A Multicenter, Prospective Trial to Assess the Safety and Performance of the Spinal Modulation Dorsal Root Ganglion Neurostimulator System in the Treatment of Chronic Pain

Neuromorphic hardware for somatosensory neuroprostheses

In individuals with sensory-motor impairments, missing limb functions can be restored using neuroprosthetic devices that directly interface with the nervous system. However, restoring the natural tactile experience through electrical neural stimulation requires complex encoding strategies. Indeed, they are presently limited in effectively conveying or restoring tactile sensations by bandwidth constraints. Neuromorphic technology, which mimics the natural behavior of neurons and synapses, holds promise for replicating the encoding of natural touch, potentially informing neurostimulation design. In this perspective, we propose that incorporating neuromorphic technologies into neuroprostheses could be an effective approach for developing more natural human-machine interfaces, potentially leading to advancements in device performance, acceptability, and embeddability. We also highlight ongoing challenges and the required actions to facilitate the future integration of these advanced technologies.

Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation as Compared With L2 Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in Pain Relief for Nonoperated Discogenic Low Back Pain: Analysis of Two Prospective Studies

INTRODUCTION

Chronic discogenic low back pain (CD-LBP) is caused by degenerated disks marked by neural and vascular ingrowth. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been shown to be effective for pain relief in patients who are not responsive to conventional treatments. Previously, the pain-relieving effect of two variations of SCS has been evaluated in CD-LBP: Burst SCS and L2 dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS). The aim of this study is to compare the effectivity in pain relief and pain experience of Burst SCS with that of conventional L2 DRGS in patients with CD-LBP.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Subjects were implanted with either Burst SCS (n = 14) or L2 DRGS with conventional stimulation (n = 15). Patients completed the numeric pain rating score (NRS) for back pain and Oswestry disability index (ODI) and EuroQoL 5D (EQ-5D) questionnaires at baseline, and at three, six, and 12 months after implantation. Data were compared between time points and between groups.

RESULTS

Both Burst SCS and L2 DRGS significantly decreased NRS, ODI, and EQ-5D scores as compared with baseline. L2 DRGS resulted in significantly lower NRS scores at 12 months and significantly increased EQ-5D scores at six and 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Both L2 DRGS and Burst SCS resulted in reduction of pain and disability, and increased quality of life in patients with CD-LBP. L2 DRGS provided significantly increased pain relief and improvement in quality of life when compared with Burst SCS.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The clinical trial registration numbers for the study are NCT03958604 and NL54405.091.15.

A Definition of Neuromodulation and Classification of Implantable Electrical Modulation for Chronic Pain

OBJECTIVES

Neuromodulation therapies use a variety of treatment modalities (eg, electrical stimulation) to treat chronic pain. These therapies have experienced rapid growth that has coincided with escalating confusion regarding the nomenclature surrounding these neuromodulation technologies. Furthermore, studies are often published without a complete description of the effective stimulation dose, making it impossible to replicate the findings. To improve clinical care and facilitate dissemination among the public, payors, research groups, and regulatory bodies, there is a clear need for a standardization of terms.

APPROACH

We formed an international group of authors comprising basic scientists, anesthesiologists, neurosurgeons, and engineers with expertise in neuromodulation. Because the field of neuromodulation is extensive, we chose to focus on creating a taxonomy and standardized definitions for implantable electrical modulation of chronic pain.

RESULTS

We first present a consensus definition of neuromodulation. We then describe a classification scheme based on the 1) intended use (the site of modulation and its indications) and 2) physical properties (waveforms and dose) of a neuromodulation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

This framework will help guide future high-quality studies of implantable neuromodulatory treatments and improve reporting of their findings. Standardization with this classification scheme and clear definitions will help physicians, researchers, payors, and patients better understand the applications of implantable electrical modulation for pain and guide informed treatment decisions.

Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring During Lead Placement for Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation: A Literature Review and Case Series

INTRODUCTION

Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S) is a viable interventional option for intractable pain management. Although systematic data are lacking regarding the immediate neurologic complications of this procedure, intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) can be a valuable tool to detect real-time neurologic changes and prompt intervention(s) during DRG-S performed under general anesthesia and deep sedation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In our single-center case series, we performed multimodal IONM, including peripheral nerve somatosensory evoked potentials (pnSSEPs) and dermatomal somatosensory evoked potentials (dSSEPs), spontaneous electromyography (EMG), transcranial motor evoked potentials (MEPs), and electroencephalogram (EEG) for some trials and all permanent DRG-S lead placement per surgeon preference. Alert criteria for each IONM modality were established before data acquisition and collection. An IONM alert was used to implement an immediate repositioning of the lead to reduce any possible postoperative neurologic deficits. We reviewed the literature and summarized the current IONM modalities commonly applied during DRG-S, including somatosensory evoked potentials and EMG. Because DRG-S targets the dorsal roots, we hypothesized that including dSSEP would allow more sensitivity as a proxy for potential sensory changes under generalized anesthesia than would including standard pnSSEPs.

