Percutaneous Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Pain Reduction and Improvements in Functional Outcomes in Chronic Low Back Pain

Ultrasound-guided gluteal nerves electrical stimulation to enhance strength and power in individuals with chronic knee pain: a randomized controlled pilot trial

Introduction

Various pathophysiological contexts can be accompanied by weakness, arthrogenic muscle inhibition, and even disability. In this scenario, peripheral nerve stimulation has been studied not only for pain management but also for the improvement of neuromuscular parameters. For this purpose, the use of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) has typically been investigated, but recently, the use of ultrasound-guided percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (pPNS) has gained popularity. In this regard, electrical stimulation has a predisposition to activate Type II muscle fibers and has been shown to be capable of generating short-term potentiation by increasing calcium sensitivity. However, the evidence of pPNS applied in humans investigating such variables is rather limited.

Objectives

This pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility of the methodology and explore the potential of pPNS in enhancing hip extension performance in individuals suffering from knee pain, comparing it with TENS.

Methods

Twelve participants were divided into pPNS and TENS groups, undergoing pre- and post-intervention assessments of peak concentric power (W), strength (N), execution speed (m/s), and one-repetition maximum (1RM) (kg) estimation. For pPNS, two needles were positioned adjacent to the superior and inferior gluteal nerves under ultrasound guidance. For TENS, electrodes were positioned between the posterosuperior iliac spine and the ischial tuberosity, and halfway between the posterosuperior iliac spine and the greater trochanter. The interventions consisted of 10 stimulations of 10 s at a frequency of 10 Hz with a pulse width of 240 μs, with rest intervals of 10 s between stimulations.

Results

Peripheral nerve stimulation significantly improved concentric power at 30% (p = 0.03) and 50% (p = 0.03) of 1RM, surpassing TENS, which showed minimal changes. No significant strength differences were observed post-intervention in either group.

Conclusion

This work presents evidence where pPNS applied to the gluteal nerves results in an enhanced performance of hip extension at submaximal loads. However, this improvement does not seem to be reflected in short-term changes in the estimation of the 1RM by the force-velocity profile.

A review of prospective studies regarding percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation treatment in the management of chronic pain

Conventionally, peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) for treatment of chronic pain has involved a two-stage process: a short-term (e.g., 7 days) trial and, if significant pain relief is achieved, a permanent PNS system is implanted. A percutaneous PNS treatment is now available where a coiled lead may be implanted for up to 60 days with the goal of producing sustained relief. In the present review, published prospective trials using percutaneous PNS treatment were identified and synthesized. The collected evidence indicates that percutaneous PNS treatment for up to 60 days provides durable clinically significant improvements in pain and pain interference. Similar efficacy across diverse targets and etiologies supports the broad applicability for use within the chronic pain population using this nonopioid technology.

Blood flow effects of percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation. A blinded, randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The vasculature function is mainly regulated by the autonomic nervous system. Importantly, the sensory-motor nervous system also innervates peripheral vessels and has the capacity to modulate vascular tone. Here we investigated the effects of electrical stimulation of a mixed nerve trunk on blood flow in deep arteries and muscle perfusion. Our hypothesis is that stimulation of a mixed nerve can modify blood flow.

METHODS

Twenty-nine healthy participants were included into a randomized-crossover and blinded clinical trial. Each subject received a placebo and two percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (pPNS) protocols on the median nerve: Pain Threshold continuous Low Frequency (PT-cLF) and Sensory Threshold burst High Frequency (ST-bHF). Blood flow was then assessed bilaterally using Power Doppler Ultrasonography at the main arteries of the arm, and blood perfusion at the forearm muscles. Afterwards, blood flow was quantified using a semi-automatized software, freely shared here.

RESULTS

Placebo, consisting in needle insertion, produced an immediate and generalized reduction on peak systolic velocity in all arteries. Although nerve stimulation produced mainly no effects, some significant differences were found: both protocols increased the relative perfusion area of the forearm muscles, the ST-bHF protocol prevented the reduction in peak systolic velocity and TAMEAN of the radial artery produced by the control protocol and PT-cLF produced a TAMEAN reduction of the ulnar artery.

