review after keywords defining recent waveform technology were added.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical data suggest that neuromodulation remains a promising tool in the treatment of chronic pain. The evidence for SCS for treating chronic pain seems compelling; however, more long-term and comparative data are needed for a comparison of waveforms when it comes to the etiology of pain. In addition, an exploration into combination waveform therapy and waveform cycling may be paramount for future clinical studies and the development of new technologies.

Immunomodulatory and endocrine effects of deep brain stimulation and spinal cord stimulation - A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) and Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) represent burgeoning treatments for diverse neurological disorders. This systematic review aims to consolidate findings on the immunological and endocrine effects of DBS and SCS, shedding light on the intricate mechanisms of neuromodulation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This systematic review, aligned with PRISMA protocols, synthesizes findings from 33 references-20 on DBS and 13 on SCS-to unravel the immunological and endocrine impacts of neuromodulation.

RESULTS

DBS interventions exhibited divergent effects on cytokines, with an increase in hepcidin levels and a variable impact on the IL-6/IL-10 ratio. While some studies reported elevated IL-6, animal studies consistently demonstrated a reduction in IL-1β and IL-6, with no significant changes in TNF-α and an increase in IL-10. Noteworthy hormonal changes included decreased corticosterone and ACTH concentrations and increased oxytocin levels following DBS of the hypothalamus. SCS mirrored similar effects on interleukins, indicating a reduction in IL-6 and IL-1β and an increase in IL-10 levels. Additionally, SCS led to reduced VEGF levels and elevated expression of neurotrophic factors such as BDNF and GDNF, particularly under burst stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Both DBS and SCS exert anti-inflammatory effects, manifesting as a decrease in pro-inflammatory cytokines alongside the stimulation of anti-inflammatory cytokine synthesis. These findings, observed in both animal and human models, imply that neurostimulation may modify the trajectory of neurological diseases by modulating local immune responses in an immunomodulatory and endocrine manner. This comprehensive exploration sets the stage for future research endeavors in this evolving domain.

Narrative review of current neuromodulation modalities for spinal cord injury

Neuromodulation is a developing field of medicine that includes a vast array of minimally invasive and non-invasive therapies including transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), peripheral nerve stimulation, and spinal cord stimulation (SCS). Although the current literature surrounding the use of neuromodulation in managing chronic pain is abundant, there is an insufficient amount of evidence specifically regarding neuromodulation in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). Given the pain and functional deficits that these patients face, that are not amenable to other forms conservative therapy, the purpose of this narrative review is to examine and assess the use of various neuromodulation modalities to manage pain and restore function in the SCI population. Currently, high-frequency spinal cord stimulation (HF-SCS) and burst spinal cord stimulation (B-SCS) have been shown to have the most promising effect in improving pain intensity and frequency. Additionally, dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S) and TMS have been shown to effectively increase motor responses and improve limb strength. Although these modalities carry the potential to enhance overall functionality and improve a patient's degree of disability, there is a lack of long-term, randomized-controlled trials in the current space. Additional research is warranted to further support the clinical use of these emerging modalities to provide improved pain management, increased level of function, and ultimately an overall better quality of life in the SCI population.

Advances in Pain Medicine: a Review of New Technologies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This narrative review highlights the interventional musculoskeletal techniques that have evolved in recent years.

RECENT FINDINGS

The recent progress in pain medicine technologies presented here represents the ideal treatment of the pain patient which is to provide personalized care. Advances in pain physiology research and pain management technologies support each other concurrently. As new technologies give rise to new perspectives and understanding of pain, new research inspires the development of new technologies.

Tonic, Burst, and Burst-Cycle Spinal Cord Stimulation Lead to Differential Brain Activation Patterns as Detected by Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this preclinical study was to examine the responses of the brain to noxious stimulation in the presence and absence of different modes of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) using blood-oxygen-level-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging (BOLD-fMRI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sprague-Dawley rats were randomized to groups based on the mode of SCS delivered which included tonic stimulation (n = 27), burst stimulation (n = 30), and burst-cycle stimulation (n = 29). The control (sham) group (n = 28) received no SCS. The SCS electrode was inserted between T10 and T12 spinal levels prior to fMRI session. The experimental protocol for fMRI acquisition consisted of an initial noxious stimulation phase, a treatment phase wherein the SCS was turned on concurrently with noxious stimulation, and a residual effect phase wherein the noxious stimulation alone was turned on. The responses were statistically analyzed through paired t-test and the results were presented as z-scores for the quantitative analysis of the fMRI data.

RESULTS

The treatment with different SCS modes attenuated the BOLD brain responses to noxious hindlimb stimulation. The tonic, burst, and burst-cycle SCS treatment attenuated BOLD responses in the caudate putamen (CPu), insula (In), and secondary somatosensory cortex (S2). There was little to no corresponding change in sham control in these three regions. The burst and burst-cycle SCS demonstrated greater attenuation of BOLD signals in CPu, In, and S2 compared to tonic stimulation.

CONCLUSION

The high-resolution fMRI study using a rat model demonstrated the potential of different SCS modes to act on several pain-matrix-related regions of the brain in response to noxious stimulation. The burst and burst-cycle SCS exhibited greater brain activity reduction in response to noxious hindlimb stimulation in the caudate putamen, insula, and secondary somatosensory cortex compared to tonic stimulation.

A narrative review and future considerations of spinal cord stimulation, dorsal root ganglion stimulation and peripheral nerve stimulation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In recent years, neuromodulation has experienced a renaissance. Novel waveforms and anatomic targets show potential improvements in therapy that may signify substantial benefits. New innovations in peripheral nerve stimulation and dorsal root ganglion stimulation have shown prospective evidence and sustainability of results. Sub-perception physiologic bursting, high-frequency stimulation and feedback loop mechanisms provide significant benefits over traditional tonic spinal cords stimulation (SCS) in peer reviewed investigations. We reviewed the themes associated with novel technology in the context of historical stalwart publications.

RECENT FINDINGS

New innovations have led to better nerve targeting, improvements in disease-based treatment, and opioid alternatives for those in chronic pain. In addition, new neural targets from both structural and cellular perspectives have changed the field of Neurostimulation.

SUMMARY

For many years, tonic SCS was representative of neuromodulation, but as this review examines, the progression of the field in the past decade has reshaped patient options.

