Cargando…

Long-term efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with refractory angina pectoris

BACKGROUND: The number of patients with refractory angina pectoris (RAP), associated with poor quality of life, has been steadily increasing. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a last resort treatment option leading to significant improvement in quality of life over a one year follow-up. The aim of th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vervaat, F.E., van der Gaag, A., Teeuwen, K., van Suijlekom, H., Dekker, L., Wijnbergen, I.F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10033933/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36970250
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcha.2023.101194
_version_ 1784911096260329472
author Vervaat, F.E.
van der Gaag, A.
Teeuwen, K.
van Suijlekom, H.
Dekker, L.
Wijnbergen, I.F.
author_facet Vervaat, F.E.
van der Gaag, A.
Teeuwen, K.
van Suijlekom, H.
Dekker, L.
Wijnbergen, I.F.
author_sort Vervaat, F.E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The number of patients with refractory angina pectoris (RAP), associated with poor quality of life, has been steadily increasing. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a last resort treatment option leading to significant improvement in quality of life over a one year follow-up. The aim of this prospective, single-centre, observational cohort study is to determine the long-term efficacy and safety of SCS in patients with RAP. METHODS: All patients with RAP who received a spinal cord stimulator from the period July 2010 up to November 2019 were included. In May 2022 all patients were screened for long-term follow-up. If the patient was alive the Seattle Angina (SAQ) and RAND-36 questionnaire were completed and if the patient had passed away cause of death was determined. The primary endpoint is the change in SAQ summary score at long-term follow-up compared to baseline. RESULTS: From July 2010 up to November 2019 132 patients received a spinal cord stimulator due to RAP. The mean follow-up period was 65.2 ± 32.8 months. Seventy-one patients completed the SAQ at baseline and long-term follow-up. The SAQ SS showed an improvement of 24.32U (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.71 – 29.93; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The main findings of the study show that long-term SCS in patients with RAP leads to significant improvement in quality of life, significant reduction in angina frequency, significantly less use of short-acting nitrates and a low risk of spinal cord stimulator related complications over a mean follow-up period of 65.2 ± 32.8 months.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10033933
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100339332023-03-24 Long-term efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with refractory angina pectoris Vervaat, F.E. van der Gaag, A. Teeuwen, K. van Suijlekom, H. Dekker, L. Wijnbergen, I.F. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc Original Paper BACKGROUND: The number of patients with refractory angina pectoris (RAP), associated with poor quality of life, has been steadily increasing. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a last resort treatment option leading to significant improvement in quality of life over a one year follow-up. The aim of this prospective, single-centre, observational cohort study is to determine the long-term efficacy and safety of SCS in patients with RAP. METHODS: All patients with RAP who received a spinal cord stimulator from the period July 2010 up to November 2019 were included. In May 2022 all patients were screened for long-term follow-up. If the patient was alive the Seattle Angina (SAQ) and RAND-36 questionnaire were completed and if the patient had passed away cause of death was determined. The primary endpoint is the change in SAQ summary score at long-term follow-up compared to baseline. RESULTS: From July 2010 up to November 2019 132 patients received a spinal cord stimulator due to RAP. The mean follow-up period was 65.2 ± 32.8 months. Seventy-one patients completed the SAQ at baseline and long-term follow-up. The SAQ SS showed an improvement of 24.32U (95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.71 – 29.93; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The main findings of the study show that long-term SCS in patients with RAP leads to significant improvement in quality of life, significant reduction in angina frequency, significantly less use of short-acting nitrates and a low risk of spinal cord stimulator related complications over a mean follow-up period of 65.2 ± 32.8 months. Elsevier 2023-03-20 /pmc/articles/PMC10033933/ /pubmed/36970250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcha.2023.101194 Text en © 2023 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Paper
Vervaat, F.E.
van der Gaag, A.
Teeuwen, K.
van Suijlekom, H.
Dekker, L.
Wijnbergen, I.F.
Long-term efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with refractory angina pectoris
title Long-term efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with refractory angina pectoris
title_full Long-term efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with refractory angina pectoris
title_fullStr Long-term efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with refractory angina pectoris
title_full_unstemmed Long-term efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with refractory angina pectoris
title_short Long-term efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with refractory angina pectoris
title_sort long-term efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with refractory angina pectoris
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10033933/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36970250
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcha.2023.101194
work_keys_str_mv AT vervaatfe longtermefficacyandsafetyofspinalcordstimulationinpatientswithrefractoryanginapectoris
AT vandergaaga longtermefficacyandsafetyofspinalcordstimulationinpatientswithrefractoryanginapectoris
AT teeuwenk longtermefficacyandsafetyofspinalcordstimulationinpatientswithrefractoryanginapectoris
AT vansuijlekomh longtermefficacyandsafetyofspinalcordstimulationinpatientswithrefractoryanginapectoris
AT dekkerl longtermefficacyandsafetyofspinalcordstimulationinpatientswithrefractoryanginapectoris
AT wijnbergenif longtermefficacyandsafetyofspinalcordstimulationinpatientswithrefractoryanginapectoris