Spinal Cord Stimulation, Current Status 2017


.

.

.

One of the top read articles in 2017 from the journal Pain (free pdf).

.

.

Click title below:

.

Current status and future perspectives of spinal cord stimulation in treatment of chronic pain

.

Geurts, José W.a,*; Joosten, Elbert A.a,b; van Kleef, Maartena

.

..

3. Complications and side effects

.

“Complications and side effects (adverse events) acquiring reinterventions often occur during treatment with SCS.6,8,16,20,37 Complications include deep and superficial infections or equipment-related side effects like hardware malfunction, lead migration, fractured electrode, pulse generator discomfort, and battery replacements. Localized pain over the implanted hardware occurs regularly, on average in 6% of cases.6 This pain, for instance, can present as pain around the implanted pulse generator or over the lead. Such pain typically leads to replacement of the lead and therefore an additional surgery. Removal of the SCS system may be necessary in cases of deep infection or treatment failure. A prospective study performed over 12 years8 showed adverse events in 61% of patients. However, the complication rate was significantly reduced during the last 4 years of the study from an annual mean of 30% to 22%. The authors concluded that this was likely due to technological developments and improvements in the SCS hardware. Another explanation for this reduction is that the physicians treating patients gradually gain experience in a particular implant technique.22 New implantation techniques like DRG-STIM have been reported to cause more complications and it has been concluded that refinement and optimization of the technique are needed to minimize adverse events.22

.

..

.

5. Future perspectives of spinal cord stimulation

.

….”A point of concern is that, at present, cost-effectiveness of SCS is impeded by the high cost of the device and the high incidence of complications and side effects requiring reintervention and surgery. Consequently, SCS treatment is not accessible for everyone in the world and up to now is only available for selected indications.”….

.

 

..

Among problems from spinal cord stimulators that I have seen in those with CRPS, the procedure has created a new pain that is now #1 most severe, often at the battery pack that is placed at the low back. Several patients reported units were explanted with difficulty due to severe scar formation.   

.

Reference

[8]: Geurts JW, Smits H, Kemler MA, Brunner F, Kessels AG, van Kleef M.

Spinal cord stimulation for complex regional pain syndrome type I: a prospective cohort study with long-term follow-up.

Neuromodulation 2013;16:523–9; discussion 529.

.

Objectives: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment for intractable complex regional pain syndrome type I pain. Long-term data are scarce on effectiveness, degree of pain relief, predictors, and complications.

Materials and methods: From 1997 to 2008, 84 consecutive patients who received an implanted SCS system after positive test stimulation were included in the prospective study. Treatment effectiveness was assessed annually as measured by mean visual analog scale pain scores and with the Patients Global Impression of Change scale. Treatment success was defined as at least 30% mean pain relief at end point and treatment failure as explantation of the system. A Cox regression determined if baseline factors were associated with both these outcomes.

Results: During 11 years, 41% (95% CI: 27-55) of the patients experience at least 30% pain relief at assessment end point. During 12 years of follow-up 63% (95%CI: 41-85) of the implanted patients still use their SCS device at measured end point. Pain relief of at least 50% one week following test stimulation is associated with a higher probability of long-term treatment success. In 51 patients, 122 reinterventions were performed over 12 years; 13 were due to complications, 44 to battery changes, and 65 reinterventions were equipment related.

Conclusion: SCS provides an effective long-term pain treatment for 63% (95%CI: 41-85) of implanted patients. Forty-one percent (95%CI: 27-55) of SCS treated patients have at least 30% pain reduction at measurement end point. The number of reinterventions after implantation due to equipment-related problems, battery changes, and complications is 122 over 12 years of follow-up. Sixty-one percent (N = 51) of the patients had at least one reintervention. Mean pain relief of at least 50% (visual analog scale) one week after the test stimulation is associated with long-term treatment success.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

.

.

The material on this site is for informational purposes only.

.

It is not legal for me to provide medical advice without an examination.

.

It is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified health care provider.

~~

Comments are welcome.

This site is not for email, not for medical questions, and not for appointments.

~~~~~

For My Home Page, click here:  Welcome to my Weblog on Pain Management!

.

Please IGNORE THE ADS BELOW. They are not from me.

.

.

.

.

.

..

..

.

.

.

 

 

.

.. 

 

 

 

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: