1
|
Han YF, Cong X. Comparison of the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation and dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a prospective, cohort-controlled study. Front Neurol 2024; 15:1366796. [PMID: 38660091 PMCID: PMC11039825 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2024.1366796] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2024] [Accepted: 04/02/2024] [Indexed: 04/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Objective The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S) in the treatment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN). Methods In this prospective cohort study, 55 patients received dorsal column spinal cord stimulation (SCS group) and 51 patients received dorsal root spinal cord stimulation (DRG-S group). The primary outcome was a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) remission rate of ≥50%, and secondary outcomes included the effects of SCS and DRG-S on quality of life scores (EQ-5D-3L), nerve conduction velocity, and HbA1c, respectively. Results The percentage of NRS remission rate ≥ 50% at 6 months was 80.43 vs. 79.55%, OR (95% CI): 1.06 (0.38-2.97) in the SCS and DRG-S groups, respectively, and the percentage of VAS remission rate ≥ 50% at 12 months was 79.07 vs. 80.95%, OR (95% CI): 0.89 (0.31-2.58). Compared with baseline, there were significant improvements in EQ-5D and EQ-VAS at 6 and 12 months (p < 0.05), but there was no difference in improvement between the SCS and DRG-S groups (p > 0.05). Nerve conduction velocities of the common peroneal, peroneal, superficial peroneal, and tibial nerves were significantly improved at 6 and 12 months compared with the preoperative period in both the SCS and PND groups (p < 0.05). However, at 6 and 12 months, there was no difference in HbA1c between the two groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion Both SCS and DRG-S significantly improved pain, quality of life, and lower extremity nerve conduction velocity in patients with PDPN, and there was no difference between the two treatments at 12 months.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Xi Cong
- Department of Neurosurgery, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Strand N, Anderson MA, Attanti S, Gill B, Wie C, Dawodu A, Pagan-Rosado R, Harbell MW, Maloney JA. Diabetic Neuropathy: Pathophysiology Review. Curr Pain Headache Rep 2024:10.1007/s11916-024-01243-5. [PMID: 38558164 DOI: 10.1007/s11916-024-01243-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/16/2024] [Indexed: 04/04/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Diabetic neuropathy is a debilitating complication of diabetes mellitus that affects millions of individuals worldwide. It is characterized by nerve damage resulting from prolonged exposure to high blood glucose levels. Diabetic neuropathy may cause a range of symptoms, including pain, numbness, muscle weakness, autonomic dysfunction, and foot ulcers, potentially causing significant impairment to the quality of life for those affected. This review article aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the pathophysiology of diabetic neuropathy. The etiology of diabetic neuropathy will be discussed, including risk factors, predisposing conditions, and an overview of the complex interplay between hyperglycemia, metabolic dysregulation, and nerve damage. Additionally, we will explore the molecular mechanisms and pathways of diabetic neuropathy, including the impact of hyperglycemia on nerve function, abnormalities in glucose metabolism, the role of advanced glycation end products (AGEs), and inflammatory and immune-mediated processes. We will provide an overview of the various nerve fibers affected by diabetic neuropathy and explore the common symptoms and complications associated with diabetic neuropathy in the pain medicine field. RECENT FINDINGS This review highlights advances in understanding the pathophysiology of diabetic neuropathy as well as reviews potential novel therapeutic strategies and promising areas for future research. In conclusion, this review article aims to shed light on the pathophysiology of diabetic neuropathy, its far-reaching consequences, and the evolving strategies for prevention and management. In understanding the mechanisms of diabetic neuropathy and the ongoing research in this area, healthcare professionals can better serve patients with diabetes, ultimately improving well-being and reducing complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natalie Strand
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
| | | | | | - Benjamin Gill
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Christopher Wie
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Azizat Dawodu
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | | | - Monica W Harbell
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Jillian A Maloney
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mekhail NA, Levy RM, Deer TR, Kapural L, Li S, Amirdelfan K, Hunter CW, Rosen SM, Costandi SJ, Falowski SM, Burgher AH, Pope JE, Gilmore CA, Qureshi FA, Staats PS, Scowcroft J, McJunkin T, Kim CK, Yang MI, Stauss T, Rauck R, Duarte RV, Soliday N, Leitner A, Hanson E, Ouyang Z, Mugan D, Poree L. Neurophysiological outcomes that sustained clinically significant improvements over 3 years of physiologic ECAP-controlled closed-loop spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of chronic pain. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2024:rapm-2024-105370. [PMID: 38490687 DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2024-105370] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2024] [Accepted: 02/20/2024] [Indexed: 03/17/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION A novel, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) system with a physiologic closed-loop (CL) feedback mechanism controlled by evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) enables the optimization of physiologic neural dose and the accuracy of the stimulation, not possible with any other commercially available SCS systems. The report of objective spinal cord measurements is essential to increase the transparency and reproducibility of SCS therapy. Here, we report a cohort of the EVOKE double-blind randomized controlled trial treated with CL-SCS for 36 months to evaluate the ECAP dose and accuracy that sustained the durability of clinical improvements. METHODS 41 patients randomized to CL-SCS remained in their treatment allocation and were followed up through 36 months. Objective neurophysiological data, including measures of spinal cord activation, were analyzed. Pain relief was assessed by determining the proportion of patients with ≥50% and ≥80% reduction in overall back and leg pain. RESULTS The performance of the feedback loop resulted in high-dose accuracy by keeping the elicited ECAP within 4µV of the target ECAP set on the system across all timepoints. Percent time stimulating above the ECAP threshold was >98%, and the ECAP dose was ≥19.3µV. Most patients obtained ≥50% reduction (83%) and ≥80% reduction (59%) in overall back and leg pain with a sustained response observed in the rates between 3-month and 36-month follow-up (p=0.083 and p=0.405, respectively). CONCLUSION The results suggest that a physiological adherence to supra-ECAP threshold therapy that generates pain inhibition provided by ECAP-controlled CL-SCS leads to durable improvements in pain intensity with no evidence of loss of therapeutic effect through 36-month follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nagy A Mekhail
