10 kHz spinal cord stimulation for chronic upper limb and neck pain: Australian experience

Incidence of Lead Migration With Loss of Efficacy or Paresthesia Coverage After Spinal Cord Stimulator Implantation: Systematic Review and Proportional Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies and Randomized Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this meta-analysis was to approximate the incidence of overall lead migration, clinically significant lead migration, and asymptomatic lead migration in patients who have undergone spinal cord stimulator implantation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed for studies published before May 31, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies with more than ten patients were included. Two reviewers analyzed the articles from the literature search for final inclusion, after which, study characteristics and outcome data were extracted. The primary dichotomous categorical outcome variables were the incidence of overall lead migration, clinically significant lead migration (defined as lead migration resulting in loss of efficacy), and asymptomatic lead migration (defined as lead migration discovered incidentally on follow-up imaging) in patients with spinal cord stimulator implant. Freeman-Tukey arcsine square root transformation for meta-analysis of proportions using random effects (DerSimonian and Laird method) was used to calculate incidence rates for the outcome variables. Pooled incidence rates and 95% CIs were calculated for the outcome variables.

RESULTS

Fifty-three studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 2932 patients having received spinal cord stimulator implants. The pooled incidence of overall lead migration was 9.97% (95% CI of 7.62%-12.59%). Only 24 of the included studies commented on the clinical significance of reported lead migrations, of which every lead migration was clinically significant. In these 24 studies, 96% of the reported lead migrations required a revision procedure or explant. Unfortunately, no studies that reported lead migration commented on asymptomatic lead migrations; therefore, the incidence of asymptomatic lead migrations could not be defined.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis found that the rate of lead migration in patients who have received spinal cord stimulator implants is approximately one in ten patients. This likely closely approximates the incidence of clinically significant lead migration owing to the included studies not routinely performing follow-up imaging. Therefore, lead migrations were primarily discovered owing to loss of efficacy, and no included studies clearly reported asymptomatic lead migration. The results of this meta-analysis can be used to inform patients more accurately on the risks and benefits of spinal cord stimulator implantation.

Indirect Comparison of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) versus Traditional Low-Frequency SCS for the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is increasingly used to treat painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). At the time of a recent meta-analysis in this field, data were only available from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of traditional low-frequency SCS (LF-SCS). However, outcomes from high-frequency 10 kHz SCS treatment are now available. Our study aimed to systematically review the contemporary evidence for SCS in patients with lower limb pain due to PDN and include an indirect comparison of the high- and low-frequency modalities. We searched the PubMed/CENTRAL databases up to 18 August 2022, for peer-reviewed RCTs of SCS that enrolled PDN patients with lower limb pain symptoms. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Using SCS treatment arm data from the RCTs, we indirectly compared the absolute treatment effect of 10 kHz SCS and LF-SCS. Results are presented in tables and forest plots. This systematic review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Three RCTs met our eligibility criteria, including the recent 10 kHz SCS RCT (N = 216, 90 implanted) and 2 others that examined LF-SCS (N = 36, 17 implanted; N = 60, 37 implanted). Our analysis of 6-month data found clinically meaningful pain relief with each SCS modality. However, significantly greater pain reduction was identified for 10 kHz SCS over LF-SCS: average pain reduction in the 10 kHz SCS cohort was 73.7% compared with 47.5% in the pooled LF-SCS group (p < 0.0001). In the permanent implant subset, the 50% pain reduction responder rate was 83.3% in the 10 kHz SCS cohort versus 63.0% in the pooled LF-SCS group (p = 0.0072). The overall risk of bias of each included RCT was deemed high, mainly due to the absence of patient blinding. Our analysis indicates that paresthesia-free 10 kHz SCS can provide superior pain relief and responder rate over LF-SCS for managing PDN patients refractory to conventional medical management.

High-Frequency 10-kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation Improves Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Refractory Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: 12-Month Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial

Objective

To evaluate high-frequency (10-kHz) spinal cord stimulation (SCS) treatment in refractory painful diabetic neuropathy.

Patients and Methods

A prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted between Aug 28, 2017 and March 16, 2021, comparing conventional medical management (CMM) with 10-kHz SCS+CMM. The participants had hemoglobin A1c level of less than or equal to 10% and pain greater than or equal to 5 of 10 cm on visual analog scale, with painful diabetic neuropathy symptoms 12 months or more refractory to gabapentinoids and at least 1 other analgesic class. Assessments included measures of pain, neurologic function, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) over 12 months with optional crossover at 6 months.

