Chronic self-stimulation of the medial posterior inferior thalamus for the alleviation of deafferentation pain

Translational aspects of deep brain stimulation for chronic pain

The use of deep brain stimulation (DBS) for the treatment of chronic pain was one of the first applications of this technique in functional neurosurgery. Established brain targets in the clinic include the periaqueductal (PAG)/periventricular gray matter (PVG) and sensory thalamic nuclei. More recently, the anterior cingulum (ACC) and the ventral striatum/anterior limb of the internal capsule (VS/ALIC) have been investigated for the treatment of emotional components of pain. In the clinic, most studies showed a response in 20%-70% of patients. In various applications of DBS, animal models either provided the rationale for the development of clinical trials or were utilized as a tool to study potential mechanisms of stimulation responses. Despite the complex nature of pain and the fact that animal models cannot reliably reflect the subjective nature of this condition, multiple preparations have emerged over the years. Overall, DBS was shown to produce an antinociceptive effect in rodents when delivered to targets known to induce analgesic effects in humans, suggesting a good predictive validity. Compared to the relatively high number of clinical trials in the field, however, the number of animal studies has been somewhat limited. Additional investigation using modern neuroscience techniques could unravel the mechanisms and neurocircuitry involved in the analgesic effects of DBS and help to optimize this therapy.

Deep brain stimulation for chronic pain

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a neurosurgical intervention popularised in movement disorders such as Parkinson's disease, and also reported to improve symptoms of epilepsy, Tourette's syndrome, obsessive compulsive disorders and cluster headache. Since the 1950s, DBS has been used as a treatment to relieve intractable pain of several aetiologies including post stroke pain, phantom limb pain, facial pain and brachial plexus avulsion. Several patient series have shown benefits in stimulating various brain areas, including the sensory thalamus (ventral posterior lateral and medial), the periaqueductal and periventricular grey, or, more recently, the anterior cingulate cortex. However, this technique remains "off label" in the USA as it does not have Federal Drug Administration approval. Consequently, only a small number of surgeons report DBS for pain using current technology and techniques and few regions approve it. Randomised, blinded and controlled clinical trials that may use novel trial methodologies are desirable to evaluate the efficacy of DBS in patients who are refractory to other therapies. New imaging techniques, including tractography, may help optimise electrode placement and clinical outcome.

Deep brain stimulation for chronic pain: intracranial targets, clinical outcomes, and trial design considerations

For over half a century, neurosurgeons have attempted to treat pain from a diversity of causes using acute and chronic intracranial stimulation. Targets of stimulation have included the sensory thalamus, periventricular and periaqueductal gray, the septum, the internal capsule, the motor cortex, posterior hypothalamus, and more recently, the anterior cingulate cortex. The current work focuses on presenting and evaluating the evidence for the efficacy of these targets in a historical context while also highlighting the major challenges to having a double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial. Considerations for pain research in general and use of intracranial targets specifically are included.

Neuropathic pain and deep brain stimulation

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a neurosurgical intervention the efficacy, safety, and utility of which are established in the treatment of Parkinson's disease. For the treatment of chronic, neuropathic pain refractory to medical therapies, many prospective case series have been reported, but few have published findings from patients treated with current standards of neuroimaging and stimulator technology over the last decade . We summarize the history, science, selection, assessment, surgery, programming, and personal clinical experience of DBS of the ventral posterior thalamus, periventricular/periaqueductal gray matter, and latterly rostral anterior cingulate cortex (Cg24) in 113 patients treated at 2 centers (John Radcliffe, Oxford, UK, and Hospital de São João, Porto, Portugal) over 13 years. Several experienced centers continue DBS for chronic pain, with success in selected patients, in particular those with pain after amputation, brachial plexus injury, stroke, and cephalalgias including anesthesia dolorosa. Other successes include pain after multiple sclerosis and spine injury. Somatotopic coverage during awake surgery is important in our technique, with cingulate DBS under general anesthesia considered for whole or hemibody pain, or after unsuccessful DBS of other targets. Findings discussed from neuroimaging modalities, invasive neurophysiological insights from local field potential recording, and autonomic assessments may translate into improved patient selection and enhanced efficacy, encouraging larger clinical trials.