CONCLUSIONS

Therefore, the arterial blood flow in the arm is mainly impervious to the electrical stimulation of the median nerve, composed by autonomic and sensory-motor axons, although it produces mild modifications in the forearm muscles perfusion.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Pain Management: A Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Peripheral nerve stimulation has seen a recent upsurge in utilization for various chronic pain conditions, specifically from a neuropathic etiology, where a single peripheral nerve can be pinpointed as a culprit for pain.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is conflicting evidence about the efficacy and long-term outcomes of peripheral nerve stimulation for chronic pain, with most studies being small sized. The focus of this article is to review available evidence for the utilization of peripheral nerve stimulation for chronic pain syndromes as well as upcoming evidence in the immediate postoperative realm. The indications for the use of PNS have expanded from neuropathic pain such as occipital neuralgia and post-amputation pain, to more widespread disease processes such as chronic low back pain. Percutaneous PNS delivered over a 60-day period may provide significant carry-over effects including pain relief, potentially avoiding the need for a permanently implanted system while enabling improved function in patients with chronic pain.

Durable patient-reported outcomes following 60-day percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) of the medial branch nerves

Background

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is often associated with clinical evidence of central nervous system sensitization and finding a clear source of nociceptive input can be challenging. Conventional therapies targeting peripheral spinal pain structures can fail to address centrally-mediated, underlying causes of pain. Sixty-day percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) applied to the lumbar medial branch nerves is a non-surgical, non-opioid treatment that may restore the balance of peripheral inputs to the central nervous system and reverse maladaptive changes in central pain processing. As a minimally invasive, non-destructive treatment, percutaneous PNS was designed to be used earlier in the treatment continuum than radiofrequency ablation or permanently-implanted neurostimulation systems.

Objective

The objective of this clinical trial was to characterize the durability of responses to medial branch PNS in a prospective multicenter case series study of CLBP patients recalcitrant to multiple non-surgical treatments.

Design

Prospective, multicenter clinical trial.

Population

Adults with CLBP without radicular leg pain who had previously failed multiple types of conventional treatments.

Intervention

Sixty-day percutaneous PNS applied to the lumbar medial branch nerves.

Methods

Percutaneous PNS leads were implanted under image guidance (ultrasound and/or fluoroscopy) and treatment was applied for up to 60 days, after which the leads were removed. Participants were followed through 14 months (12 months after the 2-month PNS treatment). Prospectively-defined endpoints included assessments of pain intensity, disability, pain interference, health-related quality of life, depression, and patient global impression of change.

Results

Treatment of CLBP with 60-day percutaneous PNS treatment produced clinically meaningful improvements in average pain intensity, disability, and/or pain interference for a majority of participants through the entire 14 month follow up period without requiring permanent system implantation. The proportion of participants experiencing clinically meaningful improvement in at least one outcome (pain intensiy, disability, pain interference) with PNS was 91% after 2 months, 79% at 5 months, 73% at 8 months, 75% at 11 months, and 77% at 14 months. There were no serious or unanticipated study-related adverse events.

Conclusion

This prospective multicenter clinical trial demonstrates the clinical utility of percutaneous PNS when applied to the medial branch nerves for the treatment of chronic low back pain recalcitrant to non-surgical treatments. Given the minimally invasive nature of percutaneous PNS and the significant benefits experienced by participants, percutaneous PNS provides a safe and effective first-line neuromodulation treatment for patients with CLBP that may obviate the need for neuroablative procedures or permanent neurostimulation system implantation.

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain

Introduction

Painful lumbar spinal disorders represent a leading cause of disability in the US and worldwide. Interventional treatments for lumbar disorders are an effective treatment for the pain and disability from low back pain. Although many established and emerging interventional procedures are currently available, there exists a need for a defined guideline for their appropriateness, effectiveness, and safety.

Objective

The ASPN Back Guideline was developed to provide clinicians the most comprehensive review of interventional treatments for lower back disorders. Clinicians should utilize the ASPN Back Guideline to evaluate the quality of the literature, safety, and efficacy of interventional treatments for lower back disorders.

Methods

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified an educational need for a comprehensive clinical guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations. Experts from the fields of Anesthesiology, Physiatry, Neurology, Neurosurgery, Radiology, and Pain Psychology developed the ASPN Back Guideline. The world literature in English was searched using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Scopus, and meeting abstracts to identify and compile the evidence (per section) for back-related pain. Search words were selected based upon the section represented. Identified peer-reviewed literature was critiqued using United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria and consensus points are presented.