Ultra-Low Energy Cycled Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation Yields Robust Outcomes in Pain, Function, and Affective Domains: A Subanalysis From Two Prospective, Multicenter, International Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

DeRidder's burst stimulation design has become a key spinal cord stimulation (SCS) waveform because it reduces the intensity of pain as well as its associated emotional distress. The brain pathways underlying these outcomes may also allow for the effects of stimulation to carry over after stimulation is turned off, making it amenable to intermittent application. Here, the utility of intermittently cycled burst was evaluated using data from two large real-world prospective studies (TRIUMPH, REALITY).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Subjects used intermittent dosing in a 1:3 ratio (30 sec on, 90 sec off; N = 100) in TRIUMPH and 1:12 ratio in REALITY (30-sec on, 360-sec off; N = 95) for six months. Pain intensity (0-10 numeric rating scale), pain-related emotions on the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS), and physical function on PROMIS questionnaires were compared with preimplant baseline ratings and by group.

RESULTS

In both groups, mean pain intensity decreased by nearly 50% relative to baseline, PCS scores significantly decreased, and physical function improved. Importantly, no differences between the 1:3 and 1:12 groups were identified. A high proportion, 80% and 77% of the 1:3 and 1:12 groups, respectively, were considered responders on a multiple measures. No adverse events were associated with intermittent stimulation.

DISCUSSION

Intermittent cycling of burst SCS lowers the overall electric charge delivered to the spinal cord and preserves battery consumption, without compromising pain relief and associated symptoms.

Differential Modulation of Dorsal Horn Neurons by Various Spinal Cord Stimulation Strategies

New strategies for spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for chronic pain have emerged in recent years, which may work better via different analgesic mechanisms than traditional low-frequency (e.g., 50 Hz) paresthesia-based SCS. To determine if 10 kHz and burst SCS waveforms might have a similar mechanistic basis, we examined whether these SCS strategies at intensities ostensibly below sensory thresholds would modulate spinal dorsal horn (DH) neuronal function in a neuron type-dependent manner. By using an in vivo electrophysiological approach in rodents, we found that low-intensity 10 kHz SCS, but not burst SCS, selectively activates inhibitory interneurons in the spinal DH. This study suggests that low-intensity 10 kHz SCS may inhibit pain-sensory processing in the spinal DH by activating inhibitory interneurons without activating DC fibers, resulting in paresthesia-free pain relief, whereas burst SCS likely operates via other mechanisms.

Early changes in brain network topology and activation of affective pathways predict persistent pain in the rat

Adaptations in brain communication are associated with multiple pain disorders and are hypothesized to promote the transition from acute to chronic pain. Despite known increases in brain synaptic activity, it is unknown if and how changes in pathways and networks contribute to persistent pain. A tunable rat model that induces transient or persistent temporomandibular joint pain was used to characterize brain network and subcircuit changes when sensitivity is detected in both transient and persistent pain groups and later when sensitivity is present only for the persistent pain group. Brain activity was measured by F-FDG positron emission tomography imaging and used to construct intersubject correlation networks; network connectivity distributions, diagnostics, and community structure were assessed. Activation of subcircuits was tested by structural equation modeling. Findings reveal differences in the brain networks at day 7 between the persistent and transient pain groups, a time when peripheral sensitivity is detected in both groups, but spontaneous pain occurs only in the persistent pain group. At day 7, increased (P ≤ 0.01) clustering, node strength, network segregation, and activation of prefrontal-limbic pathways are observed only in the group that develops persistent pain. Later, increased clustering and node strength are more pronounced with persistent pain, particularly within the limbic system, and decrease when pain resolves. Pretreatment with intra-articular etanercept to attenuate pain confirms that these adaptations are associated with pain onset. Results suggest that early and sustained brain changes can differentiate persistent and transient pain, implying they could be useful as prognostic biomarkers for persistent pain and in identifying therapeutic targets.

Increased substance P and synaptic remodeling occur in the trigeminal sensory system with sustained osteoarthritic temporomandibular joint sensitivity

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

Increased substance P and a loss of inhibitory synapses occurs within the brain's trigeminal sensory system with persistent, but not transient, temporomandibular joint sensitivity.

Introduction:

Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) pain is among the most prevalent musculoskeletal conditions and can result from atypical joint loading. Although TMJ pain is typically self-resolving, 15% of patients develop chronic TMJ pain that is recalcitrant to therapy and may be attributed to changes in pain processing centers. Although TMJ overloading induces pain and osteoarthritis, whether neuronal modifications in the trigeminal sensory system contribute to persistent TMJ pain is unknown.

Objective:

This study investigates changes in excitatory neuropeptides and synaptic transmission proteins in cases of transient and persistent TMJ sensitivity in a rat model.

Methods:

Rats underwent repeated jaw loading that produces transient (2N-load) or persistent (3.5N-load) sensitivity. In both groups, immunolabeling was used to assess substance P in the spinal trigeminal nucleus caudalis (Sp5C) and glutamate transporter 1 in the ventroposteriomedial thalamus early after loading. Synaptosomal Western blots were used to measure synaptic proteins in the caudal medulla and thalamus at a later time after loading.

Results:

Substance P increases transiently in the Sp5C early after loading that induces persistent sensitivity. However, glutamate transporter 1 is unchanged in the ventroposteriomedial thalamus. At a later time, synaptosomal Western blots show loss of the presynaptic tethering protein, synapsin, and the inhibitory scaffolding protein, gephyrin, in the thalamus with persistent, but not transient, sensitivity. No changes are identified in synapsin, phosphorylated synapsin, homer, or gephyrin in the caudal medulla.

Conclusions:

Substance P in the Sp5C and later loss of inhibitory synapses in the thalamus likely contribute to, or indicate, persistent TMJ pain.

Spinal cord stimulation alleviates intractable pain due to malignant pleural mesothelioma: a case report

Background

Patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) frequently complain of intractable pain that is resistant to conservative treatments. Although spinal cord stimulation (SCS) may be promising in the alleviation of such devastating pain, the effects of SCS on MPM-associated pain and the appropriate timing of its application remain unknown.

Case presentation

A 66-year-old man diagnosed with MPM presented with severe neuropathic pain due to rapid progression of the tumor to the intercostal nerves. The patient immediately decided to receive SCS implantation and burst stimulus, which relieved the conservative therapy-resistant pain and improved his sleep and daily activities.

Conclusion

This report suggests that the execution of SCS as soon as possible may help to alleviate MPM symptoms. Since MPM extends aggressively to the thorax and nerves that cause mixed nociceptive and/or neuropathic pain, appropriate pain management requires the proper assessment of the etiology by an expert in pain management.

Improved Psychosocial and Functional Outcomes and Reduced Opioid Usage Following Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation

Objective

Burst spinal cord stimulation (B‐SCS) has been shown to reduce neuronal firing in the anterior cingulate cortex through selective modulation of the medial pain pathway tract. This pain pathway communicates the affective component of pain processing. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of B‐SCS on psychosocial functioning and its influence on pain and quality of life.

