Comparison of Spinal Cord Stimulation vs. Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation vs. Association of Both in Patients with Refractory Chronic Back and/or Lower Limb Neuropathic Pain: An International, Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Crossover Trial (BOOST-DRG Study)

Comparison of Spinal Cord Stimulation, Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation, and Association of Both in Patients With Refractory Chronic Back and/or Lower Limb Neuropathic Pain: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Cross-Over Trial (BOOST-DRG Study)

OBJECTIVES

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) have individually shown efficacy in relieving pain in patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome after spinal surgery (PSPS-T2). Combining SCS and DRGS simultaneously, along with Burst stimulation programming, may enhance the responder rate of patients with PSPS-T2.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study aimed to compare the pain relief (≥50%) responder rates in SCS, DRGS, and SCS+DGRS (DUAL) through a three-month randomized cross-over trial in patients with PSPS-T2. After the cross-over period, stimulation programming was switched to Burst. Secondary objectives included evaluating the clinical efficacy at three-, four-, six-, and 12-month follow-ups, assessing pain intensity, area of pain, area of paresthesia coverage, quality of life, functional disability, psychologic distress, medication intake, and the Multidimensional Clinical Response Index (MCRI).

RESULTS

The responder rate of pain relief was similar in SCS, DRGS, and DUAL (60%, p = 0.84) at the end of the cross-over period, increasing to 80% with the ability to switch between stimulation possibilities. Burst programming did not provide additional pain relief at the four-month follow-up (p = 0.99). Clinical outcomes significantly improved until 12-month follow-up compared with baseline. Considering a clinically significant increase of 1.05 of the MCRI, all patients were responders at three-, four-, and six- month follow-up, and 80% were responders at 12 months compared with baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

The full option to stimulate different neural structures, separately or simultaneously, led to improved responder rates, allowing patients to personalize treatment. A multidimensional assessment is essential to reveal the full potential benefits of neuromodulation in patients with chronic pain.

Synergistic neuromodulation therapy for persistent spinal pain: a proof-of-concept trial on the use of spinal cord and dorsal root ganglion stimulation

PURPOSE

Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome type 2 (PSPS-T2) poses a significant clinical challenge, demanding innovative therapeutic interventions. The integration of Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) and Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation (DRG-S) is emerging as a potent synergistic strategy for comprehensive pain management. This single patient-blind proof of concept (POC) trial explores the efficacy and synergistic potential of combined SCS and DRG-S in a patient with refractory PSPS-T2.

METHODS

A 45-year-old male with intractable PSPS-T2 underwent a unique, methodically structured study, involving three treatment phases: Phase A with SCS alone, Phase B with DRG-S alone, and Phase C The patient, blinded to the treatment modalities, provided pain assessments using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions (DN4) conducted by clinical investigators at each phase. Baseline pain scores were ten and nine, respectively.

RESULTS

Distinct responses were noted across the phases. Phase A demonstrated moderate pain relief, while Phase B offered further pain intensity reduction. However, Phase C, combining both strategies, yielded the most significant improvement, remarkably enhancing the patient's quality of life and functional capacity.

CONCLUSION

This POC trial underscores the synergistic potential of SCS and DRG-S in managing complex cases of PSPS-T2, suggesting a paradigm shift towards integrated neuromodulation strategies for enhanced pain control. The development of dual intent implantable pulse generators (IPGs) capable of offering combination therapy simultaneously might be effective for pain management in select cases. The significant pain reduction and functional improvement observed advocate for further research in dual neuromodulation therapies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

IRB 20190536.

Neuromodulation for Neuropathic Pain Syndromes

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews the principles, applications, and emerging trends of neuromodulation as a therapeutic approach for managing painful neuropathic diseases. By parsing evidence for possible mechanisms of action and clinical trial outcomes for various diseases, this article focuses on five common therapy modalities: cutaneous, peripheral nerve, spinal cord, and brain stimulation, and intrathecal drug delivery.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Recent advances in both invasive and noninvasive neuromodulation for pain have introduced personalized and closed-loop techniques, integrating real-time feedback mechanisms and combining therapies to improve physical and psychosocial function. Novel stimulation waveforms may influence distinct neural tissues to rectify pathologic pain signaling.

