Mode of action of spinal cord stimulation in neuropathic pain

The deep and the deeper: Spinal cord and deep brain stimulation for neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain occurs in people experiencing lesion or disease affecting the somatosensorial system. It is present in 7 % of the general population and may not fully respond to first- and second-line treatments in up to 40 % of cases. Neuromodulation approaches are often proposed for those not tolerating or not responding to usual pharmacological management. These approaches can be delivered surgically (invasively) or non-invasively. Invasive neuromodulation techniques were the first to be employed in neuropathic pain. Among them is spinal cord stimulation (SCS), which consists of the implantation of epidural electrodes over the spinal cord. It is recommended in some guidelines for peripheral neuropathic pain. While recent studies have called into question its efficacy, others have provided promising data, driven by advances in techniques, battery capabilities, programming algorithms and software developments. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is another well-stablished neuromodulation therapy routinely used for movement disorders; however, its role in pain management remains limited to specific research centers. This is not only due to variable results in the literature contesting its efficacy, but also because several different brain targets have been explored in small trials, compromising comparisons between these studies. Structures such as the periaqueductal grey, posterior thalamus, anterior cingulate cortex, ventral striatum/anterior limb of the internal capsule and the insula are the main targets described to date in literature. SCS and DBS present diverse rationales for use, mechanistic backgrounds, and varying levels of support from experimental studies. The present review aims to present their methodological details, main mechanisms of action for analgesia and their place in the current body of evidence in the management of patients with neuropathic pain, as well their particularities, effectiveness, safety and limitations.

Absence of paresthesia during high-rate spinal cord stimulation reveals importance of synchrony for sensations evoked by electrical stimulation

Electrically activating mechanoreceptive afferents inhibits pain. However, paresthesia evoked by spinal cord stimulation (SCS) at 40-60 Hz becomes uncomfortable at high pulse amplitudes, limiting SCS "dosage." Kilohertz-frequency SCS produces analgesia without paresthesia and is thought, therefore, not to activate afferent axons. We show that paresthesia is absent not because axons do not spike but because they spike asynchronously. In a pain patient, selectively increasing SCS frequency abolished paresthesia and epidurally recorded evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs). Dependence of ECAP amplitude on SCS frequency was reproduced in pigs, rats, and computer simulations and is explained by overdrive desynchronization: spikes desychronize when axons are stimulated faster than their refractory period. Unlike synchronous spikes, asynchronous spikes fail to produce paresthesia because their transmission to somatosensory cortex is blocked by feedforward inhibition. Our results demonstrate how stimulation frequency impacts synchrony based on axon properties and how synchrony impacts sensation based on circuit properties.

Kilohertz high-frequency electrical stimulation ameliorate hyperalgesia by modulating transient receptor potential vanilloid-1 and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor-2B signaling pathways in chronic constriction injury of sciatic nerve mice

The number of patients with neuropathic pain is increasing in recent years, but drug treatments for neuropathic pain have a low success rate and often come with significant side effects. Consequently, the development of innovative therapeutic strategies has become an urgent necessity. Kilohertz High Frequency Electrical Stimulation (KHES) offers pain relief without inducing paresthesia. However, the specific therapeutic effects of KHES on neuropathic pain and its underlying mechanisms remain ambiguous, warranting further investigation. In our previous study, we utilized the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database to identify datasets related to neuropathic pain mice. The majority of the identified pathways were found to be associated with inflammatory responses. From these pathways, we selected the transient receptor potential vanilloid-1 (TRPV1) and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor-2B (NMDAR2B) pathway for further exploration. Mice were randomly divided into four groups: a Sham group, a Sham/KHES group, a chronic constriction injury of the sciatic nerve (CCI) group, and a CCI/KHES stimulation group. KHES administered 30 min every day for 1 week. We evaluated the paw withdrawal threshold (PWT) and thermal withdrawal latency (TWL). The expression of TRPV1 and NMDAR2B in the spinal cord were analyzed using quantitative reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, Western blot, and immunofluorescence assay. KHES significantly alleviated the mechanical and thermal allodynia in neuropathic pain mice. KHES effectively suppressed the expression of TRPV1 and NMDAR2B, consequently inhibiting the activation of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and ionized calcium binding adapter molecule 1 (IBA1) in the spinal cord. The administration of the TRPV1 pathway activator partially reversed the antinociceptive effects of KHES, while the TRPV1 pathway inhibitor achieved analgesic effects similar to KHES. KHES inhibited the activation of spinal dorsal horn glial cells, especially astrocytes and microglia, by inhibiting the activation of the TRPV1/NMDAR2B signaling pathway, ultimately alleviating neuropathic pain.

Neurostimulation for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review of High-Quality Randomized Controlled Trials With Long-Term Follow-Up

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to review the best evidence on the long-term efficacy of neurostimulation for chronic pain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically reviewed PubMed, CENTRAL, and WikiStim for studies published between the inception of the data bases and July 21, 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a minimum of one-year follow-up that were of high methodologic quality as ascertained using the Delphi list criteria were included in the evidence synthesis. The primary outcome was long-term reduction in pain intensity, and the secondary outcomes were all other reported outcomes. Level of recommendation was graded from I to III, with level I being the highest level of recommendation.

RESULTS

Of the 7119 records screened, 24 RCTs were included in the evidence synthesis. Therapies with recommendations for their usage include pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) for postherpetic neuralgia, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for trigeminal neuralgia, motor cortex stimulation for neuropathic pain and poststroke pain, deep brain stimulation for cluster headache, sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation for cluster headache, occipital nerve stimulation for migraine, peripheral nerve field stimulation for back pain, and spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for back and leg pain, nonsurgical back pain, persistent spinal pain syndrome, and painful diabetic neuropathy. Closed-loop SCS is recommended over open-loop SCS for back and leg pain. SCS is recommended over PRF for postherpetic neuralgia. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation is recommended over SCS for complex regional pain syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

Neurostimulation is generally effective in the long term as an adjunctive treatment for chronic pain. Future studies should evaluate whether the multidisciplinary management of the physical perception of pain, affect, and social stressors is superior to their management alone.

Rates and Causes of Reoperations Following Spinal Cord Stimulation Within a 2-12 year Period

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

Spinal cord stimulation has been mainly used for the management of postsurgical persistent neuropathic. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the rate and causes for reoperation following spinal cord stimulation, and to identify risk factors for reoperation.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted including patients who underwent surgical implantation of spinal cord stimulators within a 10-year period. The medical records of the included patients were reviewed for reoperations, demographics and certain clinical parameters. Demographics and clinical parameters were compared between patients with and without reoperations, and between patients with and without surgical site infections.

RESULTS

Overall, 1014 index procedures and 175 reoperations were performed within the study period. At least 1 reoperation was performed in 97 (9.5%) cases. The most common cause for revision was lead migration or lead misplacement (n = 31, 3.0%). In 31 (3.1%) cases the stimulator was removed due to no pain relief. Surgical site infection that required reoperation developed in 30 cases (2.9%). Younger age was associated with a need for reoperation (Odds Ratio [OR]: .97,95% Confidence Interval [CI]:0.95-.99, P = .005), while higher Body Mass index and diabetes were associated with development of infection (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.00-1.11, P = .036 and OR: 2.42, 95% CI: 1.05-5.47, P = .033 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study indicate that certain measures could improve the overall reoperation rate after spinal cord stimulation, such as accurate positioning of the spinal cord stimulators and design of smaller generators. Moreover, preoperative optimization of patients could result in lower complication rate, lower reoperations rate, and subsequently better clinical outcomes.