Materials and Methods

Eligible patients with chronic, intractable pain of the trunk, and/or lower limbs were enrolled. After a successful trial period, subjects received a permanent implant and returned for follow‐up at 6‐ and 12‐months.

Results

In total, 269 patients were enrolled at 22 centers. Trial success rate was 90%. Significant improvements in pain, physical, mental, and emotional functioning were observed from baseline to the 6‐ and 12‐month follow‐up (p < 0.001). Overall, patients had improved quality of life, became more active, and the negative impact of pain on daily life was decreasing. At one year, 81% of subjects were satisfied or very satisfied with their therapy. Subjects showing significant improvements on mental health outcomes reported enhanced pain relief and quality of life scores compared with subjects with continued impaired mental health at follow‐up. At one year, 89% of subjects who were taking opioids at baseline decreased or stayed at the same level of opioid use; 19% stopped taking any opioids. No unanticipated adverse events have been reported.

Conclusions

One‐year outcomes after B‐SCS show improvements across all evaluated psychological measures with the largest impact observed on catastrophizing and depression (the affective component of pain processing). These pain‐related beliefs and behaviors, and not pain intensity, have been shown to put patients at greatest risk of a poor prognosis and quality of life.

The Evolution of Neuromodulation in the Treatment of Chronic Pain: Forward-Looking Perspectives

Background

The field of neuromodulation is continually evolving, with the past decade showing significant advancement in the therapeutic efficacy of neuromodulation procedures. The continued evolution of neuromodulation technology brings with it the promise of addressing the needs of both patients and physicians, as current technology improves and clinical applications expand.

Design

This review highlights the current state of the art of neuromodulation for treating chronic pain, describes key areas of development including stimulation patterns and neural targets, expanding indications and applications, feedback-controlled systems, noninvasive approaches, and biomarkers for neuromodulation and technology miniaturization.

Results and Conclusions

The field of neuromodulation is undergoing a renaissance of technology development with potential for profoundly improving the care of chronic pain patients. New and emerging targets like the dorsal root ganglion, as well as high-frequency and patterned stimulation methodologies such as burst stimulation, are paving the way for better clinical outcomes. As we look forward to the future, neural sensing, novel target-specific stimulation patterns, and approaches combining neuromodulation therapies are likely to significantly impact how neuromodulation is used. Moreover, select biomarkers may influence and guide the use of neuromodulation and help objectively demonstrate efficacy and outcomes.

All bursts are equal, but some are more equal (to burst firing): burstDR stimulation versus Boston burst stimulation

Introduction: Since the introduction of burst spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain, several companies have developed their own version of burst stimulation, which is confusing the marketplace and clinicians of what burst stimulation truly is, the value and utilization of the therapy.Areas covered: We review those two burst stimulation designs and notice important differences. The original burstDR^TM stimulation tries to mimic physiologic burst firing, which involves closely spaced high frequency sodium spikes nested on a calcium mediated plateau. This is realized by generating a train of 5 monophasic spikes of increasing amplitude with passive charge balance after the last spike, in contrast to the other burst designs which involve a version of cycling 4-5 spikes each being individually actively charge balanced spikes.Expert opinion: Based on the neurobiology of burst firing as well as abductive reasoning we like to clarify that burstDR^TM is a true physiologic burst stimulation, and that other versions being called burst stimulation are essentially clustered tonic stimulation. This differentiating terminology will prevent confusion for healthcare providers, regulators, and the marketplace of what burst stimulation is.

Suppression of Superficial Microglial Activation by Spinal Cord Stimulation Attenuates Neuropathic Pain Following Sciatic Nerve Injury in Rats

We evaluated the mechanisms underlying the spinal cord stimulation (SCS)-induced analgesic effect on neuropathic pain following spared nerve injury (SNI). On day 3 after SNI, SCS was performed for 6 h by using electrodes paraspinally placed on the L4-S1 spinal cord. The effects of SCS and intraperitoneal minocycline administration on plantar mechanical sensitivity, microglial activation, and neuronal excitability in the L4 dorsal horn were assessed on day 3 after SNI. The somatosensory cortical responses to electrical stimulation of the hind paw on day 3 following SNI were examined by using in vivo optical imaging with a voltage-sensitive dye. On day 3 after SNI, plantar mechanical hypersensitivity and enhanced microglial activation were suppressed by minocycline or SCS, and L4 dorsal horn nociceptive neuronal hyperexcitability was suppressed by SCS. In vivo optical imaging also revealed that electrical stimulation of the hind paw-activated areas in the somatosensory cortex was decreased by SCS. The present findings suggest that SCS could suppress plantar SNI-induced neuropathic pain via inhibition of microglial activation in the L4 dorsal horn, which is involved in spinal neuronal hyperexcitability. SCS is likely to be a potential alternative and complementary medicine therapy to alleviate neuropathic pain following nerve injury.

Changes in Neuronal Activity in the Anterior Cingulate Cortex and Primary Somatosensory Cortex With Nonlinear Burst and Tonic Spinal Cord Stimulation

INTRODUCTION

Although nonlinear burst and tonic SCS are believed to treat neuropathic pain via distinct pain pathways, the effectiveness of these modalities on brain activity in vivo has not been investigated. This study compared neuronal firing patterns in the brain after nonlinear burst and tonic SCS in a rat model of painful radiculopathy.

METHODS

Neuronal activity was recorded in the ACC or S1 before and after nonlinear burst or tonic SCS on day 7 following painful cervical nerve root compression (NRC) or sham surgery. The amplitude of nonlinear burst SCS was set at 60% and 90% motor threshold to investigate the effect of lower amplitude SCS on brain activity. Neuronal activity was recorded during and immediately following light brush and noxious pinch of the paw. Change in neuron firing was measured as the percent change in spikes post-SCS relative to pre-SCS baseline.

RESULTS

ACC activity decreases during brush after 60% nonlinear burst compared to tonic (p < 0.05) after NRC and compared to 90% nonlinear burst (p < 0.04) and pre-SCS baseline (p < 0.03) after sham. ACC neuron activity decreases (p < 0.01) during pinch after 60% and 90% nonlinear burst compared to tonic for NRC. The 60% of nonlinear burst decreases (p < 0.02) ACC firing during pinch in both groups compared to baseline. In NRC S1 neurons, tonic SCS decreases (p < 0.01) firing from baseline during light brush; 60% nonlinear burst decreases (p < 0.01) firing from baseline during brush and pinch.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonlinear burst SCS reduces firing in the ACC from a painful stimulus; a lower amplitude nonlinear burst appears to have the greatest effect. Tonic and nonlinear burst SCS may have comparable effects in S1.