- Evidence-Based Pain Management Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Robert M Levy
- Anesthesia Pain Care Consultants, Boca Raton, Florida, USA
| | - Timothy R Deer
- Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, West Virginia, USA
| | | | - Sean Li
- National Spine and Pain Centers, Shrewsbury, New Jersey, USA
| | - Kasra Amirdelfan
- Integrated Pain Management Medical Group Inc, Walnut Creek, California, USA
| | - Corey W Hunter
- Ainsworth Institute of Pain Management, New York, New York, USA
| | - Steven M Rosen
- Delaware Valley Pain and Spine Institute, Trevose, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Shrif J Costandi
- Evidence-Based Pain Management Research, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Steven M Falowski
- Argires-Marotti Neurosurgical Associates of Lancaster, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, USA
| | | | - Jason E Pope
- Evolve Restorative Center, Santa Rosa, California, USA
| | | | | | - Peter S Staats
- National Spine and Pain Centers, Shrewsbury, New Jersey, USA
| | | | | | - Christopher K Kim
- Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, West Virginia, USA
| | | | - Thomas Stauss
- Pain Physicians of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Richard Rauck
- Carolinas Pain Institute, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
| | - Rui V Duarte
- Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
- Saluda Medical Pty Ltd, Artarmon, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Nicole Soliday
- Saluda Medical Pty Ltd, Artarmon, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Angela Leitner
- Saluda Medical Pty Ltd, Artarmon, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Erin Hanson
- Saluda Medical Pty Ltd, Artarmon, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Zhonghua Ouyang
- Saluda Medical Pty Ltd, Artarmon, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Dave Mugan
- Saluda Medical Pty Ltd, Artarmon, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Lawrence Poree
- University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mallick-Searle T, Adler JA. Update on Treating Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Review of Current US Guidelines with a Focus on the Most Recently Approved Management Options. J Pain Res 2024; 17:1005-1028. [PMID: 38505500 PMCID: PMC10949339 DOI: 10.2147/jpr.s442595] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2023] [Accepted: 02/26/2024] [Indexed: 03/21/2024] Open
Abstract
Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is a highly prevalent and disabling complication of diabetes that is often misdiagnosed and undertreated. The management of painful DPN involves treating its underlying cause via lifestyle modifications and intensive glucose control, targeting its pathogenesis, and providing symptomatic pain relief, thereby improving patient function and health-related quality of life. Four pharmacologic options are currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat painful DPN. These include three oral medications (duloxetine, pregabalin, and tapentadol extended release) and one topical agent (capsaicin 8% topical system). More recently, the FDA approved several spinal cord stimulation (SCS) devices to treat refractory painful DPN. Although not FDA-approved specifically to treat painful DPN, tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, gabapentinoids, and sodium channel blockers are common first-line oral options in clinical practice. Other strategies may be used as part of individualized comprehensive pain management plans. This article provides an overview of the most recent US guidelines for managing painful DPN, with a focus on the two most recently approved treatment options (SCS and capsaicin 8% topical system), as well as evidence for using FDA-approved and guideline-supported drugs and devices. Also discussed are unmet needs for this patient population, and evidence for potential future treatments for painful DPN, including drugs with novel mechanisms of action, electrical stimulation devices, and nutraceuticals.
Collapse
|
5
|
Zhou PB, Sun HT, Bao M. Comparative Analysis of the Efficacy of Spinal Cord Stimulation and Traditional Debridement Care in the Treatment of Ischemic Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Neurosurgery 2024:00006123-990000000-01048. [PMID: 38334381 DOI: 10.1227/neu.0000000000002866] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2023] [Accepted: 12/26/2023] [Indexed: 02/10/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment for diabetic peripheral neuropathy. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of SCS in the treatment of ischemic diabetic foot ulcers. METHODS In this retrospective study, the SCS group comprised 102 patients with ischemic diabetic foot who were treated with SCS for foot ulcers and nonhealing wounds due to severe lower limb ischemia. The traditional debridement care (TDC) group comprised 104 patients with ischemic diabetic foot who received only TDC. Strict screening criteria were applied. The assignment of patients to either group depended solely on their willingness to be treated with SCS. Secondary end points were transcutaneous partial pressure of oxygen (PtcO2), ankle-brachial index (ABI), and color Doppler of the lower limb arteries in the feet at 6 months and 12 months after treatment. The primary end point was the amputation. RESULTS The dorsal foot PtcO2 and ABI of the patients in the SCS group were significantly improved at 6 months and 12 months postoperation (P < .05). The therapeutic efficacy was significantly better than that of the TDC group over the same period of time (P < .05). The degree of vasodilation of the lower limb arteries (ie, femoral, popliteal, posterior tibial, and dorsalis pedis arteries) on color Doppler was higher in the SCS group than in the TDC group (P < .05). The odds ratios for total amputation at 6 and 12 months postoperatively in the SCS group were 0.45 (95% CI, 0.19-1.08) and 0.17 (95% CI, 0.08-0.37), respectively, compared with the TDC group. CONCLUSION SCS improved symptoms of lower limb ischemia in ischemic diabetic feet and reduced the rate of toe amputation by increasing PtcO2, ABI, and arterial vasodilation in the lower limbs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peng-Bo Zhou
- The First School of Clinical Medical, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
- Tianjin Key Laboratory of Neurotrauma Repair, Characteristic Medical Center of People's Armed Police Forces, Tianjin, People's Republic of China
| | - Hong-Tao Sun
- The First School of Clinical Medical, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, People's Republic of China
- Tianjin Key Laboratory of Neurotrauma Repair, Characteristic Medical Center of People's Armed Police Forces, Tianjin, People's Republic of China
| | - Min Bao