Spinal stimulation for motor rehabilitation immediately modulates nociceptive transmission

Objective. Spinal cord injury (SCI) often results in debilitating movement impairments and neuropathic pain. Electrical stimulation of spinal neurons holds considerable promise both for enhancing neural transmission in weakened motor pathways and for reducing neural transmission in overactive nociceptive pathways. However, spinal stimulation paradigms currently under development for individuals living with SCI continue overwhelmingly to be developed in the context of motor rehabilitation alone. The objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that motor-targeted spinal stimulation simultaneously modulates spinal nociceptive transmission.Approach. We characterized the neuromodulatory actions of motor-targeted intraspinal microstimulation (ISMS) on the firing dynamics of large populations of discrete nociceptive specific and wide dynamic range (WDR) neurons. Neurons were accessed via dense microelectrode arrays implantedin vivointo lumbar enlargement of rats. Nociceptive and non-nociceptive cutaneous transmission was induced before, during, and after ISMS by mechanically probing the L5 dermatome.Main results. Our primary findings are that (a) sub-motor threshold ISMS delivered to spinal motor pools immediately modulates concurrent nociceptive transmission; (b) the magnitude of anti-nociceptive effects increases with longer durations of ISMS, including robust carryover effects; (c) the majority of all identified nociceptive-specific and WDR neurons exhibit firing rate reductions after only 10 min of ISMS; and (d) ISMS does not increase spinal responsiveness to non-nociceptive cutaneous transmission. These results lead to the conclusion that ISMS parameterized to enhance motor output results in an overall net decrease n spinal nociceptive transmission.Significance. These results suggest that ISMS may hold translational potential for neuropathic pain-related applications and that it may be uniquely suited to delivering multi-modal therapeutic benefits for individuals living with SCI.

Alterations in local activity and functional connectivity in patients with postherpetic neuralgia after short-term spinal cord stimulation

Introduction

The efficacy of short-term spinal cord stimulation (stSCS) as a treatment for neuropathic pain in patients with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) has already been validated. However, the potential alterations in brain functionality that are induced by such treatment have yet to be completely elucidated.

Methods

This study use resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) to detect the changes in regional homogeneity (ReHo) and degree centrality (DC) related to stimulator-induced pain relief in patients with PHN. A total of 10 patients with PHN underwent an MRI protocol at baseline and after stSCS. Alterations in ReHo and DC were then compared between baseline and after stSCS. We investigated the relationship between clinical parameters and functional changes in the brain.

Results

Clinical parameters on pain, emotion, and sleep quality were correlated with ReHo and DC. ReHo and DC were significantly altered in the middle temporal gyrus, precuneus, superior frontal gyrus, supramarginal gyrus, inferior parietal lobule, rolandic operculum, middle occipital gyrus, superior parietal gyrus, and the precentral gyrus after stSCS. A significant correlation was detected between ReHo changes in the middle occipital gyrus, precuneus, inferior parietal gyrus, and changes in pain, emotion, and sleep quality. A significant negative correlation was detected between DC changes in the middle temporal gyrus, rolandic operculum, supramarginal gyrus, precuneus, inferior parietal gyrus, and changes in pain, emotion, and sleep quality.

Conclusion

This study found that stSCS is able to induce ReHo and DC changes in patients with PHN, thus suggesting that stSCS can change brain function to alleviate pain, sleep, and emotional disorder.

Spinal cord bioelectronic interfaces: opportunities in neural recording and clinical challenges

Bioelectronic stimulation of the spinal cord has demonstrated significant progress in restoration of motor function in spinal cord injury (SCI). The proximal, uninjured spinal cord presents a viable target for the recording and generation of control signals to drive targeted stimulation. Signals have been directly recorded from the spinal cord in behaving animals and correlated with limb kinematics. Advances in flexible materials, electrode impedance and signal analysis will allow SCR to be used in next-generation neuroprosthetics. In this review, we summarize the technological advances enabling progress in SCR and describe systematically the clinical challenges facing spinal cord bioelectronic interfaces and potential solutions, from device manufacture, surgical implantation to chronic effects of foreign body reaction and stress-strain mismatches between electrodes and neural tissue. Finally, we establish our vision of bi-directional closed-loop spinal cord bioelectronic bypass interfaces that enable the communication of disrupted sensory signals and restoration of motor function in SCI.

Dorsal Column and Root Stimulation at Aβ-fiber Intensity Activate Superficial Dorsal Horn Glutamatergic and GABAergic Populations

Neurostimulation therapies are frequently used in patients with chronic pain conditions. They emerged from Gate Control Theory (GCT), which posits that Aβ-fiber activation recruits superficial dorsal horn (SDH) inhibitory networks to “close the gate” on nociceptive transmission, resulting in pain relief. However, the efficacy of current therapies is limited, and the underlying circuits remain poorly understood. For example, it remains unknown whether ongoing stimulation of Aβ-fibers is sufficient to drive activity in SDH neurons. We used multiphoton microscopy in spinal cords extracted from mice expressing the genetically encoded calcium indicator GCaMP6s in glutamatergic and GABAergic populations; activity levels were inferred from deconvolved calcium signals using CaImAn software. Sustained Aβ-fiber stimulation at the dorsal columns or dorsal roots drove robust yet transient activation of both SDH populations. Following the initial increase, activity levels decreased below baseline in glutamatergic neurons and were depressed after stimulation ceased in both populations. Surprisingly, only about half of GABAergic neurons responded to Aβ-fiber stimulation. This subset showed elevated activity for the entire duration of stimulation, while non-responders decreased with time. Our findings suggest that Aβ-fiber stimulation initially recruits both excitatory and inhibitory populations but has divergent effects on their activity, providing a foundation for understanding the analgesic effects of neurostimulation devices.

Perspective: This article used microscopy to characterize the responses of mouse spinal cord cells to stimulation of non-painful nerve fibers. These findings deepen our understanding of how the spinal cord processes information and provide a foundation for improving pain-relieving therapies.

Dorsal root ganglion stimulation of injured sensory neurons in rats rapidly eliminates their spontaneous activity and relieves spontaneous pain

ABSTRACT

Dorsal root ganglion field stimulation (GFS) relieves evoked and spontaneous neuropathic pain by use-dependent blockade of impulse trains through the sensory neuron T-junction, which becomes complete within less than 1 minute for C-type units, also with partial blockade of Aδ units. We used this tool in the spinal nerve ligation (SNL) rat model to selectively block sensory neuron spontaneous activity (SA) of axotomized neurons at the fifth lumbar (L5) level vs blockade of units at the L4 level that remain uninjured but exposed to inflammation. In vivo dorsal root single-unit recordings after SNL showed increased SA in L5 units but not L4 units. Ganglion field stimulation blocked this SA. Ganglion field stimulation delivered at the L5 dorsal root ganglion blocked mechanical hyperalgesia behavior, mechanical allodynia, and ongoing spontaneous pain indicated by conditioned place preference, whereas GFS at L4 blocked evoked pain behavior but not spontaneous pain. In vivo single-unit recordings of spinal cord dorsal horn (DH) wide-dynamic-range neurons showed elevated SA after SNL, which was reduced by GFS at the L5 level but not by GFS at the L4 level. In addition, L5 GFS, but not L4 GFS, increased mechanical threshold of DH units during cutaneous mechanical stimulation, while L5 GFS exceeded L4 GFS in reducing evoked firing rates. Our results indicate that SA in injured neurons supports increased firing of DH wide-dynamic-range neurons, contributing to hyperalgesia, allodynia, and ongoing pain. Ganglion field stimulation analgesic effects after nerve injury are at least partly attributable to blocking propagation of this SA.

Spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used for more than 40years to treat localized chronic medically refractory neuropathic pain involving limb(s) and trunk. The most frequent indications remain complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), and peripheral neuropathy. Stimulation-induced paresthesias, perceived by the patient, prevent blinded evaluation and increase the placebo effect, decreasing the credibility of the tonic SCS efficacy. Retrospective studies reported that about 50% of the patients are improved more than 50% at short-term, but long-term improvement is less. Several comparative randomized trials (RCT) are now available. In CRPS, a RCT demonstrated the superiority of SCS plus physiotherapy compared to physiotherapy alone. In FBSS, two RCTs have shown that SCS was superior to reoperation and conventional medical treatment, (CMM) respectively. New stimulation waveforms, namely burst, high frequency (10KHz) stimulation and close-loop SCS, have been proposed recently to avoid the perception of paresthesias and/or increase the pain relief. RCTs in FBSS have suggested that these new SCS modalities were as least as efficient than conventional tonic SCS and perhaps slightly superior. Two RCTs confirmed SCS efficacy in painful diabetic neuropathy in comparison with CMM. Complications are frequent (hardware dysfunction or migration, superficial infection) but exceptionally serious. Consequently, the risk/benefit ratio is favorable to SCS, considering that chronic pain patients undergoing this procedure are usually resistant to all the other therapies.

Electrical epidural stimulation of the cervical spinal cord: implications for spinal respiratory neuroplasticity after spinal cord injury

Traumatic cervical spinal cord injury (cSCI) can lead to damage of bulbospinal pathways to the respiratory motor nuclei and consequent life-threatening respiratory insufficiency due to respiratory muscle paralysis/paresis. Reports of electrical epidural stimulation (EES) of the lumbosacral spinal cord to enable locomotor function after SCI are encouraging, with some evidence of facilitating neural plasticity. Here, we detail the development and success of EES in recovering locomotor function, with consideration of stimulation parameters and safety measures to develop effective EES protocols. EES is just beginning to be applied in other motor, sensory, and autonomic systems; however, there has only been moderate success in preclinical studies aimed at improving breathing function after cSCI. Thus, we explore the rationale for applying EES to the cervical spinal cord, targeting the phrenic motor nucleus for the restoration of breathing. We also suggest cellular/molecular mechanisms by which EES may induce respiratory plasticity, including a brief examination of sex-related differences in these mechanisms. Finally, we suggest that more attention be paid to the effects of specific electrical parameters that have been used in the development of EES protocols and how that can impact the safety and efficacy for those receiving this therapy. Ultimately, we aim to inform readers about the potential benefits of EES in the phrenic motor system and encourage future studies in this area.

Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potentials in Spinal Cord Stimulation: Implications for Preclinical Research Models

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to assess the feasibility of recording electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) from the rat spinal cord. To achieve this, we characterized electrophysiological responses of dorsal column (DC) axons from electrical stimulation and quantified the relationship between ECAP and motor thresholds (ECAPTs and MTs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Naïve, anesthetized and freely behaving rats were implanted with a custom-made epidural spinal cord stimulation (SCS) lead. Epidural stimulation and recordings were performed on the same lead using specifically designed equipment.

RESULTS

The ECAPs recorded from the rat spinal cord demonstrated the expected triphasic morphology. Using 20 μsec pulse duration and 2 Hz frequency rate, the current required in anesthetized rats to generate ECAPs was 0.13 ± 0.02 mA, while the average current required to observe MT was 1.49 ± 0.14 mA. In unanesthetized rats, the average current required to generate ECAPs was 0.09 ± 0.02 mA, while the average current required to observe MT was 0.27 ± 0.04 mA. Thus, there was a significant difference between the ECAPT and MT in both anesthetized and unanesthetized rats (MT was 13.39 ± 2.40 and 2.84 ± 0.33 times higher than ECAPT, respectively). Signal analysis revealed average conduction velocities (CVs) suggesting that predominantly large, myelinated fibers were activated. In addition, a morphometric evaluation of spinal cord slices indicated that the custom-made lead may preferentially activate DC axons.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first evidence demonstrating the feasibility of recording ECAPs from the rat spinal cord, which may be more useful in determining parameters of SCS in preclinical SCS models than MTs. Thus, this approach may allow for the development of a novel model of SCS in rats with chronic pain that will translate better between animals and humans.

Overview of HF10 spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of chronic pain and an introduction to the Senza Omnia™ system

Chronic intractable pain affects a significant percentage of the worldwide population, and it is one of the most disabling and expensive health conditions across the globe. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used to treat chronic pain for a number of years, but high-frequency SCS was not the US FDA approved until 2015. In this review, we describe the history and development of high-frequency SCS and discuss the benefits of the Omnia™ implantable pulse generator. We also provide a thorough literature review of the published work, highlighting the efficacy and safety profiles of high-frequency SCS for the treatment of multiple chronic pain conditions. Lastly, we offer our outlook on future developments with the Omnia SCS system.

History of and Insights Into Spinal Cord Stimulation in Parkinson Disease

BACKGROUND

Current available therapies for Parkinson disease (PD) have strong limitations, and patients usually present with refractory symptoms despite all efforts. Deep brain stimulation (DBS), which has been used in PD patients for decades (since 1987), has best indications for symptoms like tremor, motor fluctuations, or dyskinesia. However, postural instability and gait disturbances (PIGD) have restricted benefits with DBS. In 2009, spinal cord stimulation (SCS), a well-established therapy for chronic pain, has emerged as a potential alternative therapy that may help control unresponsive symptoms such as bradykinesia, PIGD, and freezing of gait.

METHODS

The main studies regarding SCS in PD are reviewed here from the first studies in animal models to the latest clinical trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite promising findings, the heterogeneity of methodologies used and small samples in human studies pose a challenging problem to be addressed in order to have robust clinical evidence to support SCS as a viable PD treatment.

Spinal Cord Stimulation Enhances Microglial Activation in the Spinal Cord of Nerve-Injured Rats

Microglia can modulate spinal nociceptive transmission. Yet, their role in spinal cord stimulation (SCS)-induced pain inhibition is unclear. Here, we examined how SCS affects microglial activation in the lumbar cord of rats with chronic constriction injury (CCI) of the sciatic nerve. Male rats received conventional SCS (50 Hz, 80% motor threshold, 180 min, 2 sessions/day) or sham stimulation on days 18-20 post-CCI. SCS transiently attenuated the mechanical hypersensitivity in the ipsilateral hind paw and increased OX-42 immunoreactivity in the bilateral dorsal horns. SCS also upregulated the mRNAs of M1-like markers, but not M2-like markers. Inducible NOS protein expression was increased, but brain-derived neurotrophic factor was decreased after SCS. Intrathecal minocycline (1 μg-100 μg), which inhibits microglial activation, dose-dependently attenuated the mechanical hypersensitivity. Pretreatment with low-dose minocycline (1 μg, 30 min) prolonged the SCS-induced pain inhibition. These findings suggest that conventional SCS may paradoxically increase spinal M1-like microglial activity and thereby compromise its own ability to inhibit pain.

Unique Characteristics of the Dorsal Root Ganglion as a Target for Neuromodulation

Objective

The dorsal root ganglion (DRG) is a novel target for neuromodulation, and DRG stimulation is proving to be a viable option in the treatment of chronic intractable neuropathic pain. Although the overall principle of conventional spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and DRG stimulation—in which an electric field is applied to a neural target with the intent of affecting neural pathways to decrease pain perception—is similar, there are significant differences in the anatomy and physiology of the DRG that make it an ideal target for neuromodulation and may account for the superior outcomes observed in the treatment of certain chronic neuropathic pain states. This review highlights the anatomy of the DRG, its function in maintaining homeostasis and its role in neuropathic pain, and the unique value of DRG as a target in neuromodulation for pain.

Methods

A narrative literature review was performed.

Results

Overall, the DRG is a critical structure in sensory transduction and modulation, including pain transmission and the maintenance of persistent neuropathic pain states. Unique characteristics including selective somatic organization, specialized membrane characteristics, and accessible and consistent location make the DRG an ideal target for neuromodulation. Because DRG stimulation directly recruits the somata of primary sensory neurons and harnesses the filtering capacity of the pseudounipolar neural architecture, it is differentiated from SCS, peripheral nerve stimulation, and other neuromodulation options.