Potential Therapeutic Effect of Low Amplitude Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation on Pain

BACKGROUND

The SUNBURST Study, a USA-based controlled cross-over trial demonstrated that burst spinal cord stimulation was superior compared to tonic stimulation in suppressing chronic intractable pain. However, when on burst stimulation, participants preferred lower to higher amplitudes. This led to the hypothesis that lower burst amplitudes will correlate with lower pain scores while higher amplitudes will be associated with higher pain scores.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate correlations between burst amplitude and self-reported pain and different psychosocial measures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred participants in the SUNBURST study were randomized to receive burst or tonic stimulation, each for 12 weeks in a cross-over manner. Complete data of 99 participants were used in this secondary analysis. Pearson correlations were conducted at 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-weeks postactivation to determine the strength of linear relationships between burst amplitude and (1) the average seven-day daily pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), (2) the different domains of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), (3) the different domains of the SF-36v2 (Quality Metric Incorporated, Lincoln, RI) Health Survey. In addition, correlations between tonic stimulation amplitude and the above-mentioned outcome measures were examined.

RESULTS

Significant positive correlations were identified between burst amplitude and total, "worst," and "trunk" pain for VAS; all domains for PCS; and "Role-Physical," "Bodily Pain," and "General Health" for SF-36v2™ after 12-weeks of burst stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

In burst spinal cord stimulation, in contrast to tonic stimulation, lower amplitudes are more effective in suppressing pain than high amplitudes.

Fiber Threshold Accommodation as a Mechanism of Burst and High-Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation

OBJECTIVES

Burst and high-frequency spinal cord stimulation (SCS), in contrast to low-frequency stimulation (LFS, < 200 Hz), reduce neuropathic pain without the side effect of paresthesia, yet it is unknown whether these methods' mechanisms of action (MoA) overlap. We used empirically based computational models of fiber threshold accommodation to examine the three MoA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Waveforms used in SCS are composed of cathodic, anodic, and rest phases. Empirical studies of human peripheral sensory nerve fibers show different accommodation effects occurring in each phase. Notably, larger diameter fibers accommodate more than smaller fibers. We augmented our computational axon model to replicate fiber threshold accommodation behavior for diameters from 5 to 15 μm in each phase. We used the model to predict threshold change in variations of burst, high frequency, and LFS.

RESULTS

The accommodation model showed that 1) inversion of larger and smaller diameter fiber thresholds produce a therapeutic window in which smaller fibers fire while larger ones do not and 2) the anodic pulses increase accommodation and perpetuate threshold inversion from burst to burst and between cathodic pulses in burst, high frequency, and variations, resulting in an amplitude "window" in which larger fibers are inactivated while smaller fibers fire. No threshold inversion was found for traditional LFS.

CONCLUSIONS

The model, based on empirical data, predicts that, at clinical amplitudes, burst and high-frequency SCS do not activate large-diameter fibers that produce paresthesia while driving medium-diameter fibers, likely different from LFS, which produce analgesia via different populations of dorsal horn neural circuits.

The Quasi-uniform assumption for Spinal Cord Stimulation translational research

BACKGROUND

Quasi-uniform assumption is a general theory that postulates local electric field predicts neuronal activation. Computational current flow model of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) of humans and animal models inform how the quasi-uniform assumption can support scaling neuromodulation dose between humans and translational animal.

NEW METHOD

Here we developed finite element models of cat and rat SCS, and brain slice, alongside SCS models. Boundary conditions related to species specific electrode dimensions applied, and electric fields per unit current (mA) predicted.

RESULTS

Clinically and across animal, electric fields change abruptly over small distance compared to the neuronal morphology, such that each neuron is exposed to multiple electric fields. Per unit current, electric fields generally decrease with body mass, but not necessarily and proportionally across tissues. Peak electric field in dorsal column rat and cat were ∼17x and ∼1x of clinical values, for scaled electrodes and equal current. Within the spinal cord, the electric field for rat, cat, and human decreased to 50% of peak value caudo-rostrally (C5-C6) at 0.48 mm, 3.2 mm, and 8 mm, and mediolaterally at 0.14 mm, 2.3 mm, and 3.1 mm. Because these space constants are different, electric field across species cannot be matched without selecting a region of interest (ROI).

COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD

This is the first computational model to support scaling neuromodulation dose between humans and translational animal.

CONCLUSIONS

Inter-species reproduction of the electric field profile across the entire surface of neuron populations is intractable. Approximating quasi-uniform electric field in a ROI is a rational step to translational scaling.

Burst and Tonic Spinal Cord Stimulation Both Activate Spinal GABAergic Mechanisms to Attenuate Pain in a Rat Model of Chronic Neuropathic Pain

BACKGROUND

Experimental and clinical studies have shown that tonic spinal cord stimulation (SCS) releases gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) in the spinal dorsal horn. Recently, it was suggested that burst SCS does not act via spinal GABAergic mechanisms. Therefore, we studied spinal GABA release during burst and tonic SCS, both anatomically and pharmacologically, in a well-established chronic neuropathic pain model.

METHODS

Animals underwent partial sciatic nerve ligation (PSNL). Quantitative immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis of intracellular GABA levels in the lumbar L4 to L6 dorsal spinal cord was performed after 60 minutes of burst, tonic, or sham SCS in rats that had undergone PSNL (n = 16). In a second pharmacological experiment, the effects of intrathecal administration of the GABA_A antagonist bicuculline (5 μg) and the GABA_B antagonist phaclofen (5 μg) were assessed. Paw withdrawal thresholds to von Frey filaments of rats that had undergone PSNL (n = 20) were tested during 60 minutes of burst and tonic SCS 30 minutes after intrathecal administration of the drugs.

RESULTS

Quantitative IHC analysis of GABA immunoreactivity in spinal dorsal horn sections of animals that had received burst SCS (n = 5) showed significantly lower intracellular GABA levels when compared to sham SCS sections (n = 4; P = 0.0201) and tonic SCS sections (n = 7; P = 0.0077). Intrathecal application of the GABA_A antagonist bicuculline (5 μg; n = 10) or the GABA_B antagonist phaclofen (5 μg; n = 10) resulted in ablation of the analgesic effect for both burst SCS and tonic SCS.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, our anatomical and pharmacological data demonstrate that, in this well-established chronic neuropathic animal model, the analgesic effects of both burst SCS and tonic SCS are mediated via spinal GABAergic mechanisms.