Deep brain stimulation for pain

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a neurosurgical intervention whose efficacy, safety, and utility have been shown in the treatment of movement disorders. For the treatment of chronic pain refractory to medical therapies, many prospective case series have been reported, but few have published findings from patients treated during the past decade using current standards of neuroimaging and stimulator technology. We summarize the history, science, selection, assessment, surgery, and personal clinical experience of DBS of the ventral posterior thalamus, periventricular/periaqueductal gray matter, and, latterly, the rostral anterior cingulate cortex (Cg24) in 100 patients treated now at two centers (John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK, and Hospital de São João, Porto, Portugal) over 12 years. Several experienced centers continue DBS for chronic pain with success in selected patients, in particular those with pain after amputation, brachial plexus injury, stroke, and cephalalgias including anesthesia dolorosa. Other successes include pain after multiple sclerosis and spine injury. Somatotopic coverage during awake surgery is important in our technique, with cingulate DBS considered for whole-body pain or after unsuccessful DBS of other targets. Findings discussed from neuroimaging modalities, invasive neurophysiological insights from local field potential recording, and autonomic assessments may translate into improved patient selection and enhanced efficacy, encouraging larger clinical trials.

Deep brain stimulation for the treatment of chronic, intractable pain

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) was first used for the treatment of pain in 1954. Since that time, remarkable advances have been made in the field of DBS, largely because of the resurgence of DBS for the treatment of movement disorders. Although DBS for pain has largely been supplanted by motor cortex and spinal cord stimulation during the last decade, no solid evidence exists that these alternative modalities truly offer improved outcomes. Furthermore, nuclei not yet fully explored are known to play a role in the transmission and modulation of pain. This article outlines the history of DBS for pain, pain classification, patient selection criteria, DBS target selection, surgical techniques, indications for DBS (versus ablative techniques), putative new DBS targets, complications, and the outcomes associated with DBS for pain.

Deep brain stimulation for the treatment of intractable pain

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) plays an important role in the treatment of chronic pain when other less invasive treatment modalities have been exhausted. DBS is an apparently safe and effective treatment option for a select group of patients. Further research into the mechanisms of pain relief by DBS and careful prospective outcomes studies should help to define better the optimal techniques for DBS and clarify which patient populations may be best helped by this interventional procedure.

Thalamic field potentials in chronic central pain treated by periventricular gray stimulation -- a series of eight cases

Chronic deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the periventricular gray (PVG) has been used for the treatment of chronic central pain for decades. In recent years motor cortex stimulation (MCS) has largely supplanted DBS in the surgical management of intractable neuropathic pain of central origin. However, MCS provides satisfactory pain relief in about 50-75% of cases, a range comparable to that reported for DBS (none of the reports are in placebo-controlled studies and hence the further need for caution in evaluating and comparing these results). Our experience also suggests that there is still a role for DBS in the control of central pain. Here we present a series of eight consecutive cases of intractable chronic pain of central origin treated with PVG DBS with an average follow-up of 9 months. In each case, two electrodes were implanted in the PVG and the ventroposterolateral thalamic nucleus, respectively, under guidance of corneal topography/magnetic resonance imaging image fusion. The PVG was stimulated in the frequency range of 2-100 Hz in alert patients while pain was assessed using the McGill-Melzack visual analogue scale. In addition, local field potentials (FPs) were recorded from the sensory thalamus during PVG stimulation. Maximum pain relief was obtained with 5-35 Hz stimulation while 50-100 Hz made the pain worse. This suggests that pain suppression was frequency dependent. Interestingly, we detected low frequency thalamic FPs at 0.2-0.4 Hz closely associated with the pain. During 5-35 Hz PVG stimulation the amplitude of this potential was significantly reduced and this was associated with marked pain relief. At the higher frequencies (50-100 Hz), however, there was no reduction in the FPs and no pain suppression. We have found an interesting and consistent correlation between thalamic electrical activity and chronic pain. This low frequency potential may provide an objective index for quantifying chronic pain, and may hold further clues to the mechanism of action of PVG stimulation. It may be possible to use the presence of these slow FPs and the effect of trial PVG DBS on both the clinical status and the FPs to predict the probable success of future pain control in individual patients.

Deep brain stimulation: a review of basic research and clinical studies

Deep brain stimulation for pain control in humans was first used almost 30 years ago and has continued to receive considerable attention. Despite the large number of clinical reports describing pain relief, numerous studies have indicated that the results of these procedures vary considerably. In addition, many neurosurgeons find the procedures unpredictable, and considerable disagreement still exists regarding important issues related to the technique itself. This review gives an historical overview of the relevant basic and clinical literature and provides a critical examination of the clinical efficacy, choice of stimulation sites, parameters of stimulation, and effects on experimental pain. Finally, we give suggestions for future research that could more definitively determine the usefulness of deep brain stimulation for pain control.

