Spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain

Cervical Spinal Cord Stimulation for Failed Neck Surgery Syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cervical spine pain with or without radicular symptoms is a common condition leading to high utilization of the healthcare system with over 10 million medical visits per year. Many patients undergo surgical interventions and unfortunately are still left with neck and upper extremity pain, sometimes referred to as "Failed Neck Surgery Syndrome." When these options fail, cervical spinal cord stimulation can be a useful tool to decrease pain and suffering as well as reduce prescription medication use.

RECENT FINDINGS

Spinal cord stimulation is a well-established therapy for chronic back and leg pain and is becoming more popular for neck and upper extremity pain. Recent studies have explored cervical spinal cord stimulation with successful outcomes regarding improved pain scores, functional outcomes, and reduction of prescription medication use. Continued research into cervical spinal cord stimulation is essential for maximizing its therapeutic potential for patients with chronic neck and upper extremity pain. This review highlights the importance of cervical spinal cord stimulation as an option for patients with failed neck surgery syndrome.

Cervical spinal cord stimulation exerts anti-epileptic effects in a rat model of epileptic seizure through the suppression of CCL2-mediated cascades

Epidural spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is indicated for the treatment of intractable pain and is widely used in clinical practice. In previous basic research, the therapeutic effects of SCS have been demonstrated for epileptic seizure. However, the mechanism has not yet been elucidated. In this study, we investigated the therapeutic effect of SCS and the influence of epileptic seizure. First, SCS in the cervical spine was performed. The rats were divided into four groups: control group and treatment groups with SCS conducted at 2, 50, and 300 Hz frequency. Two days later, convulsions were induced by the intraperitoneal administration of kainic acid, followed by video monitoring to assess seizures. We also evaluated glial cells in the hippocampus by fluorescent immunostaining, electroencephalogram measurements, and inflammatory cytokines such as C-C motif chemokine ligand 2 (CCL2) by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Seizure frequency and the number of glial cells were significantly lower in the 300 Hz group than in the control group. SCS at 300 Hz decreased gene expression level of CCL2, which induces monocyte migration. SCS has anti-seizure effects by inhibiting CCL2-mediated cascades. The suppression of CCL2 and glial cells may be associated with the suppression of epileptic seizure.

Pathology of pain and its implications for therapeutic interventions

Pain is estimated to affect more than 20% of the global population, imposing incalculable health and economic burdens. Effective pain management is crucial for individuals suffering from pain. However, the current methods for pain assessment and treatment fall short of clinical needs. Benefiting from advances in neuroscience and biotechnology, the neuronal circuits and molecular mechanisms critically involved in pain modulation have been elucidated. These research achievements have incited progress in identifying new diagnostic and therapeutic targets. In this review, we first introduce fundamental knowledge about pain, setting the stage for the subsequent contents. The review next delves into the molecular mechanisms underlying pain disorders, including gene mutation, epigenetic modification, posttranslational modification, inflammasome, signaling pathways and microbiota. To better present a comprehensive view of pain research, two prominent issues, sexual dimorphism and pain comorbidities, are discussed in detail based on current findings. The status quo of pain evaluation and manipulation is summarized. A series of improved and innovative pain management strategies, such as gene therapy, monoclonal antibody, brain-computer interface and microbial intervention, are making strides towards clinical application. We highlight existing limitations and future directions for enhancing the quality of preclinical and clinical research. Efforts to decipher the complexities of pain pathology will be instrumental in translating scientific discoveries into clinical practice, thereby improving pain management from bench to bedside.

Neuropathic pain: Evidence based recommendations

Neuropathic pain continues to be a significant problem that lacks effective solutions for every single patient. In 2015, international guidelines (NeuPSIG) were published, while the French recommendations were updated in 2020. The purpose of this minireview is to provide an update on the process of developing evidence-based recommendations and explore potential changes to the current recommendations. Primary treatments for neuropathic pain include selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) such as duloxetine and venlafaxine, gabapentin, tricyclic antidepressants, as well as topical lidocaine and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, which are specifically suggested for focal peripheral neuropathic pain. Pregabalin is a first line treatment according to international guidelines but second-line in the more recent French guidelines, due to lower efficacy seen in more recent studies and misuse risk. Additionally, tramadol, combination therapies, and psychotherapy as adjuncts are proposed second line; high-concentration capsaicin patches, and botulinum toxin A are proposed specifically for focal peripheral neuropathic pain. In cases where primary and secondary treatments prove insufficient, third-line options come into play. These include high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) targeting the motor cortex, spinal cord stimulation, and the use of strong opioids when no alternative is available. To ensure optimal management of neuropathic pain in real-life situations, it is imperative to disseminate these recommendations widely and secure the acceptance of practitioners. By doing so, we can bridge the gap between theory and practice, and enhance the overall care and treatment of individuals suffering from neuropathic pain.