Conclusions

There are several advantages to targeting the DRG, including lower energy usage, more focused and posture-independent stimulation, reduced paresthesia, and improved clinical outcomes.

Neurostimulation methods in the treatment of chronic pain

The goal of this narrative review was to give an up-to-date overview of the peripheral and central neurostimulation methods that can be used to treat chronic pain. Special focus has been given to three pain conditions: neuropathic pain, nociplastic pain and primary headaches. Both non-invasive and invasive techniques are briefly presented together with their pain relief potentials. For non-invasive stimulation techniques, data concerning transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) and vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) are provided. Concerning invasive stimulation techniques, occipital nerve stimulation (ONS), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), epidural motor cortex stimulation (EMCS), spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) are presented. The action mode of all these techniques is only partly understood but can be very different from one technique to the other. Patients' selection is still a challenge. Recent consensus-based guidelines for clinical practice are presented when available. The development of closed-loop devices could be of interest in the future, although the clinical benefit over open loop is not proven yet.

Selective relay of afferent sensory-induced action potentials from peripheral nerve to brain and the effects of electrical stimulation

Electrical stimulation of peripheral nerve fibers and dorsal column fibers is used to treat acute and chronic pain. Recent studies have shown that sensitized A-fibers maybe involved in the relay of pain information. These nerve fibers also carry sensory-induced action potentials (APs), such as proprioception, mechanoreception, etc. Electrical stimulation of these nerve fibers can result in interactions between sensory-induced APs and stimulation-induced APs. For example, the sensory-induced APs can collide with stimulus APs, and thus may never be relayed to the brain. In this study, we aimed to quantify the effects of stimulation frequency on these interactions. Specifically, we focused on the goal of stimulation to simultaneously (i) block noxious sensory signals while (ii) relaying innocuous sensory signals from the periphery to the brain via a myelinated nerve fiber. We defined a performance metric called the "selective relay $(SR)$ " measure. Specifically, we constructed a tractable model of a nerve fiber that receives two inputs: the underlying sensory activity at the bottom of the fiber (noxious or innocuous), and the external stimulus applied to the middle of the fiber. We then defined relay reliability, $R$, as the percentage of sensory APs that make it to the top of the fiber. $SR$ is then a product of relaying innocuous sensory information while blocking noxious pain stimuli, i.e., $SR=R_{\mathrm {s}\mathrm {e}\mathrm {n}}(1-R_{\mathrm {p}\mathrm {a}\mathrm {i}\mathrm {n}})$. We applied the two inputs to the fiber at various frequencies and analyzed relay reliability and then we studied selective relay assuming noxious and innocuous stimuli produce APs with distinct frequencies. We found that frequency stimulation between 50-100Hz effectively blocks relay of low-frequency pain signals, allowing mid-to-high frequency sensory signals to transmit to the brain.

Assessment of axonal recruitment using model-guided preclinical spinal cord stimulation in the ex vivo adult mouse spinal cord

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used clinically to limit chronic pain, but fundamental questions remain on the identity of axonal populations recruited. We developed an ex vivo adult mouse spinal cord preparation to assess recruitment following delivery of clinically analogous stimuli determined by downscaling a finite element model of clinical SCS. Analogous electric field distributions were generated with 300-µm × 300-µm electrodes positioned 200 µm above the dorsal column (DC) with stimulation between 50 and 200 µA. We compared axonal recruitment using electrodes of comparable size and stimulus amplitudes when contacting the caudal thoracic DC and at 200 or 600 μm above. Antidromic responses recorded distally from the DC, the adjacent Lissauer tract (LT), and in dorsal roots (DRs) were found to be amplitude and site dependent. Responses in the DC included a unique component not seen in DRs, having the lowest SCS recruitment amplitude and fastest conduction velocity. At 200 μm above, mean cathodic SCS recruitment threshold for axons in DRs and LT were 2.6 and 4.4 times higher, respectively, than DC threshold. SCS recruited primary afferents in all (up to 8) caudal segments sampled. Whereas A and C fibers could be recruited at nearby segments, only A fiber recruitment and synaptically mediated dorsal root reflexes were observed in more distant (lumbar) segments. In sum, clinically analogous SCS led to multisegmental recruitment of several somatosensory-encoding axonal populations. Most striking is the possibility that the lowest threshold recruitment of a nonprimary afferent population in the DC are postsynaptic dorsal column tract cells (PSDCs) projecting to gracile nuclei.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used clinically to control pain. To identify axonal populations recruited, finite element modeling identified scaling parameters to deliver clinically analogous SCS in an ex vivo adult mouse spinal cord preparation. Results showed that SCS first recruited an axonal population in the dorsal column at a threshold severalfold lower than primary afferents. These putative postsynaptic dorsal column tract cells may represent a previously unconsidered population responsible for SCS-induced paresthesias necessary for analgesia.

Modulation of Spinal Nociceptive Transmission by Sub-Sensory Threshold Spinal Cord Stimulation in Rats After Nerve Injury

OBJECTIVES

High-frequency spinal cord stimulation (SCS) administered below the sensory threshold (subparesthetic) can inhibit pain, but the mechanisms remain obscure. We examined how different SCS paradigms applied at intensities below the threshold of Aβ-fiber activation (sub-sensory threshold) affect spinal nociceptive transmission in rats after an L5 spinal nerve ligation (SNL).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electrophysiology was used to record local field potential (LFP) at L4 spinal cord before, during, and 0-60 min after SCS in SNL rats. LFP was evoked by high-intensity paired-pulse test stimulation (5 mA, 0.2 msec, 400 msec interval) at the sciatic nerve. Epidural SCS was delivered through a miniature electrode placed at T13-L1 and L2-L3 spinal levels. Four patterns of SCS (200 Hz, 1 msec; 500 Hz, 0.5 msec; 1200 Hz; 0.2 msec; 10,000 Hz, 0.024 msec, 30 min, bipolar) were tested at 90% Aβ-threshold as a subthreshold intensity. As a positive control, traditional SCS (50 Hz, 0.2 msec) was tested at 100% Aβ-plateau as a suprathreshold intensity.

RESULTS

Traditional suprathreshold SCS at T13-L1 level significantly reduced LFP to C-fiber inputs (C-LFP). Subthreshold SCS of 200 and 500 Hz, but not 1200 or 10,000 Hz, also reduced C-LFP, albeit to a lesser extent than did traditional SCS (n = 7-10/group). When SCS was applied at the L2-L3 level, only traditional SCS and subthreshold SCS of 200 Hz inhibited C-LFP (n = 8-10/group).

CONCLUSIONS

Traditional suprathreshold SCS acutely inhibits spinal nociceptive transmission. Low-frequency subthreshold SCS with a long pulse width (200 Hz, 1 msec), but not higher-frequency SCS, also attenuates C-LFP.

Spinal cord stimulator education during pain fellowship: unmet training needs and factors that impact future practice

Background and objectives

With a growing need for non-opioid chronic pain treatments, pain physicians should understand the proper utilization of neuromodulation therapies to provide the most comprehensive care. We aimed to identify the unmet training needs that deter physicians from using spinal cord stimulation (SCS) devices.

Methods

Internet-based surveys were fielded to fellows enrolled in pain fellowships during the 2016–2017 academic year accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and past pain fellows identified through pain medicine societies and SCS manufacturers.

Results

Current fellows were more likely to have received SCS training during fellowship compared with past fellows (100.0% vs 84.0%), yet there was variability in fellows’ SCS experiences with a wide range of trials and implants performed. Forty-six percent of current fellows felt there was an unmet training need regarding SCS. Deficiency in SCS case volume was the most common barrier that was noted (38.5%), followed by lack of SCS curriculum (30.8%) and lack of faculty with SCS expertise (23.1%). Lack of training was a predominant reason for past fellows choosing not to use SCS devices postfellowship. The majority of current and past fellows (79.5% and 55.4%, respectively) strongly supported direct training of fellows by SCS manufacturers.