Results

After a comprehensive review and analysis of the available evidence, the ASPN Back Guideline group was able to rate the literature and provide therapy grades to each of the most commonly available interventional treatments for low back pain.

Conclusion

The ASPN Back Guideline represents the first comprehensive analysis and grading of the existing and emerging interventional treatments available for low back pain. This will be a living document which will be periodically updated to the current standard of care based on the available evidence within peer-reviewed literature.

Effect of Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Neuromodulation of Sciatic Nerve on Hip Muscle Strength in Chronic Low Back Pain Sufferers: A Pilot Study

Background: Limited hip internal rotation range of motion (IR-ROM) and hip abductor weakness are recognized in low back pain (LBP) sufferers. The main aim was to investigate the effect of a ultrasound (US)-guided percutaneous neuromodulation (PNM) technique on hip strength in people with LBP. A second purpose was to discover whether the location along the sciatic nerve, where percutaneous neuromodulation was applied, could influence the change of strength response in these patients. Methods: Sixty LBP sufferers were recruited and divided randomly into three groups. All participants received an isolated percutaneous electrical stimulation at one of three different locations of the sciatic nerve pathway (proximal, middle, and distal), depending on the assigned group. Pain intensity, hip passive IR-ROM, hip muscle strength, and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were analyzed. All variables were calculated before the intervention and one week after the intervention. Results: All interventions significantly decreased pain intensity and improved the IR-ROMs, strength, and functionality after one week (p = 0.001). However, between-group (treatment x time) differences were reported for flexion strength in the non-intervention limb (p = 0.029) and ODI (p = 0.021), although the effect size was small (Eta² = 0.1) in both cases. Conclusions: The application of an isolated intervention of the US-guided PNM technique may be a useful therapeutic tool to increase the hip muscle strength in patients with chronic LBP.

Effects of Ultrasound-Guided Nerve Stimulation Targeting Peripheral Nerve Tissue on Pain and Function: A Scoping Review

This paper assesses the effects of percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (PENS) on pain- and function-related outcomes by means of a scoping review of studies with single cases, case-series, quasi-experimental, and randomized or non-randomized trial designs. We consulted the PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Data were extracted by two reviewers. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale for experimental studies and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool for case reports or cases series. Mapping of the results included: (1), description of included studies; (2), summary of results; and, (3), identification of gaps in the existing literature. Eighteen articles (five randomized controlled trials, one trial protocol, nine case series and three case reports) were included. The methodological quality of the papers was moderate to high. The conditions included in the studies were heterogeneous: chronic low back pain, lower limb pain after lumbar surgery, chronic post-amputation pain, rotator cuff repair, foot surgery, knee arthroplasty, knee pain, brachial plexus injury, elbow pain and ankle instability. In addition, one study included a healthy athletic population. Interventions were also highly heterogeneous in terms of sessions, electrical current parameters, or time of treatment. Most studies observed positive effects of PENS targeting nerve tissue against the control group; however, due to the heterogeneity in the populations, interventions, and follow-up periods, pooling analyses were not possible. Based on the available literature, PENS interventions targeting peripheral nerves might be considered as a potential therapeutic strategy for improving pain-related and functional outcomes. Nevertheless, further research considering important methodological quality issues (e.g., inclusion of control groups, larger sample sizes and comparatives between electric current parameters) are needed prior to recommending its use in clinical practice.

A profile of injuries suffered by female soldiers serving in the Australian Army

Introduction

Female soldiers comprise an important component of any modern army, yet little research has been performed to investigate differences in the profiles of injuries reported by qualified female and male army personnel.

Aim

The aim of this study was to compare injury rates and patterns between female and male soldiers of the Australian Regular Army (ARA).

Methods

Data pertaining to all injuries reported by ARA members over a two-year period were accessed from the SENTINEL database and analysed descriptively. Findings regarding injury patterns were reported by most common location, nature, mechanism, and activity being performed at the time of injury. Injury incidence rates (IR) were calculated based on population size, and injury incidence rate ratios (IRR) comparing female and male injury rates were determined.

