Cargando…

Study protocol: Effects of active versus passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation on pain experience in persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2: a multicentre randomized trial (BURST-RAP study)

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has shown to be an effective treatment for patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2 (PSPS Type 2). The method used to deliver electrical charge in SCS is important. One such method is burst stimulation. Within burst stimulation, a recharge patter...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mons, Martijn R., Edelbroek, Caro, Zuidema, Xander, Bürger, Katja, Elzinga, Lars, de Vries, Jessica, van Kuijk, Sander, Joosten, Elbert A., Kallewaard, Jan-Willem
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9446827/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36064598
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06637-7
_version_ 1784783725884604416
author Mons, Martijn R.
Edelbroek, Caro
Zuidema, Xander
Bürger, Katja
Elzinga, Lars
de Vries, Jessica
van Kuijk, Sander
Joosten, Elbert A.
Kallewaard, Jan-Willem
author_facet Mons, Martijn R.
Edelbroek, Caro
Zuidema, Xander
Bürger, Katja
Elzinga, Lars
de Vries, Jessica
van Kuijk, Sander
Joosten, Elbert A.
Kallewaard, Jan-Willem
author_sort Mons, Martijn R.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has shown to be an effective treatment for patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2 (PSPS Type 2). The method used to deliver electrical charge in SCS is important. One such method is burst stimulation. Within burst stimulation, a recharge pattern is used to prevent buildup of charge in stimulated tissues. Two variations of burst waveforms are currently in use: one that employs active recharge and one that uses passive recharge. It has been suggested that differences exist between active and passive recharge paradigms related to both efficacy of pain relief and their underlying mechanism of action. Active recharge has been shown to activate both the medial spinal pathway, engaging cortical sensorimotor areas involved in location and intensity of pain, and lateral pathway, reaching brain areas involved with cognitive-emotional aspects of pain. Passive recharge has been suggested to act via modulation of thalamic neurons, which fire in a similar electrical pattern, and thereby modulate activity in various cortical areas including those related to motivational and emotional aspects of pain. The objective of this randomized clinical trial is to assess and compare the effect of active versus passive recharge Burst SCS on a wide spectrum of pain in PSPS Type 2 patients. METHODS: This multicentre randomized clinical trial will take place in 6 Dutch hospitals. PSPS Type 2 patients (n=94) will be randomized into a group receiving either active or passive recharge burst. Following a successful trial period, patients are permanently implanted. Patients complete the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) (primary outcome at 6 months), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NRS), Patient Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire (PVAQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Quality of Life (EQ-5D), Oswestery Disability Index (ODI), Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) and painDETECT questionnaires (secondary outcomes) at baseline, after trial, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months following implantation. DISCUSSION: The BURST-RAP trial protocol will shed light on possible clinical differences and effectivity of pain relief, including emotional-motivational aspects between active and passive burst SCS in PSPS Type 2 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05421273. Registered on 16 June 2022. Netherlands Trial Register NL9194. Registered on 23 January 2021.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9446827
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94468272022-09-07 Study protocol: Effects of active versus passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation on pain experience in persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2: a multicentre randomized trial (BURST-RAP study) Mons, Martijn R. Edelbroek, Caro Zuidema, Xander Bürger, Katja Elzinga, Lars de Vries, Jessica van Kuijk, Sander Joosten, Elbert A. Kallewaard, Jan-Willem Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has shown to be an effective treatment for patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2 (PSPS Type 2). The method used to deliver electrical charge in SCS is important. One such method is burst stimulation. Within burst stimulation, a recharge pattern is used to prevent buildup of charge in stimulated tissues. Two variations of burst waveforms are currently in use: one that employs active recharge and one that uses passive recharge. It has been suggested that differences exist between active and passive recharge paradigms related to both efficacy of pain relief and their underlying mechanism of action. Active recharge has been shown to activate both the medial spinal pathway, engaging cortical sensorimotor areas involved in location and intensity of pain, and lateral pathway, reaching brain areas involved with cognitive-emotional aspects of pain. Passive recharge has been suggested to act via modulation of thalamic neurons, which fire in a similar electrical pattern, and thereby modulate activity in various cortical areas including those related to motivational and emotional aspects of pain. The objective of this randomized clinical trial is to assess and compare the effect of active versus passive recharge Burst SCS on a wide spectrum of pain in PSPS Type 2 patients. METHODS: This multicentre randomized clinical trial will take place in 6 Dutch hospitals. PSPS Type 2 patients (n=94) will be randomized into a group receiving either active or passive recharge burst. Following a successful trial period, patients are permanently implanted. Patients complete the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) (primary outcome at 6 months), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NRS), Patient Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire (PVAQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Quality of Life (EQ-5D), Oswestery Disability Index (ODI), Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) and painDETECT questionnaires (secondary outcomes) at baseline, after trial, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months following implantation. DISCUSSION: The BURST-RAP trial protocol will shed light on possible clinical differences and effectivity of pain relief, including emotional-motivational aspects between active and passive burst SCS in PSPS Type 2 patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05421273. Registered on 16 June 2022. Netherlands Trial Register NL9194. Registered on 23 January 2021. BioMed Central 2022-09-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9446827/ /pubmed/36064598 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06637-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 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/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Mons, Martijn R.