Spinal Manipulation Therapy Improves Tactile Allodynia and Peripheral Nerve Functionality and Modulates Blood Oxidative Stress Markers in Rats Exposed to Knee-Joint Immobilization

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study was to evaluate the effect of manually assisted lumbar spinal manipulation therapy on tactile allodynia, peripheral nerve functional recovery, and oxidative markers in rats exposed to knee immobilization-inducing hypersensitivity.

METHODS

Tactile allodynia and sciatic, tibial, and peroneal functional indices were assessed before the knee joint immobilization, 24 hours after the knee cast removal, and 24 hours after 3 weeks of lumbar therapy with the Activator Adjusting Instrument, model 4 (AAI 4). Subsequently, the blood was collected from each rat, and oxidative markers such as lipid hydroperoxide levels; nitric oxide metabolites; and superoxide dismutase, catalase, and glutathione peroxidase activities were assessed.

RESULTS

The AAI 4 improved the immobilization-induced allodynia and recovered the peripheral nerve functional indices impaired after knee immobilization. Immobilized rats treated with AAI 4 therapy presented a lack of significant changes in lipid hydroperoxides and nitric oxide metabolites in the plasma contrasting with rats that were kept freely in their cages, with no therapy applied, which presented elevated lipid hydroperoxides levels. Also, the antioxidant catalase enzymatic activity decreased in the blood of rats immobilized and treated with AAI 4.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that manually assisted lumbar spinal manipulation therapy modulates systemic oxidative stress, which possibly contributes to the analgesia and recovery of peripheral nerve functionality.

Assessment of axonal recruitment using model-guided preclinical spinal cord stimulation in the ex vivo adult mouse spinal cord

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used clinically to limit chronic pain, but fundamental questions remain on the identity of axonal populations recruited. We developed an ex vivo adult mouse spinal cord preparation to assess recruitment following delivery of clinically analogous stimuli determined by downscaling a finite element model of clinical SCS. Analogous electric field distributions were generated with 300-µm × 300-µm electrodes positioned 200 µm above the dorsal column (DC) with stimulation between 50 and 200 µA. We compared axonal recruitment using electrodes of comparable size and stimulus amplitudes when contacting the caudal thoracic DC and at 200 or 600 μm above. Antidromic responses recorded distally from the DC, the adjacent Lissauer tract (LT), and in dorsal roots (DRs) were found to be amplitude and site dependent. Responses in the DC included a unique component not seen in DRs, having the lowest SCS recruitment amplitude and fastest conduction velocity. At 200 μm above, mean cathodic SCS recruitment threshold for axons in DRs and LT were 2.6 and 4.4 times higher, respectively, than DC threshold. SCS recruited primary afferents in all (up to 8) caudal segments sampled. Whereas A and C fibers could be recruited at nearby segments, only A fiber recruitment and synaptically mediated dorsal root reflexes were observed in more distant (lumbar) segments. In sum, clinically analogous SCS led to multisegmental recruitment of several somatosensory-encoding axonal populations. Most striking is the possibility that the lowest threshold recruitment of a nonprimary afferent population in the DC are postsynaptic dorsal column tract cells (PSDCs) projecting to gracile nuclei.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used clinically to control pain. To identify axonal populations recruited, finite element modeling identified scaling parameters to deliver clinically analogous SCS in an ex vivo adult mouse spinal cord preparation. Results showed that SCS first recruited an axonal population in the dorsal column at a threshold severalfold lower than primary afferents. These putative postsynaptic dorsal column tract cells may represent a previously unconsidered population responsible for SCS-induced paresthesias necessary for analgesia.

Spinal cord stimulation in chronic pain: evidence and theory for mechanisms of action

Well-established in the field of bioelectronic medicine, Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) offers an implantable, non-pharmacologic treatment for patients with intractable chronic pain conditions. Chronic pain is a widely heterogenous syndrome with regard to both pathophysiology and the resultant phenotype. Despite advances in our understanding of SCS-mediated antinociception, there still exists limited evidence clarifying the pathways recruited when patterned electric pulses are applied to the epidural space. The rapid clinical implementation of novel SCS methods including burst, high frequency and dorsal root ganglion SCS has provided the clinician with multiple options to treat refractory chronic pain. While compelling evidence for safety and efficacy exists in support of these novel paradigms, our understanding of their mechanisms of action (MOA) dramatically lags behind clinical data. In this review, we reconstruct the available basic science and clinical literature that offers support for mechanisms of both paresthesia spinal cord stimulation (P-SCS) and paresthesia-free spinal cord stimulation (PF-SCS). While P-SCS has been heavily examined since its inception, PF-SCS paradigms have recently been clinically approved with the support of limited preclinical research. Thus, wide knowledge gaps exist between their clinical efficacy and MOA. To close this gap, many rich investigative avenues for both P-SCS and PF-SCS are underway, which will further open the door for paradigm optimization, adjunctive therapies and new indications for SCS. As our understanding of these mechanisms evolves, clinicians will be empowered with the possibility of improving patient care using SCS to selectively target specific pathophysiological processes in chronic pain.

Mechanism of Action in Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation: Review and Recent Advances

OBJECTIVE

This is a comprehensive, structured review synthesizing and summarizing the current experimental data and knowledge about the mechanisms of action (MOA) underlying spinal cord stimulation with the burst waveform (as defined by De Ridder) in chronic pain treatment.

METHODS

Multiple database queries and article back-searches were conducted to identify the relevant literature and experimental findings for results integration and interpretation. Data from recent peer-reviewed conference presentations were also included for completeness and to ensure that the most up-to-date scientific information was incorporated. Both human and animal data were targeted in the search to provide a translational approach in understanding the clinical relevance of the basic science findings.

RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS

Burst spinal cord stimulation likely provides pain relief via multiple mechanisms at the level of both the spinal cord and the brain. The specific waveforms and temporal patterns of stimulation both play a role in the responses observed. Differential modulation of neurons in the dorsal horn and dorsal column nuclei are the spinal underpinnings of paresthesia-free analgesia. The burst stimulation pattern also produces different patterns of activation within the brain when compared with tonic stimulation. The latter may have implications for not only the somatic components of chronic pain but also the lateral and affective pathway dimensions as well.