Results

A total of 8750 injuries were recorded across the two-year time period (2018–2020) of the study (minor injuries: n = 1766 female, n = 6870 male; serious injuries: n = 19 female, n = 95 male). Higher incidence rates of minor injuries were reported for female soldiers (IR = 20.75 injuries/100 soldiers/year) when compared to male soldiers (IR = 13.60 injuries/100 soldiers/year), with an IRR of 1.53 [95% CI = 1.46–1.60]. More serious injuries were reported at a similar rate between female (IR = 0.22/100 soldiers/year) and male soldiers (IR = 0.21/100 soldiers/year), with an IRR of 1.05 [95% CI = 0.65–1.72]. Female soldiers tended to report more ankle injuries than male soldiers who reported more knee injuries. Physical training and combat training were the most common causes of injury for both sexes.

Discussion

There were subtle differences in body locations of minor injuries within female and male soldiers. Both minor and more serious injury profiles were otherwise similar between sexes. Therefore, strategies required to minimise injuries in female soldiers may be similar in many respects to strategies required for male soldiers but require some differences to account for the subtle differences in body locations of injury, and so to ensure effectiveness across all personnel.

Non-Spinal Neuromodulation of the Lumbar Medial Branch Nerve for Chronic Axial Low Back Pain: A Narrative Review

Chronic low back pain remains highly prevalent, costly, and the leading cause of disability worldwide. Symptoms are complex and treatment involves an interdisciplinary approach. Due to diverse anatomical etiologies, treatment outcomes with interventional options are highly variable. A novel approach to treating chronic axial low back pain entails the use of peripheral nerve stimulation to the lumbar medial branch nerve, and this review examines the clinical data of the two different, commercially available, non-spinal neuromodulation systems. This review provides the clinician a succinct narrative that presents up-to-date data objectively. Our review found ten clinical studies, including one report of two cases, six prospective studies, and three randomized clinical trials published to date. Currently, there are different proposed mechanisms of action to address chronic axial low back pain with different implantation techniques. Evidence suggests that peripheral nerve stimulation of the lumbar medial branch nerve may be effective in improving pain and function in patients with chronic axial low back pain symptoms at short and long term follow up, with good safety profiles. Further long-term data is needed to consider this intervention earlier in the pain treatment algorithm, but initial data are promising.

Sensorimotor effects of plasticity-inducing percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation protocols

BACKGROUND

Electrical stimulation of skin afferents can induce somatosensory plasticity in humans. Nevertheless, it is unknown if this is possible to do through percutaneous stimulation of a peripheral nerve, which will allow for regional anaesthesia interventions. Furthermore, potentiation protocols applied over mainly non-nociceptive fibers inhibit nociception in rodents, but this has not been tested in humans.

OBJECTIVE

to determine whether a protocol aiming to depress the nociceptive circuit and another aiming to potentiate non-nociceptive circuits produce regional hypoalgesia and changes in motor function, applied through percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (pPNS), and to assess which of them is more promising for pain relief, immediately and 24 hours after intervention.

METHODS

PT-cLF protocol aims to depress the nociceptive pathway through Pain Threshold, continuous Low Frequency stimulation and ST-bHF aims to produce potentiation of the non-nociceptive pathway, through Sensory Threshold burst stimulation at High Frequency. All subjects (n=29) went through both protocols and a control condition in a randomized and blinded crossover design.

RESULTS

Compared to control, ST-bHF induced distal hypoalgesia, towards electrical (p=0.04) and mechanical stimuli (p=0.02) and produced mechanical hypoesthesia (p=0.02). Contrarily, hypoalgesia was not observed after PT-cLF (p>0.05) but increased electrical motor threshold (p=0.04), reduced motor recruitment (p=0.03), and the subjects reported feeling reduced strength (p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

This works provides evidence that is possible to induce antinociceptive plasticity in a wide territory using pPNS. Moreover, it demonstrates for the first time in humans that a protocol aiming to produce long-term potentiation applied predominantly over non-nociceptive afferents induces hypoesthesia and hypoalgesia.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation: A Review of Techniques and Clinical Efficacy