Conclusions

While SCS training during pain fellowship has become more universal, the experiences that fellows receive are highly variable, and most rely on industry-sponsored programs to supplement training deficiencies. Standardization of SCS procedures may also enable less experienced providers to navigate the SCS treatment algorithm.

Advanced methods of spinal stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain: pulse trains, waveforms, frequencies, targets, and feedback loops

INTRODUCTION

Spinal cord stimulation has emerged as a state-of-the-art evidence-based treatment for chronic neuropathic pain and mixed nociceptive-neuropathic pain. In recent years, several newer devices and treatment algorithms have provided unique and effective ways of treating chronic pain by spinal cord stimulation. In a previous review, the authors commented on the 5-year forecast for high frequency and Burst waveforms, as the only two paresthesia independent SCS strategies. Over the last 5 years, there has been considerable addition to the outcome data related to these modalities. Additionally, new treatment algorithms and modalities for spinal cord stimulation have emerged. In this review, the authors provide an up to date summary of these modalities of treatment, indications, and evidence on all different modalities and programming paradigms that are available today.

AREAS COVERED

A literature review was performed using key bibliographic databases to find outcomes related studies pertaining to spinal cord stimulation, limited to the English language and human data, between 2010 and 2018. The literature search yielded the following based on our inclusion criteria; six articles on burst stimulation, three articled on high density/high dose stimulation, six articles on Dorsal Root Ganglion stimulation, nine articles on high-frequency stimulation, and one article on closed-loop stimulation. We have also included in the discussion some smaller and anecdotal studies.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

The evidence to support outcomes of spinal cord stimulation has evolved considerably since our last review in 2014. New targets, frequencies and pulse trains, and feedback appear to have advanced the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation. Future developments aim to continue to refine patient selection and maintenance of patients in therapy.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Pain Treatment After Spinal Cord Injury

In addition to restoration of bladder, bowel, and motor functions, alleviating the accompanying debilitating pain is equally important for improving the quality of life of patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). Currently, however, the treatment of chronic pain after SCI remains a largely unmet need. Electrical spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used to manage a variety of chronic pain conditions that are refractory to pharmacotherapy. Yet, its efficacy, benefit profiles, and mechanisms of action in SCI pain remain elusive, due to limited research, methodological weaknesses in previous clinical studies, and a lack of mechanistic exploration of SCS for SCI pain control. We aim to review recent studies and outline the therapeutic potential of different SCS paradigms for traumatic SCI pain. We begin with an overview of its manifestations, classification, potential underlying etiology, and current challenges for its treatment. The clinical evidence for using SCS in SCI pain is then reviewed. Finally, future perspectives of pre-clinical research and clinical study of SCS for SCI pain treatment are discussed.

Mechanisms of spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of pain: Still in the dark after 50 years

Background and Objective

Despite the value of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in treating some patients with focal neuropathic pain, technological advances in stimulator design and treatment protocols have not correlated with significant improvements in clinical outcomes. This may be because incomplete understanding of the mechanisms underlying SCS precludes improvement in clinical efficacy. In this brief review, we (a) review phenomenological effects of SCS, (b) review the literature on proposed spinal sites of action of SCS and (c) propose a novel hypothesis of mechanism of action.

Results

Dorsal columns, dorsal roots and dorsal horns have each been proposed as spinal sites of action of SCS. We suggest that evidence in favour of the dorsal columns or dorsal roots as the primary mediators of SCS is weak and propose that the dorsal horn is the crucial site of action. Furthermore, we hypothesize that, based on their location, and neurochemical and morphological properties, dorsal horn islet cells may mediate the effects of SCS.

Conclusions

The precise spinal mechanisms of action of SCS are still unknown. Dorsal horn islet cells have properties that position them to play a key role in analgesic effects of electrical stimulation. Understanding the mechanisms responsible for positive SCS effects are needed for successful translation into clinical dividends.

Significance

We review possible spinal mechanisms of action of spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain, proposing that direct modulation of dorsal horn neurons is crucial. We suggest that mechanistic insights are needed for translation into more favourable clinical outcomes.

Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation in Peripherally Injured Chronic Neuropathic Rats: A Delayed Effect

OBJECTIVE

Two well-known spinal cord stimulation (SCS) paradigms, conventional (Con) and burst SCS, are hypothesized to exert their antinociceptive effects through different stimulation-induced mechanisms. We studied the course of the behavioral antinociceptive effect during 60 minutes of SCS and 30 minutes post-SCS in a rat model of chronic neuropathic pain.

METHODS

Animals underwent a unilateral partial sciatic nerve ligation, after which quadripolar electrodes were implanted into the epidural space at vertebral level T13 (n = 43 rats). While receiving either Con SCS or biphasic burst SCS, the pain behavior of the rats was assessed by means of paw withdrawal thresholds (WTs) in response to the application of von Frey monofilaments.

RESULTS

After 15 minutes of Con SCS (n = 21), WTs significantly differed from baseline (P = 0.04), whereas WTs of the burst SCS group (n = 22) did not. After 30 minutes of SCS, WTs of the Con SCS and burst SCS groups reached similar levels, both significantly different from baseline, indicating a comparable antinociceptive effect for these SCS paradigms. Yet, the WTs of the burst SCS group were still significantly increased compared with baseline at 30 minutes post-stimulation, whereas the WTs of the Con SCS group were not.

CONCLUSIONS

To conclude, biphasic burst SCS results in a delayed antinociceptive effect after onset of the stimulation, as compared with Con SCS, in a chronic neuropathic pain model. Furthermore, biphasic burst SCS seems to exhibit a delayed wash-out of analgesia after stimulation is turned off.

Etiology, Evaluation, and Treatment of Failed Back Surgery Syndrome

The study aimed to review the etiology of failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and to propose a treatment algorithm based on a systematic review of the current literature and individual experience. FBSS is a term that groups the conditions with recurring low back pain after spine surgery with or without a radicular component. Since the information on FBSS incidence is limited, data needs to be retrieved from old studies. It is generally accepted that its incidence ranges between 10% and 40% after lumbar laminectomy with or without fusion. Although the etiology of FBSS is not completely understood, it is possibly multifactorial, and the causative factors may be categorized into preoperative, operative, and postoperative factors. The evaluation of patients with FBSS symptoms should ideally initiate with reviewing the patients’ clinical history (observing “red flags”), followed by a detailed clinical examination and imaging (whole-body X-ray, magnetic resonance imaging, and computed tomography). FBSS is a complex and difficult pathology, and its accurate diagnosis is of utmost importance. Its management should be multidisciplinary, and special attention should be provided to cases of recurrent disc herniation and postoperative spinal imbalance.

Spinal Cord Stimulation: Clinical Efficacy and Potential Mechanisms

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a minimally invasive therapy used for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. SCS is a safe and effective alternative to medications such as opioids, and multiple randomized controlled studies have demonstrated efficacy for difficult-to-treat neuropathic conditions such as failed back surgery syndrome. Conventional SCS is believed mediate pain relief via activation of dorsal column Aβ fibers, resulting in variable effects on sensory and pain thresholds, and measurable alterations in higher order cortical processing. Although potentiation of inhibition, as suggested by Wall and Melzack's gate control theory, continues to be the leading explanatory model, other segmental and supraspinal mechanisms have been described. Novel, non-standard, stimulation waveforms such as high-frequency and burst have been shown in some studies to be clinically superior to conventional SCS, however their mechanisms of action remain to be determined. Additional studies are needed, both mechanistic and clinical, to better understand optimal stimulation strategies for different neuropathic conditions, improve patient selection and optimize efficacy.

