Cargando…
Effect of low-frequency dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain
BACKGROUND: The role of stimulation parameters, especially stimulation frequency is not well understood in dorsal root ganglion stimulation. Previous studies documented higher effectiveness for frequencies as low as 20 Hz, but there is evidence that even lower values could lead to better outcomes. I...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Vienna
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10068636/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36705762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-023-05500-1 |
_version_ | 1785018701757546496 |
---|---|
author | Piedade, G. S. Gillner, S. McPhillips, P. S. Vesper, J. Slotty, P. J. |
author_facet | Piedade, G. S. Gillner, S. McPhillips, P. S. Vesper, J. Slotty, P. J. |
author_sort | Piedade, G. S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The role of stimulation parameters, especially stimulation frequency is not well understood in dorsal root ganglion stimulation. Previous studies documented higher effectiveness for frequencies as low as 20 Hz, but there is evidence that even lower values could lead to better outcomes. In this study, we investigate the influence of low-frequency DRG-S. METHOD: This is a randomized double-blind clinical trial with a crossover design. Patients with an already implanted DRG-S system were included and randomly tested with 4 Hz, 20 Hz, 60 Hz, and sham stimulation. Amplitude was adjusted to subthreshold values for each frequency. Each frequency was tested for 5 days, followed by a 2-day washout period. Patients were assessed using VAS, McGill Pain Questionnaire, EQ-5D-5L, and Beck Depression Inventory. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were in included. Time between inclusion in this study and primary implant was 32.8 months. Baseline stimulation frequency was 20 Hz in all patients. Mean baseline pain intensity was VAS 3.2 (SD 2.2). With 4-Hz stimulation, VAS was 3.8 (SD 1.9), with 20 Hz VAS 4.2 (SD 2.0) and with 60 Hz VAS 4.6 (SD 2.7). Worst pain control was seen with sham stimulation with a VAS of 5.3 (SD 3.0). Stimulation with 4 Hz achieved lower VAS scores, but this was only statistically significant when compared to sham (p = 0.001). A similar trend favoring 4-Hz stimulation was seen using the Beck Depression Inventory, but in this case no statistical significance was found. Outcomes of McGill Pain Questionnaire and EQ-5D-5L favored 20 Hz stimulation, but again without statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Low-frequency stimulation was not significantly better than classic 20-Hz stimulation in relieving pain intensity; the study might however be underpowered. Longer washout and observational periods might also be necessary to show clear differences in frequency response. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10068636 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Vienna |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100686362023-04-04 Effect of low-frequency dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain Piedade, G. S. Gillner, S. McPhillips, P. S. Vesper, J. Slotty, P. J. Acta Neurochir (Wien) Original Article - Functional Neurosurgery - Pain BACKGROUND: The role of stimulation parameters, especially stimulation frequency is not well understood in dorsal root ganglion stimulation. Previous studies documented higher effectiveness for frequencies as low as 20 Hz, but there is evidence that even lower values could lead to better outcomes. In this study, we investigate the influence of low-frequency DRG-S. METHOD: This is a randomized double-blind clinical trial with a crossover design. Patients with an already implanted DRG-S system were included and randomly tested with 4 Hz, 20 Hz, 60 Hz, and sham stimulation. Amplitude was adjusted to subthreshold values for each frequency. Each frequency was tested for 5 days, followed by a 2-day washout period. Patients were assessed using VAS, McGill Pain Questionnaire, EQ-5D-5L, and Beck Depression Inventory. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were in included. Time between inclusion in this study and primary implant was 32.8 months. Baseline stimulation frequency was 20 Hz in all patients. Mean baseline pain intensity was VAS 3.2 (SD 2.2). With 4-Hz stimulation, VAS was 3.8 (SD 1.9), with 20 Hz VAS 4.2 (SD 2.0) and with 60 Hz VAS 4.6 (SD 2.7). Worst pain control was seen with sham stimulation with a VAS of 5.3 (SD 3.0). Stimulation with 4 Hz achieved lower VAS scores, but this was only statistically significant when compared to sham (p = 0.001). A similar trend favoring 4-Hz stimulation was seen using the Beck Depression Inventory, but in this case no statistical significance was found. Outcomes of McGill Pain Questionnaire and EQ-5D-5L favored 20 Hz stimulation, but again without statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Low-frequency stimulation was not significantly better than classic 20-Hz stimulation in relieving pain intensity; the study might however be underpowered. Longer washout and observational periods might also be necessary to show clear differences in frequency response. Springer Vienna 2023-01-27 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10068636/ /pubmed/36705762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-023-05500-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article - Functional Neurosurgery - Pain Piedade, G. S. Gillner, S. McPhillips, P. S. Vesper, J. Slotty, P. J. Effect of low-frequency dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain |
title | Effect of low-frequency dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain |
title_full | Effect of low-frequency dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain |
title_fullStr | Effect of low-frequency dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain |
title_full_unstemmed | Effect of low-frequency dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain |
title_short | Effect of low-frequency dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain |
title_sort | effect of low-frequency dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain |
topic | Original Article - Functional Neurosurgery - Pain |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10068636/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36705762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-023-05500-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT piedadegs effectoflowfrequencydorsalrootganglionstimulationinthetreatmentofchronicpain AT gillners effectoflowfrequencydorsalrootganglionstimulationinthetreatmentofchronicpain AT mcphillipsps effectoflowfrequencydorsalrootganglionstimulationinthetreatmentofchronicpain AT vesperj effectoflowfrequencydorsalrootganglionstimulationinthetreatmentofchronicpain AT slottypj effectoflowfrequencydorsalrootganglionstimulationinthetreatmentofchronicpain |