Electrical stimulation of the cuneiform nucleus enhances the effects of rehabilitative training on locomotor recovery after incomplete spinal cord injury

Most human spinal cord injuries are anatomically incomplete, leaving some fibers still connecting the brain with the sublesional spinal cord. Spared descending fibers of the brainstem motor control system can be activated by deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the cuneiform nucleus (CnF), a subnucleus of the mesencephalic locomotor region (MLR). The MLR is an evolutionarily highly conserved structure which initiates and controls locomotion in all vertebrates. Acute electrical stimulation experiments in female adult rats with incomplete spinal cord injury conducted in our lab showed that CnF-DBS was able to re-establish a high degree of locomotion five weeks after injury, even in animals with initially very severe functional deficits and white matter lesions up to 80-95%. Here, we analyzed whether CnF-DBS can be used to support medium-intensity locomotor training and long-term recovery in rats with large but incomplete spinal cord injuries. Rats underwent rehabilitative training sessions three times per week in an enriched environment, either with or without CnF-DBS supported hindlimb stepping. After 4 weeks, animals that trained under CnF-DBS showed a higher level of locomotor performance than rats that trained comparable distances under non-stimulated conditions. The MLR does not project to the spinal cord directly; one of its main output targets is the gigantocellular reticular nucleus in the medulla oblongata. Long-term electrical stimulation of spared reticulospinal fibers after incomplete spinal cord injury via the CnF could enhance reticulospinal anatomical rearrangement and in this way lead to persistent improvement of motor function. By analyzing the spared, BDA-labeled giganto-spinal fibers we found that their gray matter arborization density after discontinuation of CnF-DBS enhanced training was lower in the lumbar L2 and L5 spinal cord in stimulated as compared to unstimulated animals, suggesting improved pruning with stimulation-enhanced training. An on-going clinical study in chronic paraplegic patients investigates the effects of CnF-DBS on locomotor capacity.

Integrative approaches in spinal cord stimulation: Neuropathic pain management and motor recovery in spinal cord injury. A narrative review

Introduction

Spinal cord stimulation is a widespread treatment of chronic neuropathic pain from different conditions. Several novel and improving technologies have been recently developed to increase the effect of neuromodulation in patients refractory to pharmacological therapy.

Research question

To explore spinal cord stimulation's mechanisms of action, indications, and management.

Material and methods

The paper initially explores the mechanism of action of this procedure based on the generation of an electric field between electrodes placed on the posterior dural surface of the spinal cord probably interfering with the transmission of pain stimuli to the brain. Subsequently, the most consolidated criteria for selecting patients for surgery, which constitute a major issue of debate, were defined. Thereafter, the fundamental patterns of stimulation were summarized by exploring the advantages and side effects. Lastly, the most common side effects and the related management were discussed.

Results

Proper selection of the patient is of paramount importance to achieve the best results from this specific neuromodulation treatment. Regarding the different types of stimulation patterns, no definite evidence-based guidelines exist on the most appropriate approach in relation to the specific type of neuropathic pain. Both burst stimulation and high-frequency stimulation are innovative techniques that reduce the risk of paresthesias compared with conventional stimulation.

Discussion and conclusion

Novel protocols of stimulation (burst stimulation and high frequency stimulation) may improve the trade-off between therapeutic benefits and potential side effects. Likewise, decreasing the rates of hardware-related complications will be also useful to increase the application of neuromodulation in clinical settings.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Painful Diabetic Neuropathy