High Cervical Spinal Cord Stimulation: A One Year Follow-Up Study on Motor and Non-Motor Functions in Parkinson's Disease

Background: The present study investigated the effectiveness of stimulation applied at cervical levels on pain and Parkinson’s disease (PD) symptoms using either tonic or burst stimulation mode. Methods: Tonic high cervical spinal cord stimulation (T-HCSCS) was applied on six PD patients suffering from low back pain and failed back surgery syndrome, while burst HCSCS (B-HCSCS) was applied in twelve PD patients to treat primarily motor deficits. Stimulation was applied percutaneously with quadripolar or octapolar electrodes. Clinical evaluation was assessed by the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) and the Hoehn and Yahr (H&Y) scale. Pain was evaluated by a visual analog scale. Evaluations of gait and of performance in a cognitive motor task were performed in some patients subjected to B-HCSCS. One patient who also suffered from severe autonomic cardiovascular dysfunction was investigated to evaluate the effectiveness of B-HCSCS on autonomic functions. Results: B-HCSCS was more effective and had more consistent effects than T-HCSCS in reducing pain. In addition, B-HCSCS improved UPDRS scores, including motor sub-items and tremor and H&Y score. Motor benefits appeared quickly after the beginning of B-HCSCS, in contrast to long latency improvements induced by T-HCSCS. A slight decrease of effectiveness was observed 12 months after implantation. B-HCSCS also improved gait and ability of patients to correctly perform a cognitive–motor task requiring inhibition of a prepared movement. Finally, B-HCSCS ameliorated autonomic control in the investigated patient. Conclusions: The results support a better usefulness of B-HCSCS compared to T-HCSCS in controlling pain and specific aspects of PD motor and non-motor deficits for at least one year.

Supraspinal Mechanisms of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Modulation of Pain: Five Decades of Research and Prospects for the Future

The field of spinal cord stimulation is expanding rapidly, with new waveform paradigms asserting supraspinal sites of action. The scope of treatment applications is also broadening from chronic pain to include cerebral ischemia, dystonia, tremor, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson disease, neuropsychiatric disorders, memory, addiction, cognitive function, and other neurologic diseases. The role of neurostimulation as an alternative strategy to opioids for chronic pain treatment is under robust discussion in both scientific and public forums. An understanding of the supraspinal mechanisms underlying the beneficial effects of spinal cord stimulation will aid in the appropriate application and development of optimal stimulation strategies for modulating pain signaling pathways. In this review, the authors focus on clinical and preclinical studies that indicate the role of supraspinal mechanisms in spinal cord stimulation-induced pain inhibition, and explore directions for future investigations.

Physiologic facet capsule stretch can induce pain & upregulate matrix metalloproteinase-3 in the dorsal root ganglia when preceded by a physiological mechanical or nonpainful chemical exposure

BACKGROUND

Neck pain from cervical facet loading is common and induces inflammation and upregulation of nerve growth factor (NGF) that can sensitize the joint afferents. Yet, the mechanisms by which these occur and whether afferents can be pre-conditioned by certain nonpainful stimuli are unknown. This study tested the hypothesis that a nonpainful mechanical or chemical insult predisposes a facet joint to generate pain after a later exposure to typically nonpainful distraction.

METHODS

Rats were exposed to either a nonpainful distraction or an intra-articular subthreshold dose of NGF followed by a nonpainful distraction two days later. Mechanical hyperalgesia was measured daily and C6 dorsal root ganglia (DRG) tissue was assayed for NGF and matrix metalloproteinase-3 (MMP-3) expression on day 7.

FINDINGS

The second distraction increased joint displacement and strains compared to its first application (p = 0.0011). None of the initial exposures altered behavioral sensitivity in either of the groups being pre-conditioned or in controls; but, sensitivity was established in both groups receiving a second distraction within one day that lasted until day 7 (p < 0.024). NGF expression in the DRG was increased in both groups undergoing a pre-conditioning exposure (p < 0.0232). Similar findings were observed for MMP-3 expression, with a pre-conditioning exposure increasing levels after an otherwise nonpainful facet distraction.

INTERPRETATION

These findings suggest that nonpainful insults to the facet joint, when combined, can generate painful outcomes, possibly mediated by upregulation of MMP-3 and mature NGF.

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in Experimental Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: Burst vs. Conventional Stimulation Paradigm

Objectives

Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) is a long‐term complication of diabetes mellitus (DM). Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation (DRGS) has recently emerged as a neuromodulation modality in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of burst DRGS (Burst‐DRGS) and conventional DRGS (Con‐DRGS) in an experimental model of PDPN.

Materials and Methods

DM was induced in female Sprague–Dawley rats by intraperitoneal injection of streptozotocin (STZ, n = 48). Animals were tested for mechanical hypersensitivity (50% hind paw withdrawal threshold on Von Frey test) before, and 4 weeks after STZ injection. PDPN rats were then implanted with a unilateral bipolar lead at the L5 DRG (n = 22) and were stimulated for 30 min at days 2 and 3 postimplantation. Animals received Con‐DRGS and Burst‐DRGS in a randomized crossover design (n = 10), or received Sham‐DRGS (n = 7) for 30 min, and were tested for mechanical hypersensitivity at baseline, 15 and 30 min during DRGS, and 15 and 30 min following DRGS. Five animals were withdrawn from the study due to electrode‐related technical problems.

Results

Con‐DRGS and Burst‐DRGS normalized STZ‐induced mechanical hypersensitivity at 15 and 30 min during stimulation. A significant difference in terms of mechanical hypersensitivity was observed between both of the stimulated groups and the Sham‐DRGS group at 15 and 30 min during stimulation. Interestingly, Burst‐DRGS showed signs of a residual effect at 15 min after cessation of stimulation, while this was not the case for Con‐DRGS.

Conclusions

Under the conditions tested, Con‐DRGS and Burst‐DRGS are equally effective in attenuating STZ‐induced mechanical hypersensitivity in an animal model of PDPN. Burst‐DRGS showed signs of a residual effect at 15 min after cessation of stimulation, which requires further investigation.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Pain Treatment After Spinal Cord Injury

In addition to restoration of bladder, bowel, and motor functions, alleviating the accompanying debilitating pain is equally important for improving the quality of life of patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). Currently, however, the treatment of chronic pain after SCI remains a largely unmet need. Electrical spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used to manage a variety of chronic pain conditions that are refractory to pharmacotherapy. Yet, its efficacy, benefit profiles, and mechanisms of action in SCI pain remain elusive, due to limited research, methodological weaknesses in previous clinical studies, and a lack of mechanistic exploration of SCS for SCI pain control. We aim to review recent studies and outline the therapeutic potential of different SCS paradigms for traumatic SCI pain. We begin with an overview of its manifestations, classification, potential underlying etiology, and current challenges for its treatment. The clinical evidence for using SCS in SCI pain is then reviewed. Finally, future perspectives of pre-clinical research and clinical study of SCS for SCI pain treatment are discussed.