Results

The participants were randomized 1:1 to CMM (n=103) or 10-kHz SCS+CMM (n=113). At 6 months, 77 of 95 (81%) CMM group participants opted for crossover, whereas none of the 10-kHz SCS group participants did so. At 12 months, the mean pain relief from baseline among participants implanted with 10-kHz SCS was 74.3% (95% CI, 70.1-78.5), and 121 of 142 (85%) participants were treatment responders (≥50% pain relief). Treatment with 10-kHz SCS improved HRQoL, including a mean improvement in the EuroQol 5-dimensional questionnaire index score of 0.136 (95% CI, 0.104-0.169). The participants also reported significantly less pain interference with sleep, mood, and daily activities. At 12 months, 131 of 142 (92%) participants were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the 10-kHz SCS treatment.

Conclusion

The 10-kHz SCS treatment resulted in substantial pain relief and improvement in overall HRQoL 2.5- to 4.5-fold higher than the minimal clinically important difference. The outcomes were durable over 12 months and support 10-kHz SCS treatment in patients with refractory painful diabetic neuropathy.

Trial registration

clincaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03228420.

Pain Relief and Safety Outcomes with Cervical 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain in head, neck, shoulders and upper limbs is debilitating, and patients usually rely on pain medications or surgery to manage their symptoms. However, given the current opioid epidemic, non-pharmacological interventions that reduce pain, such as spinal cord stimulation (SCS), are needed. The purpose of this study was to review the evidence on paresthesia-free 10 kHz SCS therapy for neck and upper extremity pain.

METHODS

Systematic literature search was performed for studies reporting outcomes for cervical 10 kHz SCS using date limits from May 2008 to November 2020. The study results were analyzed and described qualitatively. Additionally, when feasible, meta-analyses of the outcome data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were conducted using both the fixed-effects (FE) and random-effects (RE) models.

RESULTS

A total of 15 studies were eligible for inclusion. The proportion of patients who achieved ≥ 50% pain reduction was 83% (95% CI 77-89%) in both the FE and RE models. The proportion of patients who reduced/eliminated their opioid consumption was 39% (95% CI 31-46%) in the FE model and 39% (95% CI 31-48%) in the RE model. Pain or discomfort with the implant, lead migration, and infections were potential risks following cervical SCS. Explant rate was 0.1 (95% CI 0.0-0.2) events per 100 person-months, and no patients in the included studies experienced a neurological complication or paresthesia.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest 10 kHz SCS is a promising, safe, minimally invasive alternative for managing chronic upper limb and neck pain.

Efficacy and Safety of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation Using Cervical and Thoracic Leads: A Single-Center Retrospective Experience

INTRODUCTION

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) with lower thoracic leads has been studied extensively. However, the evidence base for cervical SCS is less well developed, and reports of multiarea SCS lead placement are uncommon. Therefore, this single-center retrospective study evaluated outcomes from 10-kHz SCS with cervical or combined cervical and thoracic lead placement.

METHOD

All patients that underwent a 10-kHz SCS trial with either cervical or combined cervical and thoracic lead placement between 2015 and 2020 were included in our study. We reviewed patient's charts for demographic information, lead placement, and pain scores up to 48 months after implantation.

RESULTS

Of the 105 patients that underwent a 10-kHz SCS trial during the review period, 92 (88%) had back/neck or extremity pain that responded to therapy (≥ 50% pain relief from baseline) and received a permanent system. Sixty-two of these patients (67%) were implanted with combined cervical and thoracic leads, while 30 (33%) received cervical-only leads. Pain relief in both regions exceeded 60% at most visits throughout the 48-month study period. Throughout follow-up, the responder rate in both pain areas was consistently ≥ 70%. No unexpected adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

The 10-kHz SCS provided effective and durable pain relief with either cervical or combined cervical and thoracic leads. The efficacy and safety profile of both applications appears to be comparable to lower thoracic SCS. Our results suggest that 10-kHz SCS is a useful paresthesia-free therapeutic option for chronic neuropathic pain originating in the cervical area, as well as more complex multiarea pain presentations.

Management of Chronic and Neuropathic Pain with 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation Technology: Summary of Findings from Preclinical and Clinical Studies