ESSENTIAL POINTS

With appropriate patient selection, peripheral nerve stimulation or epidural stimulation of the spinal cord can provide enduring relief for a variety of chronic pain syndromes. Newer technology using high frequencies, unique waveforms, or closed-loop stimulation may have selective advantages, but our current understanding of therapy mechanisms is very poor. For certain diagnoses and patients who meet clinical criteria, neuromodulation can provide profound, long-lasting relief that significantly improves quality of life. While many therapies are supported by data from large clinical trials, there is a risk of bias as most clinical studies were funded by device manufacturers or insurance companies, which increases the importance of real-world data analysis. Emerging methods like invasive or noninvasive brain stimulation may help us dissect basic mechanisms of pain processing and hold promise for personalized therapies for refractory pain syndromes. Finally, intrathecal delivery of drugs directly to segments of the spinal cord can also modify pain signaling to provide therapy for severe pain syndromes.

Effectiveness of combined dorsal root ganglion and spinal cord stimulation: a retrospective, single-centre case series for chronic focal neuropathic pain

OBJECTIVE

This case series retrospectively reviewed the outcomes in patients implanted with combined, synchronous dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) and spinal cord stimulation (SCS) connected to a single implantable pulse generator (IPG) in a tertiary referral neuromodulation centre in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients underwent a trial of DRGS+SCS for treating focal neuropathic pain between January 2016 and December 2019, with a follow-up in February 2022. A Transgrade approach was employed for DRGS. Patients were provided with 3 possible stimulation programs: DRGS-only, SCS-only, or DRGS+SCS. Patients were assessed for pain intensity, patients' global impression of change (PGIC), preferred lead(s) and complications.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were successful and went on for full implantation. The most common diagnosis was Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. After an average of 3.1 years follow-up, 1 patient was lost to follow-up, and 2 were non-responders. Of the remaining 17 patients, 16 (94%) continued to report a PGIC of 7. The average pain intensity at Baseline was 8.5 on an NRS scale of 0-10. At the last follow-up, the average NRS reduction overall was 78.9% with no statistical difference between those preferring DRGS+SCS (n = 9), SCS-only (n = 3) and DRGS-only (n = 5). The combination of DRGS+SCS was preferred by 53% at the last follow-up. There were no serious neurological complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective case series demonstrates the potential effectiveness of combined DRGS+SCS with sustained analgesia observed at an average follow-up of over 3 years. Implanting combined DRGS+SCS may provide programming flexibility and therapeutic alternatives.

[Electrical dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) for the treatment of refractory postherpetic neuralgia]

Postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is a rare complication of herpes zoster characterized by prolonged and excruciating pain. Traditional treatments for PHN, such as analgesics, anticonvulsants and antidepressants, do not always bring the desired result. One promising alternative that is attracting the attention of the scientific community is dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS). This method focuses on targeted and precise targeting of the source of pain, providing a new level of effectiveness in the treatment of PHN.

OBJECTIVE

A retrospective analysis of the technique and results of implantation of a permanent device for stimulating the spinal ganglia in patients with refractory PHN at the Burdenko Neurosurgical Center.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study was conducted in 7 patients (5 men, 2 women) with refractory PHN in the period from 2018 to 2020. The age of the patients ranged from 57 to 84 years (average age 74±8.4). All patients were implanted with Boston systems (Precision or Spectra versions). Stimulation parameters: pulse width - 120-210 μs, frequency - 30-130 Hz, amplitude at the lower limit of the appearance of paresthesia with the possibility of increasing with increased pain up to 5 mA. The position of the electrode depended on the location of the pain. All systems were implanted under X-ray guidance.

RESULTS

The duration of follow-up observation was more than 2.5 years. The average pain intensity one year after treatment was 3.42±2.45 points on the visual analogue scale (VAS) (a 62.3% decrease in intensity compared to baseline). In 3 (42.8%) patients, the result was characterized by us as «excellent» (intensity according to VAS decreased by 75% or more), in 1 (14.2%) - as «good» (intensity according to VAS decreased by 50-74%), in 1 (14.2%) - as «moderate» (VAS intensity decreased by 25-49% and in 2 (28.5%) as «unsatisfactory» (VAS intensity decreased by less than 25%, or postoperative complications occurred).

CONCLUSION

Given the complicated nature of PHN, the use of dorsal ganglion stimulation appears to be a promising and innovative treatment approach. Further research is needed to introduce this technique into clinical practice for the treatment of patients suffering from PHN.