Chronic pain is a common source of morbidity in many patient populations worldwide. There are growing concerns about the potential side effects of currently prescribed medications and a continued need for effective treatment. Related to these concerns, peripheral nerve stimulation has been regaining popularity as a potential treatment modality. Peripheral nerve stimulation components include helically coiled electrical leads, which direct an applied current to afferent neurons providing sensory innervation to the painful area. In theory, the applied current to the peripheral nerve will alter the large-diameter myelinated afferent nerve fibers, which interfere with the central processing of pain signals through small-diameter afferent fibers at the level of the spinal cord. Multiple studies have shown success in the use of peripheral nerve stimulation for acute post-surgical pain for orthopedic surgery, including post total knee arthroplasty and anterior cruciate ligament surgery, and chronic knee pain. Many studies have investigated the utility of peripheral nerve stimulation for the management of chronic shoulder pain. Peripheral nerve stimulation also serves as one of the potential non-pharmacologic therapies to treat back pain along with physical therapy, application of transcutaneous electrical neurostimulation unit, radiofrequency ablation, epidural steroid injections, permanently implanted neurostimulators, and surgery. Studies regarding back pain treatment have shown that peripheral nerve stimulation led to significant improvement in all pain and quality-of-life measures and a reduction in the use of opioids. Further studies are needed as the long-term risks and benefits of peripheral nerve stimulation have not been well studied as most information available on the effectiveness of peripheral nerve stimulation is based on shorter-term improvements in chronic pain.

Treatment of chronic axial back pain with 60-day percutaneous medial branch PNS: Primary end point results from a prospective, multicenter study

Background

The objective of this prospective, multicenter study is to characterize responses to percutaneous medial branch peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) to determine if results from earlier, smaller single‐center studies and reports were generalizable when performed at a larger number and wider variety of centers in patients recalcitrant to nonsurgical treatments.

Materials & Methods

Participants with chronic axial low back pain (LBP) were implanted with percutaneous PNS leads targeting the lumbar medial branch nerves for up to 60 days, after which the leads were removed. Participants were followed long‐term for 12 months after the 2‐month PNS treatment. Data collection is complete for visits through end of treatment with PNS (primary end point) and 6 months after lead removal (8 months after start of treatment), with some participant follow‐up visits thereafter in progress.

Results

Clinically and statistically significant reductions in pain intensity, disability, and pain interference were reported by a majority of participants. Seventy‐three percent of participants were successes for the primary end point, reporting clinically significant (≥30%) reductions in back pain intensity after the 2‐month percutaneous PNS treatment (n = 54/74). Whereas prospective follow‐up is ongoing, among those who had already completed the long‐term follow‐up visits (n = 51), reductions in pain intensity, disability, and pain interference were sustained in a majority of participants through 14 months after the start of treatment.

Conclusion

Given the minimally invasive, nondestructive nature of percutaneous PNS and the significant benefits experienced by participants who were recalcitrant to nonsurgical treatments, percutaneous PNS may provide a promising first‐line neurostimulation treatment option for patients with chronic axial back pain.

Correct Sciatic Nerve Management to Apply Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Neuromodulation in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effects of an ultrasound (US)-guided percutaneous neuromodulation (PNM) intervention on the sciatic nerve, regarding pain, hip range of motion (ROM), balance, and functionality in patients with chronic low back pain (LBP); and to determine the optimal anatomical location of sciatic nerve stimulation to obtain therapeutic benefits in such patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty patients with chronic LBP were recruited and divided randomly into three groups. All patients received a single percutaneous electrical stimulation intervention on the sciatic nerve, with a different anatomical application location for each group (proximal, middle, and distal). Level of pain, hip passive ROM, dynamic balance, and Oswestry disability index were analyzed. All variables were calculated before the intervention, immediately postintervention, 48 hours and one week after the intervention, except the LBP questionnaire (before, and 48 hours and one week after the intervention).

RESULTS

All interventions decreased the level of pain and increased the ROM, balance, and functionality. Besides, these therapeutic effects were maintained during one week, regardless of the anatomical location of application.

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of an anatomical location of application of the US-guided PNM on the sciatic nerve by the physiotherapist does not influence the improvement of pain, ROM, balance, and function in patients with chronic LBP.

Percutaneous Peripheral Nerve Stimulation of the Medial Branch Nerves for the Treatment of Chronic Axial Back Pain in Patients After Radiofrequency Ablation

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar radiofrequency ablation is a commonly used intervention for chronic back pain. However, the pain typically returns, and though retreatment may be successful, the procedure involves destruction of the medial branch nerves, which denervates the multifidus. Repeated procedures typically have diminishing returns, which can lead to opioid use, surgery, or implantation of permanent neuromodulation systems. The objective of this report is to demonstrate the potential use of percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) as a minimally invasive, nondestructive, motor-sparing alternative to repeat radiofrequency ablation and more invasive surgical procedures.