- Department of Neurosurgery, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Zuidema X, de Galan B, Brouwer B, Cohen SP, Eldabe S, Argoff CE, Huygen F, Van Zundert J. 4. Painful diabetic polyneuropathy. Pain Pract 2024; 24:308-320. [PMID: 37859565 DOI: 10.1111/papr.13308] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Pain as a symptom of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) significantly lowers quality of life, increases mortality and is the main reason for patients with diabetes to seek medical attention. The number of people suffering from painful diabetic polyneuropathy (PDPN) has increased significantly over the past decades. METHODS The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic polyneuropathy was retrieved and summarized. RESULTS The etiology of PDPN is complex, with primary damage to peripheral nociceptors and altered spinal and supra-spinal modulation. To achieve better patient outcomes, the mode of diagnosis and treatment of PDPN evolves toward more precise pain-phenotyping and genotyping based on patient-specific characteristics, new diagnostic tools, and prior response to pharmacological treatments. According to the Toronto Diabetic Neuropathy Expert Group, a presumptive diagnosis of "probable PDPN" is sufficient to initiate treatment. Proper control of plasma glucose levels, and prevention of risk factors are essential in the treatment of PDPN. Mechanism-based pharmacological treatment should be initiated as early as possible. If symptomatic pharmacologic treatment fails, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) should be considered. In isolated cases, where symptomatic pharmacologic treatment and SCS are unsuccessful or cannot be used, sympathetic lumbar chain neurolysis and/or radiofrequency ablation (SLCN/SLCRF), dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGs) or posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) may be considered. However, it is recommended that these treatments be applied only in a study setting in a center of expertise. CONCLUSIONS The diagnosis of PDPN evolves toward pheno-and genotyping and treatment should be mechanism-based.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xander Zuidema
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht/Zeist, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Bastiaan de Galan
- Division of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- CARIM School for Cardiovascular Diseases, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Internal Medicine, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Brigitte Brouwer
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Steven P Cohen
- Department of Anesthesiology, Pain Medicine Division, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Sam Eldabe
- Department of Pain Medicine and Anesthesiology, Durham University, Durham, UK
| | - Charles E Argoff
- Department of Neurology, New York University School of Medicine, and Pain Management Center, North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, New York, USA
| | - Frank Huygen
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jan Van Zundert
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care, Emergency Medicine and Multidisciplinary Pain Center, Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Wahezi SE, Caparo MA, Malhotra R, Sundaram L, Batti K, Ejindu P, Veeramachaneni R, Anitescu M, Hunter CW, Naeimi T, Farah F, Kohan L. Current Waveforms in Spinal Cord Stimulation and Their Impact on the Future of Neuromodulation: A Scoping Review. Neuromodulation 2024; 27:47-58. [PMID: 38184341 DOI: 10.1016/j.neurom.2023.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2023] [Revised: 10/16/2023] [Accepted: 11/13/2023] [Indexed: 01/08/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sayed E Wahezi
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA.
| | - Moorice A Caparo
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Ria Malhotra
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Lakshman Sundaram
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Kevin Batti
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Prince Ejindu
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| | | | - Magdalena Anitescu
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Corey W Hunter
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Tahereh Naeimi
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Fadi Farah
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Lynn Kohan
- Multidisciplinary Pain Program, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Yeung AM, Huang J, Nguyen KT, Xu NY, Hughes LT, Agrawal BK, Ejskjaer N, Klonoff DC. Spinal Cord Stimulation for Painful Diabetic Neuropathy. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2024; 18:168-192. [PMID: 36384312 PMCID: PMC10899837 DOI: 10.1177/19322968221133795] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Nicole Y. Xu
- Diabetes Technology Society, Burlingame, CA, USA
| | - Lorenzo T. Hughes
- Balance Health, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Mills-Peninsula Medical Center, Burlingame, CA, USA
| | | | - Niels Ejskjaer
- Steno Diabetes Center North Denmark and Department of Endocrinology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - David C. Klonoff
- Diabetes Technology Society, Burlingame, CA, USA
- Diabetes Research Institute, Mills-Peninsula Medical Center, San Mateo, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Tesfaye S, Kempler P. Conventional management and current guidelines for painful diabetic neuropathy. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2023; 206 Suppl 1:110765. [PMID: 38245323 DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2023.110765] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Accepted: 05/30/2023] [Indexed: 01/22/2024]
Abstract
Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy (PDN) is common, affecting around a quarter of patients with both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and can lead to significant curtailment of functionality and quality of life. Patients may present with unremitting burning, aching or "electric-shock" type pains in their feet, legs and later, in the hands. Conventional management approaches must focus not only on pain relief, but also on concurrent sleep problems, mood disorders and functionality. The mainstay of treatment is pharmacotherapy. Most current international guidelines recommend a choice of four drugs: amitriptyline, duloxetine, pregabalin or gabapentin, as initial treatment for PDN. Recent evidence from the OPTION-DM trial demonstrated that these drugs and their combinations have equivalent efficacy. Moreover, combination treatment provided significant pain relief to patients with inadequate response to the maximum tolerated dose of monotherapy. PDN refractory to pharmacotherapy can be treated with capsaicin 8% or high frequency spinal cord stimulation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Solomon Tesfaye
- Diabetes Research Department, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
| | - Peter Kempler
- Department of Internal Medicine and Oncology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Petersen EA. Spinal cord stimulation in painful diabetic neuropathy: An overview. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2023; 206 Suppl 1:110760. [PMID: 38245324 DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2023.110760] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2023] [Accepted: 05/30/2023] [Indexed: 01/22/2024]
Abstract