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) technology has been recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). The treatment involves surgical implantation of electrodes and a power source that delivers electrical current to the spinal cord. This treatment decreases the perception of pain in many chronic pain conditions, such as PDN. The number of patients with PDN treated with SCS and the amount of data describing their outcomes is expected to increase given four factors: (1) the large number of patients with this diagnosis, (2) the poor results that have been obtained for pain relief with pharmacotherapy and noninvasive non-pharmacotherapy, (3) the results to date with investigational SCS technology, and (4) the recent FDA approval of systems that deliver this treatment. Whereas traditional SCS replaces pain with paresthesias, a new form of SCS, called high-frequency 10-kHz SCS, first used for pain in 2015, can relieve PDN pain without causing paresthesias, although not all patients experience pain relief by SCS. This article describes (1) an overview of SCS technology, (2) the use of SCS for diseases other than diabetes, (3) the use of SCS for PDN, (4) a comparison of high-frequency 10-kHz and traditional SCS for PDN, (5) other SCS technology for PDN, (6) deployment of SCS systems, (7) barriers to the use of SCS for PDN, (8) risks of SCS technology, (9) current recommendations for using SCS for PDN, and (10) future developments in SCS.

Real-world outcomes of single-stage spinal cord stimulation in chronic pain patients: A multicentre, European case series

Background

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is effective in treating chronic neuropathic pain. A screening trial is typically conducted prior to implantation to evaluate whether a patient is a good candidate for SCS. However, the need for a screening trial has been debated. We evaluated real-world clinical outcomes in patients who underwent a single-stage procedure to receive SCS therapy (i.e., no screening trial period) (SS-SCS).

Methods

This observational, multicentre, real-world consecutive case series evaluated SS-SCS chronic pain patients. Pain and other functional outcomes were collected as part of standard care by site personnel with no sponsor involvement. Assessments included Numerical rating scale (NRS), Percent Pain Relief (PPR) and EQ-5D-5L (EuroQol 5 Dimensions-5L), recorded prior to SCS and following implantation.

Results

A total of 171 chronic pain patients (mean age: 59.4; 53.2% females) underwent a single-stage procedure (mean last follow-up, 408 days) and were included in the analysis. A 5.0 ​± ​2.1-point improvement in overall pain was reported at 3 months and sustained until the last follow-up post-implantation (p ​< ​0.0001). At last follow-up, 50.3% (86/171) of patients reported an NRS pain score ≤3. Additionally, quality of life also improved (46.1-point change, from 70.2 to 25) at the last follow-up, based on EQ-5D-5L scores.

Conclusions

In routine clinical practice, SS-SCS can provide significant long-term pain relief and improve quality of life in chronic pain patients. Our results suggest that effective long-term outcomes and success may be achieved without a trial period prior to permanent implantation of an SCS system.

Chronic pain after spine surgery: Insights into pathogenesis, new treatment, and preventive therapy

Chronic pain after spine surgery (CPSS) is often characterized by intractable low back pain and/or radiating leg pain, and has been reported in 8-40% of patients that received lumbar spine surgery. We conducted a literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE/OVID with a focus on studies about the etiology and treatments of CPSS and low back pain. Our aim was to provide a narrative review that would help us better understand the pathogenesis and current treatment options for CPSS. This knowledge will aid in the development of optimal strategies for managing postoperative pain symptoms and potentially curing the underlying etiologies. Firstly, we reviewed recent advances in the mechanistic study of CPSS, illustrated both structural (e.g., fibrosis and scaring) and non-structural factors (e.g., inflammation, neuronal sensitization, glial activation, psychological factor) causing CPSS, and highlighted those having not been given sufficient attention as the etiology of CPSS. Secondly, we summarized clinical evidence and therapeutic perspectives of CPSS. We also presented new insights about the treatments and etiology of CPSS, in order to raise awareness of medical staff in the identification and management of this complex painful disease. Finally, we discussed potential new targets for clinical interventions of CPSS and future perspectives of mechanistic and translational research. CPSS patients often have a mixed etiology. By reviewing recent findings, the authors advocate that clinicians shall comprehensively evaluate each case to formulate a patient-specific and multi-modal pain treatment, and importantly, consider an early intraoperative intervention that may decrease the risk or even prevent the onset of CPSS.

Translational potential statement

CPSS remains difficult to treat. This review broadens our understanding of clinical therapies and underlying mechanisms of CPSS, and provides new insights which will aid in the development of novel mechanism-based therapies for not only managing the established pain symptoms but also preventing the development of CPSS.

Spinal Cord Stimulation Efficacy and Erroneous Conclusions of the Cochrane Library Review of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Low Back Pain by Traeger et al

Neuromodulation, through the use of spinal cord stimulation, is an evolving therapeutic alternative for the management of chronic and refractory pain [...].