Effects of Multiple Waveforms on Patient Preferences and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Treated With Spinal Cord Stimulation for Leg and/or Back Pain

OBJECTIVES

We present the results of a prospective, randomized, crossover, single-blind, study in which each patient is in control of himself. The aim was to evaluate subperception-based (SP-SCS) waveforms in previously implanted spinal cord stimulation (SCS) patients with leg and/or back pain due to failed back surgery syndrome, who experienced only paresthesia-based stimulation (PB-SCS). Patients with PB-SCS experience in SCS was 4.7 years (SD 2.9).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled 28 consecutive patients. Treatment consisted of seven days of PB-SCS, followed by a randomized, crossover phase to test SP-SCS waveforms (burst or 1 kHz frequency, seven days each). A maximum of three-day washout period separated each stimulation program.

RESULTS

Statistically significant pain relief was maintained using both SP-SCS waveforms, as indicated by the differences between the pre-PB-SCS numeric pain rating score (mean 9) and the pain score after using the burst program (pain relief 52%) or the 1 kHz program (pain relief 51%). There was no statistically significant superiority among PB-SCS, burst, and 1 kHz stimulation. Overall, 50% of patients preferred PB-SCS, 42% chose to move to SP-SCS stimulation, one patient was unable to give feedback, and one patient was unsuccessful with any type of stimulation. Overall, SCS has shown to be successful in pain relief and the patients switched to a SP-SCS waveform only for having higher pain relief.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a high heterogeneity regarding waveform preference, with patients who preferred to feel the tingling sensation and those who chose a SP-SCS option, mainly for greater pain relief. In general, SCS is successful, resulting in high pain relief, improvements in quality of life, and little depression. Overall, 42% patients benefited from the novel SP-SCS stimulation waveforms.

Burst SCS Microdosing Is as Efficacious as Standard Burst SCS in Treating Chronic Back and Leg Pain: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

The burst waveform, a recent innovation in spinal cord stimulation (SCS), can achieve better outcomes than conventional tonic SCS, both for de novo implants and as a salvage therapy. Burst stimulation delivers more energy per second than tonic stimulation, which is a consideration for battery consumption. The clinical effectiveness of an energy-conserving strategy was investigated.

METHODS

Subjects were experienced users of BurstDR SCS for back and leg pain. Three 2-week stimulation paradigms were presented in blinded random order: standard (continuously delivered) BurstDR, microdosing A: 5 sec of BurstDR alternating with 5 sec of no stimulation, and microdosing B: 5 sec of BurstDR alternating with 10 sec of no stimulation. The primary outcome for each paradigm was change in pain ratings, and secondary outcomes included changes in scores for quality of life, satisfaction, and preference.

RESULTS

Twenty-five subjects assessed all three stimulation paradigms. There were no significant differences in pain (visual analog scale) or quality of life (EQ-5D) when comparing standard burst outcomes with those of microdosing A and, separately, microdosing B. Microdosing paradigms were graded with slightly higher level of satisfaction and were generally preferred above standard burst stimulation.

DISCUSSION

These results suggest that the use of energy-efficient burst microdosing stimulation paradigms with alternating stimulation-on and stimulation-off periods can provide clinically equivalent results to standard burst stimulation. This is important for extending SCS battery life. Further research is needed to comprehensively characterize the clinical utility of this approach and the neurophysiological mechanisms for the maintenance of pain relief during stimulation-off periods.

Comparison of Tonic vs. Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation During Trial Period

BACKGROUND

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-known treatment in patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). Burst stimulation is a recently developed stimulation modality that seems to be superior to tonic stimulation.

METHODS

This observational multicenter study compared tonic and burst stimulation during a trial period in patients with FBSS or radiculopathy. All the patients enrolled underwent two weeks of tonic stimulation followed by another two weeks of BurstDR stimulation, without randomization. The primary outcome was the reduction of pain in the legs and back. Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) and the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) were assessed before and after the trial. Patients were reevaluated after 12 months.

RESULTS

We recruited 23 patients, 57% of whom had FBSS and 43% had radiculopathies. Five patients failed both the tonic and burst stimulation trials. While tonic stimulation reduced leg pain (p < 0.05), the burst mode added an extra pain reduction (ΔNRS 1.2 ± 1.5) (p < 0.01). No significant reduction in back pain was found (p 0.29). Pain on movement was reduced only by BurstDR (p < 0.01). Both stimulation modalities increased EQ-5D and reduced PCS from the baseline (p < 0.0001). At the end of the SCS trial phase, 26% patients chose tonic SCS, while 74% preferred burst. On 12-month follow-up examination, the benefits recorded at the end of the trial were maintained.

CONCLUSIONS

Burst stimulation confers a greater reduction in leg pain intensity at rest and on movement. Reducing axial pain is still a challenge. Further studies are needed in order to provide each patient with the most appropriate stimulation paradigm.

Pre-treatment with Meloxicam Prevents the Spinal Inflammation and Oxidative Stress in DRG Neurons that Accompany Painful Cervical Radiculopathy

Painful neuropathic injuries are accompanied by robust inflammatory and oxidative stress responses that contribute to the development and maintenance of pain. After neural trauma the inflammatory enzyme cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) increases concurrent with pain onset. Although pre-treatment with the COX-2 inhibitor, meloxicam, before a painful nerve root compression prevents the development of pain, the pathophysiological mechanisms are unknown. This study evaluated if pre-treatment with meloxicam prior to painful root injury prevents pain by reducing spinal inflammation and peripheral oxidative stress. Glial activation and expression of the inflammatory mediator secreted phospholipase A2 (sPLA2) in the spinal cord were assessed at day 7 using immunohistochemistry. The extent of oxidative damage was measured using the oxidative stress marker, 8-hydroxyguanosine (8-OHG) and localization of 8-OHG with neurons, microglia and astrocytes in the spinal cord and peripherally in the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) at day 7. In addition to reducing pain, meloxicam reduced both spinal microglial and astrocytic activation at day 7 after nerve root compression. Spinal sPLA2 was also reduced with meloxicam treatment, with decreased production in neurons, microglia and astrocytes. Oxidative damage following nerve root compression was found predominantly in neurons rather than glial cells. The expression of 8-OHG in DRG neurons at day 7 was reduced with meloxicam. These findings suggest that meloxicam may prevent the onset of pain following nerve root compression by suppressing inflammation and oxidative stress both centrally in the spinal cord and peripherally in the DRG.

Models for Nociception Stimulation and Memory Effects in Awake and Aware Healthy Individuals

OBJECTIVE

This paper introduces a primer in the health care practice, namely a mathematical model and methodology for detecting and analysing nociceptor stimulation followed by related tissue memory effects.