Spinal Cord Stimulation Modulates Gene Expression in the Spinal Cord of an Animal Model of Peripheral Nerve Injury

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Previously, we found that application of pulsed radiofrequency to a peripheral nerve injury induces changes in key genes regulating nociception concurrent with alleviation of paw sensitivity in an animal model. In the current study, we evaluated such genes after applying spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapy.

METHODS

Male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 6 per group) were randomized into test and control groups. The spared nerve injury model was used to simulate a neuropathic pain state. A 4-contact microelectrode was implanted at the L1 vertebral level and SCS was applied continuously for 72 hours. Mechanical hyperalgesia was tested. Spinal cord tissues were collected and analyzed using real-time polymerase chain reaction to quantify levels of IL1β, GABAbr1, subP, Na/K ATPase, cFos, 5HT3ra, TNFα, Gal, VIP, NpY, IL6, GFAP, ITGAM, and BDNF.

RESULTS

Paw withdrawal thresholds significantly decreased in spared nerve injury animals and stimulation attenuated sensitivity within 24 hours (P = 0.049), remaining significant through 72 hours (P = 0.003). Nerve injury caused up-regulation of TNFα, GFAP, ITGAM, and cFOS as well as down-regulation of Na/K ATPase. Spinal cord stimulation therapy modulated the expression of 5HT3ra, cFOS, and GABAbr1. Strong inverse relationships in gene expression relative to the amount of applied current were observed for GABAbr1 (R = -0.65) and Na/K ATPase (R = -0.58), and a positive linear correlations between 5HT3r (R = 0.80) and VIP (R = 0.50) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuously applied SCS modulates expression of key genes involved in the regulation of neuronal membrane potential.

Differential expression of voltage-gated sodium channels in afferent neurons renders selective neural block by ionic direct current

The assertion that large-diameter nerve fibers have low thresholds and small-diameter fibers have high thresholds in response to electrical stimulation has been held in a nearly axiomatic regard in the field of neuromodulation and neuroprosthetics. In contrast to the short pulses used to evoke action potentials, long-duration ionic direct current has been shown to block neural activity. We propose that the main determinant of the neural sensitivity to direct current block is not the size of the axon but the types of voltage-gated sodium channels prevalent in its neural membrane. On the basis of the variants of voltage-gated sodium channels expressed in different types of neurons in the peripheral nerves, we hypothesized that the small-diameter nociceptive fibers could be preferentially blocked. We show the results of a computational model and in vivo neurophysiology experiments that offer experimental validation of this novel phenomenon.

Electronics for a Safe Direct Current Stimulator

Commercially available neuroprostheses, while successful and effective, are limited in their functionality by their reliance on pulsatile stimulation. Direct current (DC) has been shown to have great potential for the purposes of neuromodulation; however, direct current cannot be applied directly to neurons due to the charge injection thresholds of electrodes. We are developing a Safe Direct Current Stimulator (SDCS) that applies ionic direct current (iDC) without inducing toxic electrochemical reactions. The current design of the SDCS uses a series of eight valves in conjunction with four electrodes to rectify ionic current in microfluidic channels. This paper outlines the design, implementation, and testing of the electronics of the SDCS. These electronics will ultimately be interfaced with a separate microfluidic circuit in the device prototype. Testing the outputs of the electronics confirmed adherence to its design requirements. The completion of the SDCS electronics enables the further development of iDC as a mechanism for neuromodulation.

Burst and high frequency stimulation: underlying mechanism of action

INTRODUCTION

Paresthesia-free spinal cord stimulation (SCS) techniques, such as burst and high-frequency (HF) SCS, have been developed and demonstrated to be successful for treating chronic pain, albeit via different mechanisms of action. The goal of this review is to discuss the mechanisms of action for pain suppression at both the cellular and systems levels for burst and HF SCS. In addition, we also discuss the neuromodulation devices that mimic these paradigms.

AREAS COVERED

The authors performed a literature review to unravel the mechanisms of action for burst and HF SCS coupled with booklets and user manuals from neuromodulation companies to understand the programmable parameters and operating ranges. Burst SCS modulates the medial pathway to suppress pain. On cellular level, burst SCS is independent on activation of γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors to inhibit neuronal firing. HF SCS blocks large-diameter fibers from producing action potentials with little influence on smaller fibers, increasing pain suppression as frequency increases.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

The neuromodulation industry is in a phase of intense innovation characterized by adaptive stimulation to improve patients' experience and experiment with alternative frequencies and novel stimulation targets.

Conventional-SCS vs. Burst-SCS and the Behavioral Effect on Mechanical Hypersensitivity in a Rat Model of Chronic Neuropathic Pain: Effect of Amplitude

OBJECTIVE

Various spinal cord stimulation (SCS) modes are used in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain disorders. Conventional (Con) and Burst-SCS are hypothesized to exert analgesic effects through different stimulation-induced mechanisms. Preclinical electrophysiological findings suggest that stimulation intensity is correlated with the effectiveness of Burst-SCS. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the relation between amplitude (charge per second) and behavioral effects in a rat model of chronic neuropathic pain, for both Conventional Spinal Cord Stimulation (Con-SCS) and biphasic Burst-SCS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Animals (n = 12 rats) received a unilateral partial sciatic nerve ligation, after which they were implanted with quadripolar electrodes in the epidural space at thoracic level 13. Mechanical hypersensitivity was assessed using paw withdrawal thresholds (WTs) to von Frey monofilaments, at various SCS intensities (amplitudes) and multiple time points during 60 minutes of stimulation and 30 minutes post stimulation.

RESULTS

Increasing amplitude was shown to improve the efficacy of Con-SCS, whereas the efficacy of Burst-SCS showed a non-monotonic relation with amplitude. Con-SCS at 66% MT (n = 5) and Burst-SCS at 50% MT (n = 6) were found to be equally effective in normalizing mechanical hypersensitivity. However, in the assessed time period Burst-SCS required significantly more mean charge per second to do so (p < 0.01). When applied at comparable mean charge per second, Con-SCS resulted in a superior behavioral outcome (p < 0.01), compared with Burst-SCS.

CONCLUSION

Biphasic Burst-SCS requires significantly more mean charge per second in order to achieve similar pain relief, as compared with Con-SCS, in an experimental model of chronic neuropathic pain.

Activation of cannabinoid CB1 receptor contributes to suppression of spinal nociceptive transmission and inhibition of mechanical hypersensitivity by Aβ-fiber stimulation

Activation of Aβ-fibers is an intrinsic feature of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) pain therapy. Cannabinoid receptor type 1 (CB1) is important to neuronal plasticity and pain modulation, but its role in SCS-induced pain inhibition remains unclear. In this study, we showed that CB1 receptors are expressed in both excitatory and inhibitory interneurons in substantia gelatinosa (SG). Patch-clamp recording of the evoked excitatory postsynaptic currents (eEPSCs) in mice after spinal nerve ligation (SNL) showed that electrical stimulation of Aβ-fibers (Aβ-ES) using clinical SCS-like parameters (50 Hz, 0.2 millisecond, 10 μA) induced prolonged depression of eEPSCs to C-fiber inputs in SG neurons. Pretreatment with CB1 receptor antagonist AM251 (2 μM) reduced the inhibition of C-eEPSCs by Aβ-ES in both excitatory and inhibitory SG neurons. We further determined the net effect of Aβ-ES on spinal nociceptive transmission in vivo by recording spinal local field potential in SNL rats. Epidural SCS (50 Hz, Aβ-plateau, 5 minutes) attenuated C-fiber-evoked local field potential. This effect of SCS was partially reduced by spinal topical application of AM251 (25 μg, 50 μL), but not CB2 receptor antagonist AM630 (100 μg). Finally, intrathecal pretreatment with AM251 (50 μg, 15 μL) in SNL rats blocked the inhibition of behavioral mechanical hypersensitivity by SCS (50 Hz, 0.2 millisecond; 80% of motor threshold, 60 minutes). Our findings suggest that activation of spinal CB1 receptors may contribute to synaptic depression to high-threshold afferent inputs in SG neurons after Aβ-ES and may be involved in SCS-induced inhibition of spinal nociceptive transmission after nerve injury.