Up to 25% of people with diabetes develop painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). The standard of care pharmacotherapies for PDN have limited efficacy with a considerable side effect profile. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a form of electrical neurostimulation that modulates neural function via electrodes implanted into the spinal epidural space. While low frequency SCS has been shown to be potentially effective for treating pain associated with neuropathies, it masks pain perception by inducing paresthesia. Compared to low frequency SCS, high frequency (10 kHz) SCS delivers paresthesia-free therapy. As was shown in a randomized controlled trial, SENZA-PDN (NCT03228420), 10 kHz SCS is safe and effective for the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy. 10 kHz SCS offered a comprehensive treatment that improved pain levels, sleep, quality of life, and neurological function. These improvements correlated with a high degree of patient satisfaction. 10 kHz SCS provides a safe, durable and effective treatment for PDN with the unique potential to improve neurological function. In patients for whom durable, effective treatments have been limited thus far, the findings of the SENZA-PDN study are encouraging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erika A Petersen
- University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Boulton AJM, Jensen TS, Luecke T, Petersen EA, Pop-Busui R, Taylor RS, Tesfaye S, Vileikyte L, Ziegler D. Where does spinal cord stimulation fit into the international guidelines for refractory painful diabetic neuropathy? a consensus statement. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2023; 206 Suppl 1:110763. [PMID: 38245326 DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2023.110763] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Accepted: 05/30/2023] [Indexed: 01/22/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although pharmacotherapy with anticonvulsants and/or antidepressants can be effective for many people with painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN), albeit with frequent side-effects, a critical juncture occurs when neuropathic pain no longer responds to standard first- and second-step mono- and dual therapy and becomes refractory. Subsequent to these pharmacotherapeutic approaches, third-line treatment options for PDN may include opioids (short-term), capsaicin 8% patches, and spinal cord stimulation (SCS). AIM This document summarizes consensus recommendations regarding appropriate treatment for refractory peripheral diabetic neuropathy (PDN), based on outcomes from an expert panel convened on December 10, 2022, as part of the Worldwide Initiative for Diabetes Education Virtual Global Summit, "Advances in the Management of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy." PARTICIPANTS Nine attendees, eminent physicians and academics, comprising six diabetes specialists, two pain specialists, and one health services expert. EVIDENCE For individuals with refractory PDN, opioids are a high-risk option that do not provide a long-term solution and should not be used. For appropriately selected individuals, SCS is an effective, safe, and durable treatment option. In particular, high-frequency (HF) SCS (10 kHz) shows strong efficacy and improves quality of life. To ensure treatment success, strict screening criteria should be used to prioritize candidates for SCS. CONSENSUS PROCESS Each participant voiced their opinion after reviewing available data, and a verbal consensus was reached during the meeting. CONCLUSION Globally, the use of opioids should rarely be recommended for refractory, severe PDN. Based on increasing clinical evidence, SCS, especially HF-SCS, should be considered as a treatment for PDN that is not responsive to first- or second-line monotherapy/dual therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - T S Jensen
- International Diabetic Neuropathy Consortium, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - T Luecke
- Pain Center, Franziskus Hospital Linz, Vice President, German Pain Society, Linz am Rhein, Germany
| | - E A Petersen
- University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, AR, USA
| | - R Pop-Busui
- Metabolism, Endocrinology, and Diabetes, University of Michigan, MI, USA
| | | | - S Tesfaye
- Sheffield Teaching Hospitals and the University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - D Ziegler
- Institute for Clinical Diabetology, German Diabetes Center, Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Kissoon NR, LeMahieu AM, Stoltenberg AD, Bendel MA, Lamer TJ, Watson JC, Sletten DM, Singer W. Quantitative assessment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy after high-frequency spinal cord stimulation: a pilot study. PAIN MEDICINE (MALDEN, MASS.) 2023; 24:S41-S47. [PMID: 37833046 DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnad087] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2023] [Revised: 05/08/2023] [Accepted: 06/22/2023] [Indexed: 10/15/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Randomized trials have demonstrated efficacy of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). Preliminary data suggested that treatment of PDN with high-frequency SCS resulted in improvements on neurological examination. The purpose of the present study was to explore whether patients with PDN treated with high-frequency SCS would have improvements in lower-extremity peripheral nerve function. DESIGN Prospective cohort study in an outpatient clinical practice at a tertiary care center. METHODS Patients with PDN were treated with high-frequency SCS and followed up for 12 months after SCS implantation with clinical outcomes assessments of pain intensity, neuropathic symptoms, and neurological function. Small-fiber sudomotor function was assessed with the quantitative sudomotor axon reflex test (QSART), and large-fiber function was assessed with nerve conduction studies (NCS). Lower-extremity perfusion was assessed with laser Doppler flowmetry. RESULTS Nine patients completed 12-month follow-up visits and were observed to have improvements in lower-extremity pain, weakness, and positive sensory symptoms. Neuropathy impairment scores were improved, and 2 patients had recovery of sensory responses on NCS. A reduction in sweat volume on QSART was observed in the proximal leg but not at other sites. No significant differences were noted in lower-extremity perfusion or NCS as compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS The improvement in pain relief was concordant with improvement in neuropathy symptoms. The findings from this study provide encouraging preliminary data in support of the hypothesis of a positive effect of SCS on peripheral neuropathy, but the findings are based on small numbers and require further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03769675.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Narayan R Kissoon
- Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
- Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Allison M LeMahieu
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Anita D Stoltenberg
- Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Markus A Bendel
- Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Tim J Lamer
- Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - James C Watson
- Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - David M Sletten
- Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| | - Wolfgang Singer
- Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Zheng Y, Liu CW, Hui Chan DX, Kai Ong DW, Xin Ker JR, Ng WH, Wan KR. Neurostimulation for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review of High-Quality Randomized Controlled Trials With Long-Term Follow-Up. Neuromodulation 2023; 26:1276-1294. [PMID: 37436342 DOI: 10.1016/j.neurom.2023.05.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2023] [Revised: 05/03/2023] [Accepted: 05/24/2023] [Indexed: 07/13/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to review the best evidence on the long-term efficacy of neurostimulation for chronic pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS We systematically reviewed PubMed, CENTRAL, and WikiStim for studies published between the inception of the data bases and July 21, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a minimum of one-year follow-up that were of high methodologic quality as ascertained using the Delphi list criteria were included in the evidence synthesis. The primary outcome was long-term reduction in pain intensity, and the secondary outcomes were all other reported outcomes. Level of recommendation was graded from I to III, with level I being the highest level of recommendation. RESULTS Of the 7119 records screened, 24 RCTs were included in the evidence synthesis. Therapies with recommendations for their usage include pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) for postherpetic neuralgia, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for trigeminal neuralgia, motor cortex stimulation for neuropathic pain and poststroke pain, deep brain stimulation for cluster headache, sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation for cluster headache, occipital nerve stimulation for migraine, peripheral nerve field stimulation for back pain, and spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for back and leg pain, nonsurgical back pain, persistent spinal pain syndrome, and painful diabetic neuropathy. Closed-loop SCS is recommended over open-loop SCS for back and leg pain. SCS is recommended over PRF for postherpetic neuralgia. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation is recommended over SCS for complex regional pain syndrome. CONCLUSIONS Neurostimulation is generally effective in the long term as an adjunctive treatment for chronic pain. Future studies should evaluate whether the multidisciplinary management of the physical perception of pain, affect, and social stressors is superior to their management alone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yilong Zheng
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | | | - Diana Xin Hui Chan
- Anaesthesiology and Pain Management, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Damian Wen Kai Ong
- Anaesthesia & Chronic and Interventional Pain Management, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore
| | | | - Wai Hoe Ng
- Department of Neurosurgery, National Neuroscience Institute, Singapore
| | - Kai Rui Wan
- Department of Neurosurgery, National Neuroscience Institute, Singapore.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Armstrong DG, Grunberger G. Stimulating Results Signal a New Treatment Option for People Living With Painful Diabetic Neuropathy. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2023; 17:1387-1391. [PMID: 35770993 PMCID: PMC10563543 DOI: 10.1177/19322968221099542] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) is a progressive condition that deprives many patients of quality of life. With limited treatment options available, successful pain management can be difficult to achieve. METHODS We reviewed results of recent data evaluating high frequency spinal cord stimulation (SCS). RESULTS from the SENZA-PDN randomized clinical trial (NCT03228420), the largest such trial to date, demonstrated 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation substantially reduced PDN refractory to conventional medical management along with improvements in health-related quality-of-life measures that were sustained over 12 months. These data supported the recent U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) approval for 10-kHz SCS in PDN patients and contributed to the body of evidence on SCS available to health care professionals managing the effects of PDN. CONCLUSION High frequency spinal cord simulation appears to hold promise in treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy. We look forward to future works in the literature that will further elucidate these promising findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David G. Armstrong
- Department of Surgery, Southwestern Academic Limb Salvage Alliance, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - George Grunberger
- Grunberger Diabetes Institute, Bloomfield Hills, MI, USA
- Internal Medicine, Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, MI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Petersen EA, Stauss TG, Scowcroft JA, Jaasma MJ, Brooks ES, Edgar DR, White JL, Sills SM, Amirdelfan K, Guirguis MN, Xu J, Yu C, Nairizi A, Patterson DG, Tsoulfas KC, Creamer MJ, Galan V, Bundschu RH, Mehta ND, Sayed D, Lad SP, DiBenedetto DJ, Sethi KA, Goree JH, Bennett MT, Harrison NJ, Israel AF, Chang P, Wu PW, Argoff CE, Nasr CE, Taylor RS, Caraway DL, Mekhail NA. Long-term efficacy of high-frequency (10 kHz) spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy: 24-Month results of a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2023; 203:110865. [PMID: 37536514 PMCID: PMC10801706 DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2023.110865] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2023] [Revised: 06/30/2023] [Accepted: 07/31/2023] [Indexed: 08/05/2023]
Abstract
AIMS To evaluate the long-term efficacy of high-frequency (10 kHz) spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for treating refractory painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). METHODS The SENZA-PDN study was a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial that compared conventional medical management (CMM) alone with 10 kHz SCS plus CMM (10 kHz SCS+CMM) in 216 patients with refractory PDN. After 6 months, participants with insufficient pain relief could cross over to the other treatment. In total, 142 patients with a 10 kHz SCS system were followed for 24 months, including 84 initial 10 kHz SCS+CMM recipients and 58 crossovers from CMM alone. Assessments included pain intensity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), sleep, and neurological function. Investigators assessed neurological function via sensory, reflex, and motor tests. They identified a clinically meaningful improvement relative to the baseline assessment if there was a significant persistent improvement in neurological function that impacted the participant's well-being and was attributable to a neurological finding. RESULTS At 24 months, 10 kHz SCS reduced pain by a mean of 79.9% compared to baseline, with 90.1% of participants experiencing ≥50% pain relief. Participants had significantly improved HRQoL and sleep, and 65.7% demonstrated clinically meaningful neurological improvement. Five (3.2%) SCS systems were explanted due to infection. CONCLUSIONS Over 24 months, 10 kHz SCS provided durable pain relief and significant improvements in HRQoL and sleep. Furthermore, the majority of participants demonstrated neurological improvement. These long-term data support 10 kHz SCS as a safe and highly effective therapy for PDN. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClincalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT03228420.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erika A Petersen
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 W Markham St, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA.