Since the inception of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in 1967, the technology has evolved dramatically with important advancements in waveforms and frequencies. One such advancement is Nevro’s Senza^® SCS System for HF10, which received Food and Drug and Administration (FDA) approval in 2015. Low-frequency SCS works by activating large-diameter Aβ fibers in the lateral discriminatory pathway (pain location, intensity, quality) at the dorsal column (DC), creating paresthesia-based stimulation at lower-frequencies (30–120 Hz), high-amplitude (3.5–8.5 mA), and longer-duration/pulse-width (100–500 μs). In contrast, high-frequency 10 kHz SCS works with a proposed different mechanism of action that is paresthesia-free with programming at a frequency of 10,000 Hz, low amplitude (1–5 mA), and short-duration/pulse-width (30 μS). This stimulation pattern selectively activates inhibitory interneurons in the dorsal horn (DH) at low stimulation intensities, which do not activate the dorsal column fibers. This ostensibly leads to suppression of hyperexcitable wide dynamic range neurons (WDR), which are sensitized and hyperactive in chronic pain states. It has also been reported to act on the medial pathway (drives attention and pain perception), in addition to the lateral pathways. Other theories include a reversible depolarization blockade, desynchronization of neural signals, membrane integration, glial–neuronal interaction, and induced temporal summation. The body of clinical evidence regarding 10 kHz SCS treatment for chronic back pain and neuropathic pain continues to grow. There is high-quality evidence supporting its use in patients with persistent back and radicular pain, particularly after spinal surgery. High-frequency 10 kHz SCS studies have demonstrated robust statistically and clinically significant superiority in pain control, compared to paresthesia-based SCS, supported by level I clinical evidence. Yet, as the field continues to grow with the technological advancements of multiple waveforms and programming stimulation algorithms, we encourage further research to focus on the ability to modulate pain with precision and efficacy, as the field of neuromodulation continues to adapt to the modern healthcare era.

One-Year Results of Prospective Research Study Using 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation in Persistent Nonoperated Low Back Pain of Neuropathic Origin: Maiden Back Study

PURPOSE

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a recommended treatment for chronic neuropathic pain. Persistent nonoperative low back pain of neuropathic origin has profound negative impacts on patient's lives. This prospective, open label, research study aimed to explore the use of SCS in patients with associated features of central sensitisation such as allodynia and hyperalgesia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-one patients with back pain and hyperalgesia or allodynia who had not had prior spinal surgery underwent a SCS trial followed by full implantation. SCS comprised administering electrical impulses epidurally at a frequency of 10 kHz and pulse width of 30 μsec. Patients attended follow-up visits after 6 and 12 months of SCS. Repeated measure ANOVAs/Friedman tests explored change after 6 and 12 months of 10 kHz SCS. Independent sample t-tests/Mann-Whitney U tests examined differences in response after 12 months of 10 kHz SCS.

RESULTS

Back and leg pain, quality of life (QoL), pain-related disability, and morphine equivalence significantly improved compared with baseline following 6 and 12 months of 10 kHz SCS. There were no increases in the consumption of opioids, amitriptyline, gabapentin or pregabalin in any patient. After 12 months of treatment, 52% encountered ≥50% improvement in back pain, 44% achieved remission (0-3 cm back pain VAS), 40% reported ODI scores between 0 and 40 and 60% experienced a reduction of at least 10 ODI points. Patients reporting ≥10-point improvement in ODI had significantly longer pain history durations and experienced significantly greater improvements in back pain, leg pain and QoL than those reporting <10-point improvement in ODI.

CONCLUSION

The 10 kHz SCS improved back and leg pain, QoL, pain-related disability and medication consumption in patients with nonoperative back pain of neuropathic origin. With further research incorporating a sham control arm, the efficacy of 10 kHz SCS in this patient cohort will become more established.

Ten kilohertz SCS for Treatment of Chronic Upper Extremity Pain (UEP): Results from Prospective Observational Study

Background

Chronic upper extremity pain (UEP) has complex etiologies and is often disabling. It has been shown that 10 kHz SCS can provide paresthesia-free and durable pain relief in multiple pain types and improve the quality of life of patients.

Objective

To gain additional evidence on the safety and effectiveness of 10 kHz SCS for the treatment of chronic UEP.

Study Design

It was a prospective, multicenter, and observational study. The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov prospectively (clinical trial identifier: NCT02703818).

Setting

Multicenter.

Patients Intervention and Main Outcomes

A total of 43 subjects with chronic UEP of ≥5 cm (on a 0-10 cm visual analog scale; VAS) underwent a trial of 10 kHz SCS, and subjects with ≥40% pain relief received a permanent implant. All subjects had upper limb pain at baseline, while some had concomitant shoulder or neck pain. Subject outcomes were assessed for 12 months, and the primary outcome was the responder rate (percentage of subjects experiencing ≥50% pain relief from baseline) at three months.

Results

Thirty-eight subjects successfully completed the trial (88.3% success rate), 33 received permanent implants (five withdrew consent), and 32 had device activation (per protocol population). There were no paresthesias or uncomfortable changes in stimulation related to changes in posture during the study and there were no neurological deficits. Responder rates at 12 months for upper limb, shoulder, and neck pain in per protocol population (N=32) were 78.1%, 85.2%, and 75.0%, respectively. At 12 months, 84.4% of subjects were satisfied or very satisfied with 10 kHz SCS, and 38.7% either reduced or eliminated opioid usage.

Conclusion

This study further supports the effectiveness of 10 kHz SCS for chronic UEP treatment and documents the safety profile of the therapy.

Clinical Trial Identifier

NCT02703818.