The Advancing Role of Neuromodulation for the Management of Chronic Treatment-Refractory Pain

Neuropathic pain is a common cause of disability and health care utilization. While judicious pharmacotherapy and management of comorbid psychological distress can provide for improved quality of life, some patients with treatment-refractory disease require more invasive therapies. Spinal cord stimulation can provide for improvement in pain and decrease in medication utilization, with level 1 evidence supporting its use across various pain etiologies including persistent postoperative neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome, chronic inoperable limb ischemia, treatment refractory angina, and painful diabetic neuropathy. These procedures can be done with acceptably low morbidity and provide a cost-effective solution for those patients in whom medical therapies have failed. Technological innovation in lead design, implantable pulse generator capability, and stimulation algorithms and parameters may further enhance the success of this therapy. Neuromodulation of distal targets such as dorsal root ganglion may permit greater anatomic specificity of the therapy, whereas subthreshold stimulation with high-frequency or burst energy delivery may eliminate noxious and off-target paresthesiae. Such new technologies should be subject to rigorous evaluation as their mechanisms of action and long-term outcomes remain hitherto undefined.

Electrical stimulation of the dorsal columns of the spinal cord for Parkinson's disease

Spinal cord stimulation has been used for the treatment of chronic pain for decades. In 2009, our laboratory proposed, based on studies in rodents, that electrical stimulation of the dorsal columns of the spinal cord could become an effective treatment for motor symptoms associated with Parkinson's disease (PD). Since our initial report in rodents and a more recent study in primates, several clinical studies have now described beneficial effects of dorsal column stimulation in parkinsonian patients. In primates, we have shown that dorsal column stimulation activates multiple structures along the somatosensory pathway and desynchronizes the pathological cortico-striatal oscillations responsible for the manifestation of PD symptoms. Based on recent evidence, we argue that neurological disorders such as PD can be broadly classified as diseases emerging from abnormal neuronal timing, leading to pathological brain states, and that the spinal cord could be used as a "channel" to transmit therapeutic electrical signals to disrupt these abnormalities. © 2017 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Comparative effects of chronic administrations of gabapentin, pregabalin and baclofen on rat memory using object recognition test

Memory impairment is one of the greatest concerns when it comes to long-term CNS-affecting drug administration. Drugs like gabapentin, pregabalin and baclofen are administered in a long-term period in conditions such as epilepsy, neuropathic pain, spasticity associated with spinal cord injury or multiple sclerosis. Despite their wide spread use, few data are available on the effects of these drugs on cognitive functions, such as learning memory. In the present study, the effects of long-term administration of gabapentin, pregabalin and baclofen on memory were investigated in a comparative manner. Male Wistar rats received intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection of gabapentin (30 mg/kg), pregabalin (30 mg/kg), baclofen (3 mg/kg), combination of gabapentin/baclofen (30/3 mg/kg) and combination of pregabalin/baclofen (30/3 mg/kg) once a day for 3 weeks respective to their groups. After the end of treatments, rat memories were assessed using the object-recognition task. The discrimination and recognition indices (RI and DI) in the T2 trials were used as the memory indicating factors. The results showed that daily i.p. administrations of pregabalin but not gabapentin or baclofen significantly decreased DI and RI compared to saline group. In combination groups, either gabapentin or pregabalin impaired discrimination between new and familiar objects. Our findings suggested that pregabalin alone or in combination with baclofen significantly caused cognitive deficits.

Electrical neurostimulation for chronic pain: On selective relay of sensory neural activities in myelinated nerve fibers

Chronic pain affects about 100 million adults in the US. Despite their great need, neuropharmacology and neurostimulation therapies for chronic pain have been associated with suboptimal efficacy and limited long-term success, as their mechanisms of action are unclear. Yet current computational models of pain transmission suffer from several limitations. In particular, dorsal column models do not include the fundamental underlying sensory activity traveling in these nerve fibers. We developed a (simple) simulation test bed of electrical neurostimulation of myelinated nerve fibers with underlying sensory activity. This paper reports our findings so far. Interactions between stimulation-evoked and underlying activities are mainly due to collisions of action potentials and losses of excitability due to the refractory period following an action potential. In addition, intuitively, the reliability of sensory activity decreases as the stimulation frequency increases. This first step opens the door to a better understanding of pain transmission and its modulation by neurostimulation therapies.

New modalities of neurostimulation: high frequency and dorsal root ganglion

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Neurostimulation is a well tolerated, cost-efficient, and effective method to treat chronic pain. Although spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been shown to help patients, newer modalities such as burst, kilohertz-frequency, and dorsal root ganglion stimulation may provide greater pain relief, fewer paresthesias, and better outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Burst stimulation, programed as five-impulse burst at a frequency of 500 Hz, delivers more charge per second than conventional stimulation. Trials of burst stimulation have shown superior pain relief, decreased paresthesias, and patient preference compared with conventional SCS. Kilohertz-frequency SCS uses low-amplitude, high-frequency (10 kHz), and short-duration pulses. The SENZA trial showed superiority in both back and leg pain with greater pain relief as well as decreased opioid use. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation stimulates the ganglion cells allowing for precise targeting of pain regions. Multiple studies, including the ACCURATE trial, have shown superior pain relief in multiple conditions.

SUMMARY

Improvements in pain control and patient satisfaction suggest that these new stimulation patterns will greatly increase the utility of neurostimulation; however, clinical trials with broader patient populations have to be done to support more extensive use of these therapies.

A Comparison of the Effects of Burst and Tonic Spinal Cord Stimulation on Hyperalgesia and Physical Activity in an Animal Model of Neuropathic Pain

BACKGROUND

Parameters of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) play a role in its effectiveness and may impact SCS mechanisms and outcomes. For example, SCS applied in a bursting pattern may result in better pain relief than that for tonic SCS for neuropathic pain. We tested the effectiveness of different SCS pulse frequencies given at 2 different burst frequencies in an animal model of neuropathic pain.

METHODS

After Sprague-Dawley rats were anesthetized, neuropathic pain was induced using the spared nerve injury model, and an epidural SCS lead was implanted in the upper lumber spinal cord. One of the 8 different SCS parameters was delivered daily for 4 days at 90% motor threshold 2 weeks after nerve injury. Four burst patterns were administered at 4- or 40-Hz frequency with a train of 4 pulses at frequencies of 60, 500, and 1000 Hz. Sham and tonic patterns at 16, 60, and 160 Hz were chosen as controls. Paw withdrawal threshold was assessed before the surgery and 15 minutes before, during, and after SCS daily for 4 days. Physical activity (distance, crossing, rearing, and grooming) was assessed before surgery, before SCS on day 1, and after SCS on day 4.

RESULTS

Animals showed a decrease in paw withdrawal threshold and physical activity levels 2 weeks after nerve injury. During stimulation, burst SCS with pulse frequencies of 60, 500, or 1000 Hz were more effective for improving paw withdrawal threshold than sham and tonic SCS at 16 Hz. Burst SCS with higher pulse frequencies (500 and 1000 Hz) than 60-Hz SCS and burst SCS with higher pulse frequencies (1000 Hz) than 160-Hz SCS were more effective. In addition, tonic SCS at 160 Hz and burst SCS with higher pulse frequencies (500 and 1000 Hz) significantly increased the distance traveled. Burst SCS at 4 Hz with pulse frequency of 1000 Hz also increased the number of crossings when compared with sham control and tonic SCS at 16 Hz.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study shows that a variety of SCS pulse frequencies applied with a burst frequency result in greater improvement in hyperalgesia and activity levels than tonic SCS in a neuropathic pain model during stimulation.

