Cargando…

Redefining Spinal Cord Stimulation “Trials”: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Single‐Stage Wireless Permanent Implantable Devices

BACKGROUND: “Traditional” spinal cord stimulation (SCS) trials with percutaneous electrodes externalized to a pulse generator (PG) are typically limited in duration due to risk of infection. Newer miniaturized wireless SCS technology eliminates the percutaneous extension (as well as PGs implanted fo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: North, Richard B., Calodney, Aaron, Bolash, Robert, Slavin, Konstantin V., Creamer, Michael, Rauck, Richard, Vahedifar, Payam, Fox, Ira, Özaktay, Cuneyt, Panchal, Sunil, Vanquathem, Niek
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7004134/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31157949
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ner.12970
_version_ 1783494670155776000
author North, Richard B.
Calodney, Aaron
Bolash, Robert
Slavin, Konstantin V.
Creamer, Michael
Rauck, Richard
Vahedifar, Payam
Fox, Ira
Özaktay, Cuneyt
Panchal, Sunil
Vanquathem, Niek
author_facet North, Richard B.
Calodney, Aaron
Bolash, Robert
Slavin, Konstantin V.
Creamer, Michael
Rauck, Richard
Vahedifar, Payam
Fox, Ira
Özaktay, Cuneyt
Panchal, Sunil
Vanquathem, Niek
author_sort North, Richard B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: “Traditional” spinal cord stimulation (SCS) trials with percutaneous electrodes externalized to a pulse generator (PG) are typically limited in duration due to risk of infection. Newer miniaturized wireless SCS technology eliminates the percutaneous extension (as well as PGs implanted for chronic use), thus facilitating a single‐stage implantation after which the device can remain indefinitely. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate fully implanted wireless SCS devices during a 30‐day screening trial in subjects with chronic low back pain and leg pain and a history of lumbosacral spine surgery. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial of single‐stage wireless SCS using a wireless percutaneous system, 99 subjects received either 10 kHz high frequency stimulation (HFS) or lower frequency stimulation (LFS) below 1500 Hz (Bolash R, Creamer M, Rauck R, et al. Wireless high frequency spinal cord stimulation (10 kHz) compared to multi‐waveform low frequency spinal cord stimulation in the management of chronic pain in failed back surgery syndrome subjects: preliminary results of a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled study. Pain Med 2019, https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnz019). In this report, we assess the 30‐day trial success rate (≥50% pain relief from baseline) and complications. RESULTS: The overall trial success rate was 88% (87/99): 92% (46/50) for HFS and 84% (41/49) for LFS (NS). The trial success rate in the 64 subjects with predominant low back pain was 92% (59/64) vs. 80% (28/35) in those with leg pain ≥ low back pain (NS). During the screening trial, one infection occurred (1%) and one subject withdrew and was explanted (1%). Electrode migrations were seen on routine follow‐up x‐rays in 10 cases (10%). CONCLUSION: Using wireless SCS devices that allow for an extended trial period and evaluation of various waveforms, we observed a high rate trial success rate with both HFS and LFS waveforms, with minimal incidence of infection. Long‐term follow‐up will address the cost‐effectiveness and morbidity associated with this technology, which facilitates single‐stage treatment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7004134
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70041342020-02-11 Redefining Spinal Cord Stimulation “Trials”: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Single‐Stage Wireless Permanent Implantable Devices North, Richard B. Calodney, Aaron Bolash, Robert Slavin, Konstantin V. Creamer, Michael Rauck, Richard Vahedifar, Payam Fox, Ira Özaktay, Cuneyt Panchal, Sunil Vanquathem, Niek Neuromodulation SPINAL CORD STIMULATION BACKGROUND: “Traditional” spinal cord stimulation (SCS) trials with percutaneous electrodes externalized to a pulse generator (PG) are typically limited in duration due to risk of infection. Newer miniaturized wireless SCS technology eliminates the percutaneous extension (as well as PGs implanted for chronic use), thus facilitating a single‐stage implantation after which the device can remain indefinitely. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate fully implanted wireless SCS devices during a 30‐day screening trial in subjects with chronic low back pain and leg pain and a history of lumbosacral spine surgery. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial of single‐stage wireless SCS using a wireless percutaneous system, 99 subjects received either 10 kHz high frequency stimulation (HFS) or lower frequency stimulation (LFS) below 1500 Hz (Bolash R, Creamer M, Rauck R, et al. Wireless high frequency spinal cord stimulation (10 kHz) compared to multi‐waveform low frequency spinal cord stimulation in the management of chronic pain in failed back surgery syndrome subjects: preliminary results of a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled study. Pain Med 2019, https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnz019). In this report, we assess the 30‐day trial success rate (≥50% pain relief from baseline) and complications. RESULTS: The overall trial success rate was 88% (87/99): 92% (46/50) for HFS and 84% (41/49) for LFS (NS). The trial success rate in the 64 subjects with predominant low back pain was 92% (59/64) vs. 80% (28/35) in those with leg pain ≥ low back pain (NS). During the screening trial, one infection occurred (1%) and one subject withdrew and was explanted (1%). Electrode migrations were seen on routine follow‐up x‐rays in 10 cases (10%). CONCLUSION: Using wireless SCS devices that allow for an extended trial period and evaluation of various waveforms, we observed a high rate trial success rate with both HFS and LFS waveforms, with minimal incidence of infection. Long‐term follow‐up will address the cost‐effectiveness and morbidity associated with this technology, which facilitates single‐stage treatment. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2019-06-03 2020-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7004134/ /pubmed/31157949 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ner.12970 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Neuromodulation Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle SPINAL CORD STIMULATION
North, Richard B.
Calodney, Aaron
Bolash, Robert
Slavin, Konstantin V.
Creamer, Michael
Rauck, Richard
Vahedifar, Payam
Fox, Ira
Özaktay, Cuneyt
Panchal, Sunil
Vanquathem, Niek
Redefining Spinal Cord Stimulation “Trials”: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Single‐Stage Wireless Permanent Implantable Devices
title Redefining Spinal Cord Stimulation “Trials”: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Single‐Stage Wireless Permanent Implantable Devices
title_full Redefining Spinal Cord Stimulation “Trials”: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Single‐Stage Wireless Permanent Implantable Devices
title_fullStr Redefining Spinal Cord Stimulation “Trials”: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Single‐Stage Wireless Permanent Implantable Devices
title_full_unstemmed Redefining Spinal Cord Stimulation “Trials”: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Single‐Stage Wireless Permanent Implantable Devices
title_short Redefining Spinal Cord Stimulation “Trials”: A Randomized Controlled Trial Using Single‐Stage Wireless Permanent Implantable Devices
title_sort redefining spinal cord stimulation “trials”: a randomized controlled trial using single‐stage wireless permanent implantable devices
topic SPINAL CORD STIMULATION
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7004134/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31157949
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ner.12970
work_keys_str_mv AT northrichardb redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices
AT calodneyaaron redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices
AT bolashrobert redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices
AT slavinkonstantinv redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices
AT creamermichael redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices
AT rauckrichard redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices
AT vahedifarpayam redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices
AT foxira redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices
AT ozaktaycuneyt redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices
AT panchalsunil redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices
AT vanquathemniek redefiningspinalcordstimulationtrialsarandomizedcontrolledtrialusingsinglestagewirelesspermanentimplantabledevices