Advances in Spinal Cord Neuromodulation: The Integration of Neuroengineering, Computational Approaches, and Innovative Conceptual Frameworks

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an approved treatment for intractable pain and has recently emerged as a promising area of research for restoring function after spinal cord lesion. This review will focus on the historical evolution of this transition and the path that remains to be taken for these methods to be rigorously evaluated for application in clinical practice. New developments in SCS are being driven by advances in the understanding of spinal cord lesions at the molecular, cellular, and neuronal levels, as well as the understanding of compensatory mechanisms. Advances in neuroengineering and the computational neurosciences have enabled the development of new conceptual SCS strategies, such as spatiotemporal neuromodulation, which allows spatially selective stimulation at precise time points during anticipated movement. It has also become increasingly clear that these methods are only effective when combined with intensive rehabilitation techniques, such as new task-oriented methods and robotic aids. The emergence of innovative approaches to spinal cord neuromodulation has sparked significant enthusiasm among patients and in the media. Non-invasive methods are perceived to offer improved safety, patient acceptance, and cost-effectiveness. There is an immediate need for well-designed clinical trials involving consumer or advocacy groups to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of various treatment modalities, assess safety considerations, and establish outcome priorities.

Case report: Spinal cord stimulation in the treatment of pediatric erythromelalgia

Introduction

In children, erythromelalgia is a rare chronic pain syndrome characterized by erythema, severe burning pain, and itching of affected feet. Unfortunately, there is no definitive therapy available currently.

Case report

Here, we report a case of primary erythromelalgia and the treatment response in a 10-year-old boy, whose genetic findings for mutations in the SCN9A gene were positive and skin biopsy results were diagnosed as small fiber neuropathy, while he has suffered from excruciating burning pain, itching, erythema, and recurrent infections over the past 3 years. He did not respond well to conventional treatment, and the only way to receive minimal relief was to immerse his feet in ice water. After a successful trial of spinal cord stimulation (SCS), the implantable pulse generator (IPG) was successfully implanted without complications, and it proved partial response to therapy.

Conclusion

There is no specific, efficient treatment for pediatric erythromelalgia currently, but this case demonstrates neuromodulation serves as part of the multimodal regimen to treat pediatric erythromelalgia.

Clinical utilization of fast-acting sub-perception therapy (FAST) in SCS-implanted patients for treatment of mixed pain

Objectives

A significant proportion of patients with chronic pain exhibit mixed pain and thus do not display symptoms exclusively associated with either nociceptive or neuropathic pain syndromes. We aimed to explore whether Fast-Acting Sub-Perception Therapy, FAST - a new Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS)-based approach capable of inducing a rapid-onset of analgesia using electrical neurostimulation applied below patient-perception threshold - could potentially be useful as a treatment for chronic mixed pain.

Methods

Fourteen consecutively-enrolled patients diagnosed with chronic mixed pain and implanted with an SCS device were enrolled in this single-center case-series. All patients completed a validated, self-administered painDETECT questionnaire prior to SCS-device implantation (baseline). The painDETECT questionnaire was used to characterize each patient's chronic pain as likely neuropathic only, uncertain (but potential for presence of a non-neuropathic component), or likely presence of a non-neuropathic component. Overall pain scores (Numeric Rating Scale, NRS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Quality-of-life (EQ-5D-5L) were collected (per standard-of-care) at baseline, 3-months, and 6-months post-implantation.

Results

The average age of those assessed in this study was 64.7 ​± ​11.5 (SD) years and 43% (6/14) were female. Fifty-percent (7/14) of patients were classified with non-neuropathic pain (painDETECT), while the remainder exhibited chronic pain that could not be characterized as either neuropathic or non-neuropathic (uncertain). Mean overall pain (NRS) among all patients was 8.3 ​± ​0.3 (SE) at baseline. At 6-months post-implant, a mean 6.9-points NRS score reduction was observed (1.4 ​± ​0.3 (SE); p ​< ​0.0001). Notable improvements in disability (ODI) and Quality of Life (EQ-5D-5L) were also observed at 6-month follow-up.

Conclusions

The data from this observational case-series indicate that FAST-SCS can improve outcomes in patients reporting complex symptoms of mixed pain with a likely non-neuropathic component. These results suggest that neurostimulation modalities such as FAST may be a suitable treatment approach for non-neuropathic pain indications.