Propensity score matching comparing short-term nerve electrical stimulation to pulsed radiofrequency for herpes zoster-associated pain: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Zoster-associated pain (ZAP) is notoriously difficult to treat. Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) and short-term nerve electrical stimulation (st-NES) have been proven effective treatments for ZAP. However, it is still unclear which technique provides improved analgesia in ZAP. This study is based on a large-scale, long-term follow-up to evaluate the efficacy and safety between st-NES and PRF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All eligible ZAP patients treated with st-NES or PRF in our department were enrolled. Cohorts were divided into the st-NES group and the PRF group. A 1:1 ratio propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline characteristics. The PS-matched cohort was adopted to investigate the efficacy and safety of the two treatments. The ordinal regression analysis was performed to determine the variables affecting the treatment effect of ZAP.

RESULTS

A total of 226 patients were included after PSM. The numerical rating scale (NRS) scores in st-NES and PRF groups considerably reduced compared to baseline levels after treatment. The NRS scores in the st-NES group were obviously lower than those in the PRF group at discharge, 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. During the follow-up period, the NRS reduction rate remained higher in the st-NES group than in the PRF group (P < 0.01). The dosage of medication, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) score, and the number of patients with aggravated pain after discharge in the st-NES group were significantly less than in the PRF group after treatment.

CONCLUSION

Short-term nerve electrical stimulation has been shown to be more advantageous than PRF for pain relief and quality of life improvement for ZAP patients.

Combining Awake Anesthesia with Minimal Invasive Surgery Optimizes Intraoperative Surgical Spinal Cord Stimulation Lead Placement

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective and validated treatment to address chronic refractory neuropathic pain in persistent spinal pain syndrome-type 2 (PSPS-T2) patients. Surgical SCS lead placement is traditionally performed under general anesthesia due to its invasiveness. In parallel, recent works have suggested that awake anesthesia (AA), consisting of target controlled intra-venous anesthesia (TCIVA), could be an interesting tool to optimize lead anatomical placement using patient intra-operative feedback. We hypothesized that combining AA with minimal invasive surgery (MIS) could improve SCS outcomes. The goal of this study was to evaluate SCS lead performance (defined by the area of pain adequately covered by paraesthesia generated via SCS), using an intraoperative objective quantitative mapping tool, and secondarily, to assess pain relief, functional improvement and change in quality of life with a composite score. We analyzed data from a prospective multicenter study (ESTIMET) to compare the outcomes of 115 patients implanted with MIS under AA (MISAA group) or general anesthesia (MISGA group), or by laminectomy under general anesthesia (LGA group). All in all, awake surgery appears to show significantly better performance than general anesthesia in terms of patient pain coverage (65% vs. 34-62%), pain surface (50-76% vs. 50-61%) and pain intensity (65% vs. 35-40%), as well as improved secondary outcomes (quality of life, functional disability and depression). One step further, our results suggest that MISAA combined with intra-operative hypnosis could potentialize patient intraoperative cooperation and could be proposed as a personalized package offered to PSPS-T2 patients eligible for SCS implantation in highly dedicated neuromodulation centers.

The Challenge of Converting "Failed Spinal Cord Stimulation Syndrome" Back to Clinical Success, Using SCS Reprogramming as Salvage Therapy, through Neurostimulation Adapters Combined with 3D-Computerized Pain Mapping Assessment: A Real Life Retrospective Study

While paresthesia-based Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) has been proven effective as treatment for chronic neuropathic pain, its initial benefits may lead to the development of "Failed SCS Syndrome' (FSCSS) defined as decrease over time related to Loss of Efficacy (LoE) with or without Loss of Coverage (LoC). Development of technologies associating new paresthesia-free stimulation waveforms and implanted pulse generator adapters provide opportunities to manage patients with LoE. The main goal of our study was to investigate salvage procedures, through neurostimulation adapters, in patients already implanted with SCS and experiencing LoE. We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of patients who were offered new SCS programs/waveforms through an implanted adapter between 2018 and 2021. Patients were evaluated before and at 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Outcomes included pain intensity rating with a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), pain/coverage mappings and stimulation preferences. Last follow-up evaluations (N = 27) showed significant improvement in VAS (p = 0.0001), ODI (p = 0.021) and quality of life (p = 0.023). In the 11/27 patients with LoC, SCS efficacy on pain intensity (36.89%) was accompanied via paresthesia coverage recovery (55.57%) and pain surface decrease (47.01%). At 12-month follow-up, 81.3% preferred to keep tonic stimulation in their waveform portfolio. SCS conversion using adapters appears promising as a salvage solution, with an emphasis on paresthesia recapturing enabled via spatial retargeting. In light of these results, adapters could be integrated in SCS rescue algorithms or should be considered in SCS rescue.