Effect of bullet removal on subsequent pain in persons with spinal cord injury secondary to gunshot wound

The prevention or minimization of future pain is often cited as a reason for removal of the bullet from patients who have incurred a spinal cord injury secondary to a gunshot wound. In an attempt to examine this assumption, multimodal pain ratings were recorded for 14 patients with spinal cord injury due to a gunshot wound in whom the bullet was still present, 14 neurologically matched patients with spinal cord injury due to a gunshot wound in whom the bullet was removed, and 28 control patients with spinal cord injury unrelated to a gunshot wound who were neurologically matched to the first two groups. The results suggest that persons who sustain a spinal cord injury secondary to gunshot wounds report more pain than those injured in other ways. In addition, there was no indication that surgical removal of the bullet was helpful in reducing subsequent pain either early in the rehabilitation process or at 1 year postinjury. The location of the bullet and the type of pain that subsequently developed were not correlated with the initial decision to surgically remove the bullet. Implications for further study and clinical practice are discussed.

Pain relief by electrical stimulation of the periaqueductal and periventricular gray matter. Evidence for a non-opioid mechanism

Pain relief following stimulation of the periaqueductal gray matter (PAG) or periventricular gray matter (PVG) in man has been ascribed to stimulation-induced release of endogenous opioid substances. Forty-five patients were studied and followed for at least 1 year after placement of chronic stimulating electrodes in the PAG or PVG to determine if pain relief due to stimulation could be ascribed to an endogenous opioid mechanism. Three criteria were assessed: the development of tolerance to stimulation; the possibility of cross-tolerance to morphine; and reversibility of stimulation-induced pain relief by the opiate antagonist naloxone. Sixteen patients (35.6%) developed tolerance to stimulation, that is, they obtained progressively less effective pain relief. Twelve (44.4%) of 27 patients undergoing stimulation of the thalamic sensory relay nuclei for treatment of chronic pain (a presumably non-opioid mechanism) also developed tolerance. Morphine sulfate was administered in a blind, placebo-controlled protocol to 10 patients who had become tolerant to PAG-PVG stimulation and none showed evidence of cross-tolerance. Fifteen of 19 patients, already tolerant to morphine at the time of PAG-PVG electrode implantation, experienced excellent pain relief by stimulation, also indicating a lack of cross-tolerance. Twenty-two patients who experienced excellent pain relief from chronic PAG-PVG stimulation received intravenous naloxone in a double-blind, placebo-controlled protocol. Pain intensity as assessed by the visual analog scale was increased to the same degree by both placebo and naloxone. Eight patients showed no increase in pain intensity with either placebo or naloxone. Although tolerance to PAG-PVG stimulation developed in these patients, the frequency of tolerance was similar to that seen in patients undergoing thalamic sensory nuclear stimulation. Since the latter technique presumably relieves pain by a non-opioid mechanism, the development of tolerance to PAG-PVG stimulation does not, in itself, confirm an opioid mechanism. Cross-tolerance between PAG-PVG stimulation and morphine was not seen and cross-tolerance to PAG-PVG stimulation in patients already tolerant to morphine was rare. The pain-relieving effect of PAG-PVG stimulation was reversed to an approximately equal degree by naloxone and placebo. The authors do not believe that, in most patients, pain relief elicited by PAG-PVG stimulation depends on an endogenous opioid mechanism. It appears that other, non-opioid mechanisms are primarily responsible for such pain relief.

Compulsive thalamic self-stimulation: a case with metabolic, electrophysiologic and behavioral correlates

A 48-year-old woman with a stimulating electrode implanted in the right thalamic nucleus ventralis posterolateralis developed compulsive self-stimulation associated with erotic sensations and changes in autonomic and neurologic function. Stimulation effects were evaluated by neuropsychologic testing, endocrine studies, positron emission tomographic measurements of regional cerebral metabolic rate for glucose, EEG and evoked potentials. During stimulation, vital signs and pupillary diameter increased and a left hemiparesis and left hemisensory loss developed. Verbal functions deteriorated and visuospatial processing improved. Plasma growth hormone concentrations decreased, and adrenocorticotrophic hormone and cortisol levels rose. With stimulation, glucose metabolism increased in both thalami and both hemispheres, reversing baseline right-sided hypometabolism and right-left asymmetries. EEG and both somatosensory and brain-stem auditory evoked potentials remained unchanged during stimulation, while visual evoked potentials revealed evidence of anterior visual pathway dysfunction in the left eye. This case establishes the potential for addiction to deep brain stimulation and demonstrates that widespread behavioral and physiological changes, with concomitant alteration in the regional cerebral metabolic rate for glucose, may accompany unilateral thalamic stimulation.