Advanced Innovations for Pain

Chronic pain represents one of the most important public health problems in terms of both the number of patients afflicted and health care costs. Most patients with chronic pain are treated with medications as the mainstay of therapy, and yet most medically treated patients continue to report ongoing pain. Additionally, adverse effects from pain medications represent a major challenge for clinicians and patients. Spinal cord stimulation and intrathecal drug delivery systems are well-established techniques that have been utilized for over 25 years. Intrathecal drug delivery systems have proven efficacy for a wide variety of intractable pain conditions and fewer adverse effects than systemic medical therapy in patients with refractory cancer-related pain. Spinal cord stimulation is cost-effective and provides improved pain control compared with medical therapy in patients with a variety of refractory pain conditions including complex regional pain syndrome, painful diabetic neuropathy, and chronic radiculopathy. Patients who have intractable pain that has not responded to reasonable attempts at conservative pain care measures should be referred to a qualified interventional pain specialist to determine candidacy for the procedures discussed in this article.

Complications related to the use of spinal cord stimulation for managing persistent postoperative neuropathic pain after lumbar spinal surgery

OBJECT

Structural spinal surgery yields improvement in pain and disability for selected patients with spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or a herniated intervertebral disc. A significant fraction of patients exhibit persistent postoperative neuropathic pain (PPNP) despite technically appropriate intervention, and such patients can benefit from spinal cord stimulation (SCS) to alleviate suffering. The complication profile of this therapy has not been systematically assessed and, thus, was the goal of this review.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify prospective cohorts of patients who had PPNP following structurally corrective lumbar spinal surgery and who underwent SCS device implantation. Data about study design, technique of SCS lead introduction, and complications encountered were collected and analyzed. Comparisons of complication incidence were performed between percutaneously and surgically implanted systems, with the level of significance set at 0.05.

RESULTS

Review of 11 studies involving 542 patients formed the basis of this work: 2 randomized controlled trials and 9 prospective cohorts. Percutaneous implants were used in 4 studies and surgical implants were used in 4 studies; in the remainder, the types were undefined. Lead migration occurred in 12% of cases, pain at the site of the implantable pulse generator occurred in 9% of cases, and wound-related complications occurred in 5% of cases; the latter 2 occurred more frequently among surgically implanted devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal cord stimulation can provide for improved pain and suffering and for decreased narcotic medication use among patients with PPNP after lumbar spinal surgery. This study reviewed the prospective studies forming the evidence base for this therapy, to summarize the complications encountered and, thus, best inform patients and clinicians considering its use. There is a significant rate of minor complications, many of which require further surgical intervention to manage, including lead migration or implant infection, although such complications do not directly threaten patient life or function.

Brain activity modifications following spinal cord stimulation for chronic neuropathic pain: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is believed to exert supraspinal effects; however, these mechanisms are still far from fully elucidated. This systematic review aims to assess existing neurophysiological and functional neuroimaging literature to reveal current knowledge regarding the effects of SCS for chronic neuropathic pain on brain activity, to identify gaps in knowledge, and to suggest directions for future research.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

Electronic databases and hand-search of reference lists were employed to identify publications investigating brain activity associated with SCS in patients with chronic neuropathic pain, using neurophysiological and functional neuroimaging techniques (fMRI, PET, MEG, EEG). Studies investigating patients with SCS for chronic neuropathic pain and studying brain activity related to SCS were included. Demographic data (age, gender), study factors (imaging modality, patient diagnoses, pain area, duration of SCS at recording, stimulus used) and brain areas activated were extracted from the included studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies were included. Thirteen studies used neuroelectrical imaging techniques, eight studies used haemodynamic imaging techniques, two studies employed both neuroelectrical and haemodynamic techniques separately, and one study investigated cerebral neurobiology.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited available evidence regarding supraspinal mechanisms of SCS does not allow us to develop any conclusive theories. However, the studies included appear to show an inhibitory effect of SCS on somatosensory evoked potentials, as well as identifying the thalamus and anterior cingulate cortex as potential mediators of the pain experience. The lack of substantial evidence in this area highlights the need for large-scale controlled studies of this kind.

Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI): Modulation of Cortical Connectivity With Therapeutic SCS

INTRODUCTION

The neurophysiological basis of pain relief due to spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and the related cortical processing of sensory information are not completely understood. The aim of this study was to use resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) to detect changes in cortical networks and cortical processing related to the stimulator-induced pain relief.

METHODS

Ten patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) or neuropathic leg pain underwent thoracic epidural spinal cord stimulator implantation. Stimulation parameters associated with "optimal" pain reduction were evaluated prior to imaging studies. Rs-fMRI was obtained on a 3 Tesla, Philips Achieva MRI. Rs-fMRI was performed with stimulator off (300TRs) and stimulator at optimum (Opt, 300 TRs) pain relief settings. Seed-based analysis of the resting state functional connectivity was conducted using seeds in regions established as participating in pain networks or in the default mode network (DMN) in addition to the network analysis. NCUT (normalized cut) parcellation was used to generate 98 cortical and subcortical regions of interest in order to expand our analysis of changes in functional connections to the entire brain. We corrected for multiple comparisons by limiting the false discovery rate to 5%.

RESULTS

Significant differences in resting state connectivity between SCS off and optimal state were seen between several regions related to pain perception, including the left frontal insula, right primary and secondary somatosensory cortices, as well as in regions involved in the DMN, such as the precuneus. In examining changes in connectivity across the entire brain, we found decreased connection strength between somatosensory and limbic areas and increased connection strength between somatosensory and DMN with optimal SCS resulting in pain relief. This suggests that pain relief from SCS may be reducing negative emotional processing associated with pain, allowing somatosensory areas to become more integrated into default mode activity.

CONCLUSION

SCS reduces the affective component of pain resulting in optimal pain relief. Study shows a decreased connectivity between somatosensory and limbic areas associated with optimal pain relief due to SCS.

Comparison of tonic spinal cord stimulation, high-frequency and burst stimulation in patients with complex regional pain syndrome: a double-blind, randomised placebo controlled trial

Background

Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) is a disabling disease that is sometimes difficult to treat. Although spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can reduce pain in most patients with CRPS, some do not achieve the desired reduction in pain. Moreover, the pain reduction can diminish over time even after an initially successful period of SCS. Pain reduction can be regained by increasing the SCS frequency, but this has not been investigated in a prospective trial. This study compares pain reduction using five SCS frequencies (standard 40 Hz, 500 Hz, 1200 Hz, burst and placebo stimulation) in patients with CRPS to determine which of the modalities is most effective.

Design

All patients with a confirmed CRPS diagnosis that have unsuccessfully tried all other therapies and are eligible for SCS, can enroll in this trial (primary implantation group). CRPS patients that already receive SCS therapy, or those previously treated with SCS but with loss of therapeutic effect over time, can also participate (re-implantation group). Once all inclusion criteria are met and written informed consent obtained, patients will undergo a baseline assessment (T0). A 2-week trial with SCS is performed and, if successful, a rechargeable internal pulse generator (IPG) is implanted. For the following 3 months the patient will have standard 40 Hz stimulation therapy before a follow-up assessment (T1) is performed. Those who have completed the T1 assessment will enroll in a 10-week crossover period in which the five SCS frequencies are tested in five periods, each frequency lasting for 2 weeks. At the end of the crossover period, the patient will choose which frequency is to be used for stimulation for an additional 3 months, until the T2 assessment.

Discussion

Currently no trials are available that systematically investigate the importance of variation in frequency during SCS in patients with CRPS. Data from this trial will provide better insight as to whether SCS with a higher frequency, or with burst stimulation, results in more effective pain relief.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN36655259