RESULTS

From our case series of 22 consecutive procedures with 45 lead placements, one case had an alert immediately after DRG-S lead positioning. In this case, dSSEP attenuation was seen, indicating changes in the S1 dermatome, which occurred despite ipsilateral pnSSEP from the posterior tibial nerve remaining at baselines. The dSSEP alert prompted the surgeon to reposition the S1 lead, resulting in immediate recovery of the dSSEP to baseline status. The rate of IONM alerts reported intraoperatively was 4.55% per procedure and 2.22% per lead (n = 1). No neurologic deficits were reported after the procedure, resulting in no postoperative neurologic complications or deficits. No other IONM changes or alerts were observed from pnSSEP, spontaneous EMG, MEPs, or EEG modalities. Reviewing the literature, we noted challenges and potential deficiencies when using current IONM modalities for DRG-S procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Our case series suggests dSSEPs offer greater reliability than do pnSSEPs in quickly detecting neurologic changes, and subsequent neural injury, during DRG-S cases. We encourage future studies to focus on adding dSSEP to standard pnSSEP to provide a comprehensive, real-time neurophysiological assessment during lead placement for DRG-S. More investigation, collaboration, and evidence are required to evaluate, compare, and standardize comprehensive IONM protocols for DRG-S.

Comparing the Efficacy of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation With Conventional Medical Management in Patients With Chronic Postsurgical Inguinal Pain: Post Hoc Analyzed Results of the SMASHING Study

OBJECTIVES

Approximately 10% of patients who undergo inguinal hernia repair or Pfannenstiel incision develop chronic (> three months) postsurgical inguinal pain (PSIP). If medication or peripheral nerve blocks fail, a neurectomy is the treatment of choice. However, some patients do not respond to this treatment. In such cases, stimulation of the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) appears to significantly reduce chronic PSIP in selected patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized controlled study, DRG stimulation was compared with conventional medical management (CMM) (noninvasive treatments, such as medication, transcutaneous electric neurostimulation, and rehabilitation therapy) in patients with PSIP that was resistant to a neurectomy. Patients were recruited at a tertiary referral center for groin pain (SolviMáx, Eindhoven, The Netherlands) between March 2015 and November 2016. Suitability for implantation was assessed according to the Dutch Neuromodulation Association guidelines. The sponsor discontinued the study early owing to slow enrollment. Of 78 planned patients, 18 were randomized (DRG and CMM groups each had nine patients). Six patients with CMM (67%) crossed over to DRG stimulation at the six-month mark.

RESULTS

Fifteen of the 18 patients met the six-month primary end point with a complete data set for a per-protocol analysis. Three patients with DRG stimulation had a negative trial and were lost to follow-up. The average pain reduction was 50% in the DRG stimulation and crossover group (from 6.60 ± 1.24 to 3.28 ± 2.30, p = 0.0029). Conversely, a 13% increase in pain was observed in patients with CMM (from 6.13 ± 2.24 to 6.89 ± 1.24, p = 0.42). Nine patients with DRG stimulation experienced a total of 19 adverse events, such as lead dislocation and pain at the implantation site.

CONCLUSIONS

DRG stimulation is a promising effective therapy for pain relief in patients with PSIP resistant to conventional treatment modalities; larger studies should confirm this. The frequency of side effects should be a concern in a new study.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT02349659.

Optimizing Preoperative Chronic Pain Management in Elective Spine Surgery Patients: A Narrative Review of Outcomes with Opioid and Adjuvant Pain Therapies

» Chronic preoperative opioid use negatively affects outcomes after spine surgery, with increased complications and reoperations, longer hospital stays, decreased return-to-work rates, worse patient-reported outcomes, and a higher risk of continued opioid use postoperatively.» The definition of chronic opioid use is not consistent across studies, and a more specific and consistent definition will aid in stratifying patients and understanding their risk of inferior outcomes.» Preoperative weaning periods and maximum dose thresholds are being established, which may increase the likelihood of achieving a meaningful improvement after surgery, although higher level evidence studies are needed.» Spinal cord stimulators and intrathecal drug delivery devices are increasingly used to manage chronic back pain and are equivalent or perhaps even superior to opioid treatment, although few studies exist examining how patients with these devices do after subsequent spine surgery.» Further investigation is needed to determine whether a true mechanistic explanation exists for spine-related analgesia related to spinal cord stimulators and intrathecal drug delivery devices.