| | - Thomas G Stauss
- Advanced Pain Management, 4131 W Loomis Rd Ste 300, Greenfield, WI 53221, USA
| | - James A Scowcroft
- Pain Management Associates, 200 NE Missouri Rd Ste 103, Lee's Summit, MO 64086, USA
| | | | | | | | - Judith L White
- AES Compass Orlando, 100 W Gore St, Orlando, FL 32806, USA
| | - Shawn M Sills
- Touchstone Interventional Pain Center, 2925 Siskiyou Blvd, Medford, OR 97504, USA
| | | | - Maged N Guirguis
- Ochsner Health System, 2820 Napoleon Ave, New Orleans, LA 70115, USA
| | - Jijun Xu
- Department of Pain Management, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA
| | - Cong Yu
- Swedish Medical Center, 1101 Madison St, Seattle, WA 98104, USA
| | - Ali Nairizi
- Nevada Advanced Pain Specialists, 5578 Longley Ln, Reno, NV 89511, USA
| | - Denis G Patterson
- Nevada Advanced Pain Specialists, 5578 Longley Ln, Reno, NV 89511, USA
| | | | - Michael J Creamer
- Central Florida Pain Relief Centers, 100 W Gore St #500, Orlando, FL 32806, USA
| | - Vincent Galan
- Pain Care, 1365 Rock Quarry Rd #301, Stockbridge, GA 30281, USA
| | - Richard H Bundschu
- Coastal Orthopedics and Sports Medicine, 8000 SR 64, Bradenton, FL 34212, USA
| | - Neel D Mehta
- Department of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, 240 East 59th Street, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10022, USA
| | - Dawood Sayed
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, 3901 Rainbow Blvd, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA
| | - Shivanand P Lad
- Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University, 40 Duke Medicine Cir, Durham, NC 27710, USA
| | | | - Khalid A Sethi
- Department of Neurosurgery, United Health Services, 46 Harrison St, Johnson City, NY 13790, USA
| | - Johnathan H Goree
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 W Markham St, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA
| | - Matthew T Bennett
- Department of Neurosurgery, United Health Services, 46 Harrison St, Johnson City, NY 13790, USA
| | - Nathan J Harrison
- Ochsner Health System, 2820 Napoleon Ave, New Orleans, LA 70115, USA
| | - Atef F Israel
- Pain Management Associates, 200 NE Missouri Rd Ste 103, Lee's Summit, MO 64086, USA
| | - Paul Chang
- Pain Care, 1365 Rock Quarry Rd #301, Stockbridge, GA 30281, USA
| | - Paul W Wu
- Holy Cross Hospital, 5601 N Dixie Hwy #209, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33334, USA
| | - Charles E Argoff
- Department of Neurology, Albany Medical Center, 47 New Scotland Avenue, Albany, NY 12208, USA
| | - Christian E Nasr
- Division of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, The University of Arizona College of Medicine - Phoenix, 475 N 5th St, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA
| | - Rod S Taylor
- MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, Robertson Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health and Well Being, Clarice Pears Building, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland G12 8QQ, UK
| | | | - Nagy A Mekhail
- Evidence-Based Pain Management Research, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Huang J, Yeung AM, DuBord AY, Wolpert H, Jacobs PG, Lee WA, Drincic A, Spanakis EK, Sherr JL, Prahalad P, Fleming A, Hsiao VC, Kompala T, Lal RA, Fayfman M, Ginsberg BH, Galindo RJ, Stuhr A, Chase JG, Najafi B, Masharani U, Seley JJ, Klonoff DC. Diabetes Technology Meeting 2022. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2023; 17:1085-1120. [PMID: 36704821 PMCID: PMC10347991 DOI: 10.1177/19322968221148743] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
Diabetes Technology Society hosted its annual Diabetes Technology Meeting from November 3 to November 5, 2022. Meeting topics included (1) the measurement of glucose, insulin, and ketones; (2) virtual diabetes care; (3) metrics for managing diabetes and predicting outcomes; (4) integration of continuous glucose monitor data into the electronic health record; (5) regulation of diabetes technology; (6) digital health to nudge behavior; (7) estimating carbohydrates; (8) fully automated insulin delivery systems; (9) hypoglycemia; (10) novel insulins; (11) insulin delivery; (12) on-body sensors; (13) continuous glucose monitoring; (14) diabetic foot ulcers; (15) the environmental impact of diabetes technology; and (16) spinal cord stimulation for painful diabetic neuropathy. A live demonstration of a device that can allow for the recycling of used insulin pens was also presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Peter G. Jacobs
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Wei-An Lee
- Los Angeles County+University of Southern California Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - Elias K. Spanakis
- Baltimore Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Division of Endocrinology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Tejaswi Kompala
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
- Teladoc Health, Purchase, NY, USA
| | | | - Maya Fayfman
- Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Umesh Masharani
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - David C. Klonoff
- Diabetes Technology Society, Burlingame, CA, USA
- Diabetes Research Institute, Mills-Peninsula Medical Center, San Mateo, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Chow C, Rosenquist R. Trends in spinal cord stimulation utilization: change, growth and implications for the future. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2023; 48:296-301. [PMID: 37080580 DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2023-104346] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2023] [Accepted: 03/14/2023] [Indexed: 04/22/2023]
Abstract
Chronic pain impacts more than 100 million Americans and has a significant impact on the economy and quality of life. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has demonstrated efficacy in managing a growing number of chronic pain conditions. This in combination with an increasing number of physicians trained in SCS placement has produced significant changes in utilization, expense and sites of service related to SCS. In particular, there has been a large increase in SCS placement by non-surgeons, use of percutaneous leads and performance in ambulatory surgery centers instead of inpatient settings. There are also notable differences in SCS use related to age, race, insurance coverage and geography. There is a large potential market and use of these therapies is predicted to grow from $2.41 billion in 2020 to $4.12 billion US dollars globally by 2027. At the same time, there is increasing scrutiny around utilization of this therapy related to cost, complications, long-term efficacy and explant rates that has the potential to impact access to this therapy in the future. We must examine our indications, technique and management to optimize outcomes and utilization of SCS going forward.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Courtney Chow