Edelbroek, Caro
Zuidema, Xander
Bürger, Katja
Elzinga, Lars
de Vries, Jessica
van Kuijk, Sander
Joosten, Elbert A.
Kallewaard, Jan-Willem
Study protocol: Effects of active versus passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation on pain experience in persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2: a multicentre randomized trial (BURST-RAP study)
title Study protocol: Effects of active versus passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation on pain experience in persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2: a multicentre randomized trial (BURST-RAP study)
title_full Study protocol: Effects of active versus passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation on pain experience in persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2: a multicentre randomized trial (BURST-RAP study)
title_fullStr Study protocol: Effects of active versus passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation on pain experience in persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2: a multicentre randomized trial (BURST-RAP study)
title_full_unstemmed Study protocol: Effects of active versus passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation on pain experience in persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2: a multicentre randomized trial (BURST-RAP study)
title_short Study protocol: Effects of active versus passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation on pain experience in persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2: a multicentre randomized trial (BURST-RAP study)
title_sort study protocol: effects of active versus passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation on pain experience in persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2: a multicentre randomized trial (burst-rap study)
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9446827/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36064598
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-022-06637-7
work_keys_str_mv AT monsmartijnr studyprotocoleffectsofactiveversuspassiverechargeburstspinalcordstimulationonpainexperienceinpersistentspinalpainsyndrometype2amulticentrerandomizedtrialburstrapstudy
AT edelbroekcaro studyprotocoleffectsofactiveversuspassiverechargeburstspinalcordstimulationonpainexperienceinpersistentspinalpainsyndrometype2amulticentrerandomizedtrialburstrapstudy
AT zuidemaxander studyprotocoleffectsofactiveversuspassiverechargeburstspinalcordstimulationonpainexperienceinpersistentspinalpainsyndrometype2amulticentrerandomizedtrialburstrapstudy
AT burgerkatja studyprotocoleffectsofactiveversuspassiverechargeburstspinalcordstimulationonpainexperienceinpersistentspinalpainsyndrometype2amulticentrerandomizedtrialburstrapstudy
AT elzingalars studyprotocoleffectsofactiveversuspassiverechargeburstspinalcordstimulationonpainexperienceinpersistentspinalpainsyndrometype2amulticentrerandomizedtrialburstrapstudy
AT devriesjessica studyprotocoleffectsofactiveversuspassiverechargeburstspinalcordstimulationonpainexperienceinpersistentspinalpainsyndrometype2amulticentrerandomizedtrialburstrapstudy
AT vankuijksander studyprotocoleffectsofactiveversuspassiverechargeburstspinalcordstimulationonpainexperienceinpersistentspinalpainsyndrometype2amulticentrerandomizedtrialburstrapstudy
AT joostenelberta studyprotocoleffectsofactiveversuspassiverechargeburstspinalcordstimulationonpainexperienceinpersistentspinalpainsyndrometype2amulticentrerandomizedtrialburstrapstudy
AT kallewaardjanwillem studyprotocoleffectsofactiveversuspassiverechargeburstspinalcordstimulationonpainexperienceinpersistentspinalpainsyndrometype2amulticentrerandomizedtrialburstrapstudy