Electrical stimulation of the brain for relief of intractable pain due to cancer

Seventeen patients with intractable pain due to progressive malignancies were treated by electrical stimulation of the brain after more conventional pain therapies applied in the University of California, Los Angeles Cancer Pain Clinic had failed. Electrodes were stereotactically implanted under local anesthesia in the periaqueductal grey (PAG) or periventricular grey (PVG) in 11 patients. In six patients electrodes were placed in both PAG-PVG targets and in the sensory thalamic nuclei. Thirteen of the 17 patients achieved virtually total pain relief and 2 others achieved partial pain relief. At the hospital discharge only 4 of 17 patients required narcotic analgesics for pain relief. Follow-up periods ranged from 1 to 21 months and 6 patients remain alive. Fourteen patients eventually required narcotics for pain relief, usually in the terminal few weeks of their lives. Pain relief was achieved in spite of the fact that all patients were tolerant to large doses of systematically or intraspinally administered narcotics at the time of electrode placement. No complications related to brain stimulation were identified. Brain stimulation is a safe and effective method for treatment of intractable pain due to malignancy in certain patients.

Dysesthesias and self-mutilation in humans and subhumans: a review of clinical and experimental studies

The chronic deafferentation syndrome includes a complex pattern of abnormal self-directed behavior and a stress response. Subhuman self-mutilation is a secondary consequence of the chronic deafferentation syndrome. The evidence indicates that the chronic deafferentation syndrome in subhumans is a valid model for the induced and the spontaneous dysesthesias in humans. Objective criteria for the definition of subhuman dysesthesias have been derived from independent sources of evidence, in neurally intact subjects; those criteria are then found to match the subhuman syndrome of deafferentation. Support for the validity of the inference of subhuman dysesthesias derives from the parallels with the various facts of the human dysesthesias. The credibility of this argument is significantly strengthened by reports of morphological and excitatory physiological abnormalities, in central somatosensory structures, in response to deafferentation. There is no independent subhuman evidence in support of alternate interpretations of the deafferentation syndrome, and those interpretations seem to be inadequate in several aspects. Doubts concerning the validity of this animal model have been allayed by reports of dysesthesias in humans with spinal posterior rhizotomies or ganglionectomies, and also those with congenital analgesia. Moreover, the occurrence of this syndrome in hypoalgesic areas as a consequence of anterolateral cordotomy in monkeys, can best be interpreted as a reflection of dysesthesias. This syndrome is released by neuropathological or neurosurgical lesions in the peripheral or central nervous system; lesions which involve small caliber peripheral afferents or the spinothalamic tract. Variability in the release of this syndrome has been associated with several different factors. So far, the chronic syndrome is intractable. Evidence relates the abnormalities of this syndrome to pathophysiological foci in central relays of the somatosensory system, and suggests that the chronic abnormalities of this syndrome can be sustained at brain levels.

Electrical stimulation of the brain in treatment of chronic pain. Experience over 5 years

Forty-eight patients underwent electrical stimulation of the brain for treatment of chronic pain between 1978 and 1983. Average pain duration prior to treatment was 4.5 years. Before selection for this procedure patients underwent pain treatment in a multidisciplinary pain center, intensive psychological and psychiatric evaluation, and assessment of pain responsiveness to intravenous administration of placebo, morphine, and naloxone. A total of 71 electrodes were placed in the 48 patients at a variety of stimulating targets, including the periaqueductal gray matter, periventricular gray matter, thalamus, and internal capsule. Seventy-two percent of patients experienced complete or partial pain relief. In addition, 59% of patients were able to discontinue narcotic usage. Twenty-five percent of patients returned to normal physical activities and another 33% showed marked improvement in functional capacity. Follow-up periods ranged from 2 to 60 months; with a mean follow-up period of 20 months. A variety of relatively minor complications occurred, but no mortality or permanent sequelae were experienced. No patient's pain was made worse as a result of electrical stimulation. Electrical stimulation of the brain offers a safe and relatively effective method for the treatment of chronic pain in appropriately selected patients, who are unresponsive to other forms of therapy.

Trigeminal somatosensory evoked responses in patients with facial anaesthesia dolorosa

The TSER of six patients with facial anaesthesia dolorosa showed shorter latencies and higher amplitudes of the late waves, which are believed to represent the processing of somatosensory input in the higher subcortical and cortical centres. Shorter latencies and higher amplitudes may reflect abnormal facilitation or decreased inhibition by these centres. The TSER also supplied an objective means of pain measurement, as the stimulating impulse at the affected side had to be reduced from 20 mA (the usual intensity used in patients without evoking pain or an unpleasant sensation) down to 9-12 mA, to avoid unbearable pain.