- Department of Pain Management, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Burkey AR, Chen J, Argoff CE, Edgar DR, Petersen EA. Painful Peripheral Neuropathies of the Lower Limbs and/or Lower Extremities Treated with Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Systematic Review with Narrative Synthesis. J Pain Res 2023; 16:1607-1636. [PMID: 37229154 PMCID: PMC10202826 DOI: 10.2147/jpr.s403715] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2023] [Accepted: 04/21/2023] [Indexed: 05/27/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Painful peripheral neuropathy (PPN) is a debilitating condition with varied etiologies. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is increasingly used when conservative treatments fail to provide adequate pain relief. Few published reviews have examined SCS outcomes in all forms of PPN. Methods We conducted a systematic review of SCS in PPN. The PubMed database was searched up to February 7th, 2022, for peer-reviewed studies of SCS that enrolled PPN patients with pain symptoms in their lower limbs and/or lower extremities. We assessed the quality of randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data were tabulated and presented narratively. Results Twenty eligible studies documented SCS treatment in PPN patients, including 10 kHz SCS, traditional low-frequency SCS (t-SCS), dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS), and burst SCS. In total, 451 patients received a permanent implant (10 kHz SCS, n=267; t-SCS, n=147; DRGS, n=25; burst SCS, n=12). Approximately 88% of implanted patients had painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). Overall, we found clinically meaningful pain relief (≥30%) with all SCS modalities. Among the studies, RCTs supported the use of 10 kHz SCS and t-SCS to treat PDN, with 10 kHz SCS providing a higher reduction in pain (76%) than t-SCS (38-55%). Pain relief with 10 kHz SCS and DRGS in other PPN etiologies ranged from 42-81%. In addition, 66-71% of PDN patients and 38% of nondiabetic PPN patients experienced neurological improvement with 10 kHz SCS. Conclusion Our review found clinically meaningful pain relief in PPN patients after SCS treatment. RCT evidence supported the use of 10 kHz SCS and t-SCS in the diabetic neuropathy subpopulation, with more robust pain relief evident with 10 kHz SCS. Outcomes in other PPN etiologies were also promising for 10 kHz SCS. In addition, a majority of PDN patients experienced neurological improvement with 10 kHz SCS, as did a notable subset of nondiabetic PPN patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jeffrey Chen
- UCSD Department of Anesthesiology Center for Pain, University of California San Diego Medical Center, La Jolla, CA, USA
| | | | | | - Erika A Petersen
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Sharan AD, Hatheway JA, Murphy M, Dann T, Fishman MA, Zuidema X, van Zundert JH, LaRue M, Slangen R. Comment on Duarte et al. Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Neurostimulation for Painful Diabetic Neuropathy. Diabetes Care 2022;45:2466-2475. Diabetes Care 2023; 46:e110-e111. [PMID: 37185683 PMCID: PMC10154651 DOI: 10.2337/dc22-2491] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/17/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Tammy Dann
- Pain Evaluation & Management Center, Dayton, OH
| | | | - Xander Zuidema
- Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Hoelzer BC, Edgar D, Lu SP, Taylor RS. Indirect Comparison of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) versus Traditional Low-Frequency SCS for the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Biomedicines 2022; 10:biomedicines10102630. [PMID: 36289892 PMCID: PMC9599433 DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10102630] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2022] [Revised: 10/10/2022] [Accepted: 10/12/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is increasingly used to treat painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). At the time of a recent meta-analysis in this field, data were only available from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional low-frequency SCS (LF-SCS). However, outcomes from high-frequency 10 kHz SCS treatment are now available. Our study aimed to systematically review the contemporary evidence for SCS in patients with lower limb pain due to PDN and include an indirect comparison of the high- and low-frequency modalities. We searched the PubMed/CENTRAL databases up to 18 August 2022, for peer-reviewed RCTs of SCS that enrolled PDN patients with lower limb pain symptoms. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Using SCS treatment arm data from the RCTs, we indirectly compared the absolute treatment effect of 10 kHz SCS and LF-SCS. Results are presented in tables and forest plots. This systematic review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Three RCTs met our eligibility criteria, including the recent 10 kHz SCS RCT (N = 216, 90 implanted) and 2 others that examined LF-SCS (N = 36, 17 implanted; N = 60, 37 implanted). Our analysis of 6-month data found clinically meaningful pain relief with each SCS modality. However, significantly greater pain reduction was identified for 10 kHz SCS over LF-SCS: average pain reduction in the 10 kHz SCS cohort was 73.7% compared with 47.5% in the pooled LF-SCS group (p < 0.0001). In the permanent implant subset, the 50% pain reduction responder rate was 83.3% in the 10 kHz SCS cohort versus 63.0% in the pooled LF-SCS group (p = 0.0072). The overall risk of bias of each included RCT was deemed high, mainly due to the absence of patient blinding. Our analysis indicates that paresthesia-free 10 kHz SCS can provide superior pain relief and responder rate over LF-SCS for managing PDN patients refractory to conventional medical management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bryan C. Hoelzer
- Medical Director, Southwest Spine and Pain Center, Provo, UT 84059, USA
| | | | | | - Rod S. Taylor
- MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit & Robertson Centre for Biostatistics, School of Health and Well Being, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK
- Health Service Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter EX1 2LU, UK
- National Institute of Public Health, University of South Denmark, 1455 Copenhagen, Denmark
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Blonde L, Umpierrez GE, Reddy SS, McGill JB, Berga SL, Bush M, Chandrasekaran S, DeFronzo RA, Einhorn D, Galindo RJ, Gardner TW, Garg R, Garvey WT, Hirsch IB, Hurley DL, Izuora K, Kosiborod M, Olson D, Patel SB, Pop-Busui R, Sadhu AR, Samson SL, Stec C, Tamborlane WV, Tuttle KR, Twining C, Vella A, Vellanki P, Weber SL. American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update. Endocr Pract 2022; 28:923-1049. [PMID: 35963508 PMCID: PMC10200071 DOI: 10.1016/j.eprac.2022.08.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 132] [Impact Index Per Article: 66.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2022] [Revised: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 08/02/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide updated and new evidence-based recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, other health care professionals and stakeholders, and individuals with diabetes and their caregivers. METHODS The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology selected a task force of medical experts and staff who updated and assessed clinical questions and recommendations from the prior 2015 version of this guideline and conducted literature searches for relevant scientific papers published from January 1, 2015, through May 15, 2022. Selected studies from results of literature searches composed the evidence base to update 2015 recommendations as well as to develop new recommendations based on review of clinical evidence, current practice, expertise, and consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development. RESULTS This guideline includes 170 updated and new evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes. Recommendations are divided into four sections: (1) screening, diagnosis, glycemic targets, and glycemic monitoring; (2) comorbidities and complications, including obesity and management with lifestyle, nutrition, and bariatric surgery, hypertension, dyslipidemia, retinopathy, neuropathy, diabetic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease; (3) management of prediabetes, type 2 diabetes with antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy and glycemic targets, type 1 diabetes with insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, hospitalized persons, and women with diabetes in pregnancy; (4) education and new topics regarding diabetes and infertility, nutritional supplements, secondary diabetes, social determinants of health, and virtual care, as well as updated recommendations on cancer risk, nonpharmacologic components of pediatric care plans, depression, education and team approach, occupational risk, role of sleep medicine, and vaccinations in persons with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS This updated clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with person-centered, team-based clinical decision-making to improve the care of persons with diabetes mellitus.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - S Sethu Reddy
- Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, Michigan
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Daniel Einhorn
- Scripps Whittier Diabetes Institute, La Jolla, California
| | | | | | - Rajesh Garg
- Lundquist Institute/Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Darin Olson
- Colorado Mountain Medical, LLC, Avon, Colorado
| | | | | | - Archana R Sadhu
- Houston Methodist; Weill Cornell Medicine; Texas A&M College of Medicine; Houston, Texas
| | | | - Carla Stec
- American Association of Clinical Endocrinology, Jacksonville, Florida
| | | | - Katherine R Tuttle
- University of Washington and Providence Health Care, Seattle and Spokane, Washington
| | | | | | | | - Sandra L Weber
- University of South Carolina School of Medicine-Greenville, Prisma Health System, Greenville, South Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Petersen EA, Stauss TG, Scowcroft JA, Brooks ES, White JL, Sills SM, Amirdelfan K, Guirguis MN, Xu J, Yu C, Nairizi A, Patterson DG, Tsoulfas KC, Creamer MJ, Galan V, Bundschu RH, Mehta ND, Sayed D, Lad SP, DiBenedetto DJ, Sethi KA, Goree JH, Bennett MT, Harrison NJ, Israel AF, Chang P, Wu PW, Argoff CE, Nasr CE, Taylor RS, Caraway DL, Mekhail NA. High-Frequency 10-kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation Improves Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Refractory Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: 12-Month Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes 2022; 6:347-360. [PMID: 35814185 PMCID: PMC9256824 DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2022.05.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective To evaluate high-frequency (10-kHz) spinal cord stimulation (SCS) treatment in refractory painful diabetic neuropathy. Patients and Methods A prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted between Aug 28, 2017 and March 16, 2021, comparing conventional medical management (CMM) with 10-kHz SCS+CMM. The participants had hemoglobin A1c level of less than or equal to 10% and pain greater than or equal to 5 of 10 cm on visual analog scale, with painful diabetic neuropathy symptoms 12 months or more refractory to gabapentinoids and at least 1 other analgesic class. Assessments included measures of pain, neurologic function, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) over 12 months with optional crossover at 6 months. Results The participants were randomized 1:1 to CMM (n=103) or 10-kHz SCS+CMM (n=113). At 6 months, 77 of 95 (81%) CMM group participants opted for crossover, whereas none of the 10-kHz SCS group participants did so. At 12 months, the mean pain relief from baseline among participants implanted with 10-kHz SCS was 74.3% (95% CI, 70.1-78.5), and 121 of 142 (85%) participants were treatment responders (≥50% pain relief). Treatment with 10-kHz SCS improved HRQoL, including a mean improvement in the EuroQol 5-dimensional questionnaire index score of 0.136 (95% CI, 0.104-0.169). The participants also reported significantly less pain interference with sleep, mood, and daily activities. At 12 months, 131 of 142 (92%) participants were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the 10-kHz SCS treatment. Conclusion The 10-kHz SCS treatment resulted in substantial pain relief and improvement in overall HRQoL 2.5- to 4.5-fold higher than the minimal clinically important difference. The outcomes were durable over 12 months and support 10-kHz SCS treatment in patients with refractory painful diabetic neuropathy. Trial registration clincaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03228420.
Collapse
Key Words
- CMM, conventional medical management
- DN4, Douleur Neuropathique
- DSPN, diabetic sensorimotor peripheral neuropathy
- EQ-5D-5L, EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level questionnaire
- HRQoL, health-related quality of life
- HbA1c, hemoglobin A1c
- IPG, implantable pulse generator
- NNT, number needed to treat
- PDN, painful diabetic neuropathy
- RCT, randomized controlled trial
- SCS, spinal cord stimulation
- VAS, visual analog scale
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erika A. Petersen
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock,Correspondence: Address to Erika A. Petersen, MD, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 W Markham St, Little Rock, AR 72205.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Jijun Xu
- Department of Pain Management, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
| | - Cong Yu
- Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Neel D. Mehta
- Department of Anesthesiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY
| | - Dawood Sayed
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS
| | | | | | - Khalid A. Sethi
- Department of Neurosurgery, United Health Services, Johnson City, NY
| | - Johnathan H. Goree
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock
| | | | | | | | | | - Paul W. Wu
- Holy Cross Hospital, Fort Lauderdale, FL
| | | | - Christian E. Nasr
- Department of Endocrinology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
| | - Rod S. Taylor
- MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit & Robertson Centre for Biostatistics, Institute of Health and Well Being, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
| | | | - Nagy A. Mekhail
- Department of Pain Management, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH
| |
Collapse
|