DESIGN

Prospective, multicenter trial.

METHODS

Individuals with a return of chronic axial pain after radiofrequency ablation underwent implantation of percutaneous PNS leads targeting the medial branch nerves. Stimulation was delivered for up to 60 days, after which the leads were removed. Participants were followed up to 5 months after the start of PNS. Outcomes included pain intensity, disability, and pain interference.

RESULTS

Highly clinically significant (≥50%) reductions in average pain intensity were reported by a majority of participants (67%, n = 10/15) after 2 months with PNS, and a majority experienced clinically significant improvements in functional outcomes, as measured by disability (87%, n = 13/15) and pain interference (80%, n = 12/15). Five months after PNS, 93% (n = 14/15) reported clinically meaningful improvement in one or more outcome measures, and a majority experienced clinically meaningful improvements in all three outcomes (i.e., pain intensity, disability, and pain interference).

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous PNS has the potential to shift the pain management paradigm by providing an effective, nondestructive, motor-sparing neuromodulation treatment.

Current Perspectives on Neurostimulation for the Management of Chronic Low Back Pain: A Narrative Review

Neurostimulation techniques for the treatment of chronic low back pain (LBP) have been rapidly evolving; however, questions remain as to which modalities provide the most efficacious and durable treatment for intractable axial symptoms. Modalities of spinal cord stimulation, such as traditional low-frequency paresthesia based, high-density or high dose (HD), burst, 10-kHz high-frequency therapy, closed-loop, and differential target multiplexed, have been limitedly studied to determine their efficacy for the treatment of axial LBP. In addition, stimulation methods that target regions other than the spinal cord, such as medial branch nerve stimulation of the multifidus muscles and the dorsal root ganglion may also be viable treatment options. Here, current scientific evidence behind neurostimulation techniques have been reviewed with a focus on the management of chronic axial LBP.

Cryoneurolysis and Percutaneous Peripheral Nerve Stimulation to Treat Acute Pain

Two regional analgesic modalities currently cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration hold promise to provide postoperative analgesia free of many of the limitations of both opioids and local anesthetic-based techniques. Cryoneurolysis uses exceptionally low temperature to reversibly ablate a peripheral nerve, resulting in temporary analgesia. Where applicable, it offers a unique option given its extended duration of action measured in weeks to months after a single application. Percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation involves inserting an insulated lead through a needle to lie adjacent to a peripheral nerve. Analgesia is produced by introducing electrical current with an external pulse generator. It is a unique regional analgesic in that it does not induce sensory, motor, or proprioception deficits and is cleared for up to 60 days of use. However, both modalities have limited validation when applied to acute pain, and randomized, controlled trials are required to define both benefits and risks.

A Review of Peripheral Nerve Stimulation Techniques Targeting the Medial Branches of the Lumbar Dorsal Rami in the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain

OBJECTIVES

The lumbar medial branch nerve has historically been a focus for ablative techniques in the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP) of facetogenic origin. Recent developments in the field of neuromodulation have been employed to target these nerves for analgesia and/or functional restoration in broader populations of CLBP patients. The objective of this article was to provide an introductory review of procedural techniques and devices employed for peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) of the lumbar medial branch of the dorsal ramus for the treatment of CLBP.

METHODS

A literature search via PubMed.gov was performed through September 2019 with key words focusing on peripheral nerve stimulation for chronic low back pain. This was refined to include only those articles that focused specifically on stimulation of the lumbar medial branch of the dorsal ramus. References within selected articles and unpublished data currently in the peer review process were also utilized.

RESULTS

Ninety articles from PubMed.gov were obtained. Two approaches to PNS of the medial branch of the dorsal ramus were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review of the current literature regarding techniques for neuromodulation of the medial branch of the dorsal ramus revealed two dominant methods: a temporarily implanted percutaneous coiled-lead approach and a permanently implanted system. The two techniques share some similarities, such as targeting the medial branch of the dorsal ramus, and also have some differences, such as indwelling time, stimulation parameters, duration of treatment, image guidance, and degrees of invasiveness, but they are both demonstrating promising results in clinical trials.