METHODS

Noninvasive nociceptor stimulus protocol and prototype device for measuring bioimpedance is provided. Various time instants, sensor location, and stimulus train have been analysed.

RESULTS

The method and model indicate that nociceptor stimulation perceived as pain in awake healthy volunteers is noninvasively detected. The existence of a memory effect is proven from data. Sensor location had minimal effect on detection level, while day-to-day variability was observed without being significant.

CONCLUSION

Following the experimental study, the model enables a comprehensive management of chronic pain patients, and possibly other analgesia, or pain related regulatory loops.

SIGNIFICANCE

A device and methodology for noninvasive for detecting nociception stimulation have been developed. The proposed method and models have been validated on healthy volunteers.

Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation in Peripherally Injured Chronic Neuropathic Rats: A Delayed Effect

OBJECTIVE

Two well-known spinal cord stimulation (SCS) paradigms, conventional (Con) and burst SCS, are hypothesized to exert their antinociceptive effects through different stimulation-induced mechanisms. We studied the course of the behavioral antinociceptive effect during 60 minutes of SCS and 30 minutes post-SCS in a rat model of chronic neuropathic pain.

METHODS

Animals underwent a unilateral partial sciatic nerve ligation, after which quadripolar electrodes were implanted into the epidural space at vertebral level T13 (n = 43 rats). While receiving either Con SCS or biphasic burst SCS, the pain behavior of the rats was assessed by means of paw withdrawal thresholds (WTs) in response to the application of von Frey monofilaments.

RESULTS

After 15 minutes of Con SCS (n = 21), WTs significantly differed from baseline (P = 0.04), whereas WTs of the burst SCS group (n = 22) did not. After 30 minutes of SCS, WTs of the Con SCS and burst SCS groups reached similar levels, both significantly different from baseline, indicating a comparable antinociceptive effect for these SCS paradigms. Yet, the WTs of the burst SCS group were still significantly increased compared with baseline at 30 minutes post-stimulation, whereas the WTs of the Con SCS group were not.

CONCLUSIONS

To conclude, biphasic burst SCS results in a delayed antinociceptive effect after onset of the stimulation, as compared with Con SCS, in a chronic neuropathic pain model. Furthermore, biphasic burst SCS seems to exhibit a delayed wash-out of analgesia after stimulation is turned off.

An Observational Case Series of Spinal Cord Stimulation Waveforms Visualized on Intraoperative Neuromonitoring

INTRODUCTION

Intraoperative neuromonitoring for spinal cord stimulation uses electromyography (EMG) responses to determine myotomal coverage as a marker for dermatomal coverage. These responses are utilized to determine the orientation of the electrode. Somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) collision testing can also be used in which sensory signals are decreased and/or eliminated when stimulation is activated.

METHODS

Fifteen patients were observed in the study. Each manufacturer had a minimum of three patients. Those included were Abbott BurstDR waveform, Boston Scientific burst stimulation, Medtronic high-dose stimulation, and Nevro high-frequency waveform. Efficacy of therapy was determined by a successful trial. Analysis performed during the permanent implant, included findings with traditional tonic stimulation, specific waveform and stimulation platforms, amplitude differences, and findings for both EMG responses and SSEP collision testing.

RESULTS

The Abbott BurstDR waveform produced the most findings. The amplitudes necessary to generate an observed EMG response were far lower than others, with a threshold of 10-20% of that seen in traditional tonic programming. The Medtronic high-dose programming and Nevro high-frequency waveform did not generate any observable EMG responses. Unique to Abbott BurstDR waveform was the onset of EMG activity in the distal muscle groups prior to proximal ones, as well as a hyperexcitability phenomenon acting as a primer generating signals at lower thresholds with more robust responses when returning to traditional tonic stimulation. EMG responses demonstrated propagation into one large EMG spike with BurstDR, while Boston Scientific burst stimulation had no propagation with separate spikes being consistent with traditional tonic stimulation.

CONCLUSION

This observational series demonstrated distinct differences between the waveforms and stimulation alluding to different mechanisms of action. Nevro high-frequency and Abbott BurstDR waveforms appear to be most different in action from traditional tonic stimulation while Abbotts BurstDR appears to be the most energy efficient generating signals at the lowest thresholds with a propagating effect that leads to a hyperexcitable or primed stimulation state.

Spinal Cord Stimulation: Clinical Efficacy and Potential Mechanisms

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a minimally invasive therapy used for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. SCS is a safe and effective alternative to medications such as opioids, and multiple randomized controlled studies have demonstrated efficacy for difficult-to-treat neuropathic conditions such as failed back surgery syndrome. Conventional SCS is believed mediate pain relief via activation of dorsal column Aβ fibers, resulting in variable effects on sensory and pain thresholds, and measurable alterations in higher order cortical processing. Although potentiation of inhibition, as suggested by Wall and Melzack's gate control theory, continues to be the leading explanatory model, other segmental and supraspinal mechanisms have been described. Novel, non-standard, stimulation waveforms such as high-frequency and burst have been shown in some studies to be clinically superior to conventional SCS, however their mechanisms of action remain to be determined. Additional studies are needed, both mechanistic and clinical, to better understand optimal stimulation strategies for different neuropathic conditions, improve patient selection and optimize efficacy.

Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation: Review of Preclinical Studies and Comments on Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Burst spinal cord stimulation (SCS) technology uses a novel waveform that consists of closely packed high-frequency electrical impulses followed by a quiescent period. Within the growing field of neuromodulation, burst stimulation is unique in that it mimics the natural burst firing of the nervous system, in particular the thalamo-cingulate rhythmicity, resulting in modulation of the affective and attentional components of pain processing (e.g., medial thalamic pathways).

STUDY DESIGN

A review of preclinical and clinical studies regarding burst SCS for various chronic pain states.

METHODS

Available literature was reviewed on burst stimulation technology. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed, MEDLINE/OVID, SCOPUS, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was to understand the mechanisms of action with regards to burst stimulation and to review clinical data on the indications of burst SCS for various chronic pain states.

RESULTS

We present both mechanisms of action and review uses of burst stimulation for various pain states.

CONCLUSIONS

Burst stimulation offers a novel pain reduction tool with the absence of uncomfortable paresthesia for failed back surgery syndrome, diabetic neuropathic pain, and anesthesia dolorosa. Preclinical models have emphasized that the potential mechanisms for burst therapy could be related to neural coding algorithms that mimic the natural nervous system firing patterns, resulting in effects on both the medial and lateral pain pathways. Other mechanisms include frequency dependent opioid release, modulation of the pain gate, and activation of electrical and chemical synapses.