Implantable Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Peripheral Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review of Prospective Studies

Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) has been utilized for over 50 years with accumulating evidence of efficacy in a variety of chronic pain conditions. The level and strength of evidence supporting the use of PNS for peripheral neuropathic pain remains unclear. The purpose of this review is to synthesize data from prospective studies on the efficacy of PNS for neuropathic pain as it pertains to pain intensity, neurological deficits/neuropathy (e.g., weakness, sensory deficits, gait/balance), and other secondary outcomes (quality of life, satisfaction, emotional functioning, and adverse events). In compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this review identified articles from MEDLINE(R), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. Overall, per the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, pooled results demonstrate very low quality or low quality of evidence supporting modest to substantial improvement in pain and neurological function after PNS implantation for treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain. PNS for phantom limb pain was the only indication that had moderate level evidence. Future prospective and well-powered studies are warranted to assess the efficacy of PNS for peripheral neuropathic pain.

Spinal cord stimulator medullary compression-a very rare SCS complication and surgical treatment

INTRODUCTION

The risk of spinal cord damage after Spinal Cord Stimulator (SCS) implant is a very rare event. In our case report, the patient was affected by a progressively worsening spinal stenosis due to SCS compression.

CASE REPORT

The authors describe a progressive paraparesis in a 58-year-old woman with a long history of back pain and multiple spine surgeries. Computed tomography (CT) outlined vertebral canal stenosis corresponding to an electrode array implanted in T9. A posterior T8-T10 spinal cord decompression with explanation of the SCS device was performed and a partial neurological improvement was observed immediately postoperative.

DISCUSSION

Spinal cord stimulation has been used since 1967 for the treatment of refractory chronic pain, particularly failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Still, the mechanism underlying its function is not completely clear. Moreover, complications are mainly related to implant dysfunction and the risk of direct and indirect spinal cord compression is described as exceptional in the literature. Our aim is to describe the case SCS device spinal cord direct compression and its surgical treatment.

Neuromodulation devices for heart failure

Autonomic imbalance with a sympathetic dominance is acknowledged to be a critical determinant of the pathophysiology of chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), regardless of the etiology. Consequently, therapeutic interventions directly targeting the cardiac autonomic nervous system, generally referred to as neuromodulation strategies, have gained increasing interest and have been intensively studied at both the pre-clinical level and the clinical level. This review will focus on device-based neuromodulation in the setting of HFrEF. It will first provide some general principles about electrical neuromodulation and discuss specifically the complex issue of dose-response with this therapeutic approach. The paper will thereafter summarize the rationale, the pre-clinical and the clinical data, as well as the future prospectives of the three most studied form of device-based neuromodulation in HFrEF. These include cervical vagal nerve stimulation (cVNS), baroreflex activation therapy (BAT), and spinal cord stimulation (SCS). BAT has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in patients with HfrEF, while the other two approaches are still considered investigational; VNS is currently being investigated in a large phase III Study.

Patient selection for spinal cord stimulation: The importance of an integrated assessment of clinical and psychosocial factors

BACKGROUND

A previously developed educational e-health tool considers both clinical and psychosocial factors when selecting patients with chronic pain for spinal cord stimulation (SCS). The validity of the composite recommendations was evaluated in a retrospective study, demonstrating a strong relationship with patient outcomes after SCS.

METHODS

An additional retrospective analysis was performed to determine the added value of a psychosocial evaluation as part of the decision-making process on SCS. Data concerned 482 patients who were considered for SCS in 2018-2019. Analysis focused on the relationship between the different layers of the tool recommendations (clinical, psychosocial, composite) with trial results and patient outcomes at 6 months after SCS. Of the initial study population, 381 patients underwent SCS and had follow-up data on at least one of three pain-related outcome measures.

RESULTS

Pain improvement was observed in 76% of the patients for whom SCS was strongly recommended based on merely the clinical aspects. This percentage varied by the level of psychosocial problems and ranged from 86% in patients without any compromising psychosocial factors to 60% in those with severe problems. Similarly, the severity of psychosocial problems affected trial results in patients for whom SCS was either recommended or strongly recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

The strong relationship between psychosocial factors embedded in the SCS e-health tool and patient outcomes supports an integrated and multidisciplinary approach in the selection of patients for SCS. The educational e-health tool, combining both clinical and psychosocial aspects, is believed to be helpful for further education and implementation of this approach.