The role of walking exercise on axonal regrowth and neuropathic pain markers in dorsal root ganglion after sciatic nerve injury

The aim of this study was to determine whether walking exercise can regulate the expression level of neuropathic pain- and inflammatory response markers in the ipsilateral lumbar 4 to 6 dorsal root ganglion neurons after sciatic nerve injury (SNI). The experimental rats were randomly divided into seven groups: the normal control group, sedentary groups for 3, 7, and, 14 days postinjury (dpi), and walking exercise groups for 3, 7, and 14 dpi. Western blot techniques were used to evaluate specific neuropathic pain- and cytokine markers and mechanical allodynia was confirmed by paw withdrawal test. Mechanical allodynia was significantly improved in the walking exercise group compared to the sedentary group at all 7, 10, and 14 dpi. Furthermore, growth associated protein 43 and brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels were significantly increased in the walking exercise groups compared to the sedentary group at all 3, 7, and 14 dpi. Conversely, nuclear factor kappa-light-chain-enhancer of activated B cells, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor α, calcitonin gene-related peptide, and c-Fos expression levels were significantly decreased in the walking exercise groups compared to the sedentary group at all 3, 7, and 14 dpi. These findings suggest meaningful information that aggressive rehabilitation walking exercise applied early after SNI might be improve mechanical allodynia, neuropathic pain and inflammatory response markers following SNI.

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in Chronic Painful Polyneuropathy: A Potential Modulator for Small Nerve Fiber Regeneration

OBJECTIVES

Neuromodulatory treatments like spinal cord stimulation and dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) have emerged as effective treatments to relieve pain in painful polyneuropathy. Animal studies have demonstrated that neurostimulation can enhance nerve regeneration. This study aimed to investigate if DRGS may impact intraepidermal nerve fiber regeneration and sensory nerve function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nine patients with chronic, intractable painful polyneuropathy were recruited. Intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) quantification in 3 mm punch skin biopsy was performed 1 month before DRGS (placed at the level of the L5 and S1 dorsal root ganglion) and after 12- and 24-month follow-up. Quantitative sensory testing, nerve conduction studies, and a clinical scale score were also performed at the same time points.

RESULTS

In 7 of 9 patients, DRGS was successful (defined as a reduction of ≥ 50% in daytime and/or night-time pain intensity), allowing a definitive implantable pulse generator implantation. The median baseline IENFD among these 7 patients was 1.6 fibers/mm (first and third quartile: 1.2; 4.3) and increased to 2.6 fibers/mm (2.5; 2.9) and 1.9 fibers/mm (1.6; 2.4) at 1- and 2-years follow-up, respectively. These changes were not statistically significant (p = 1.000 and 0.375). Sensory nerve tests did not show substantial changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Although not significant, the results of this study showed that in most of the patients with implants, there was a slight increase of the IENFD at the 1- and 2-year follow-up. Larger-scale clinical trials are warranted to explore the possible role of DRGS in reversing the progressive neurodegeneration over time.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT02435004; Swiss National Clinical Trials Portal: SNCTP000001376.

Efficacy of conditioned autologous serum therapy (Orthokine®) on the dorsal root ganglion in patients with chronic radiculalgia: study protocol for a prospective randomized placebo-controlled double-blind clinical trial (RADISAC trial)

BACKGROUND

Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment on the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) has been proposed as a good option for the treatment of persistent radicular pain based on its effect of neuromodulation on neuropathic pain. Autologous conditioned serum (ACS) therapy is a conservative treatment based on the patient's own blood. The aim of this manuscript is to develop a study protocol using ACS on the DRG as a target for its molecular modulation.

METHODS

We plan to conduct a randomized controlled study to compare the efficacy of PRF therapy plus ACS versus PRF therapy plus physiological saline 0.9% (PhS) on the DRG to reduce neuropathic pain in patients with persistent lower limb radiculalgia (LLR) and to contribute to the functional improvement and quality of life of these patients. Study participants will include patients who meet study the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Eligible patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to one of treatment with PRF plus ACS (experimental group) or PRF plus PhS (placebo group). The study group will consist of 70 patients (35 per group) who have experienced radicular pain symptoms for ≥ 6 months' duration who have failed to respond to any therapy. Both groups will receive PRF on the DRG treatment before the injection of the sample (control or placebo). Patient assessments will occur at baseline, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after therapy. The primary efficacy outcome measure is Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) responders from baseline to 12 months of follow-up using validated minimal important change (MIC) thresholds. A reduction of ≥ 2 points in NPRS is considered a clinically significant pain relief. The secondary efficacy outcome measure is the proportion of Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Scale (ODS) responders from baseline to 12 months of follow-up in the experimental group (PRF plus ACS) versus the placebo group (PRF plus PhS). ODS responders are defined as those patients achieving the validated MIC of ≥ 10-point improvement in ODS from baseline to 12 months of follow-up as a clinically significant efficacy threshold.

DISCUSSION

This prospective, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled study will provide level I evidence of the safety and effectiveness of ACS on neuropathic symptoms in LLR patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION {2A}{2B}: EUDRACT number: 2021-005124-38. Validation date: 13 November 2021. Protocol version {3}: This manuscript presents the 2nd protocol version.

Targeting dorsal root ganglia and primary sensory neurons for the treatment of chronic pain: an update

INTRODUCTION

Current treatments for chronic pain are inadequate. Here, we provide an update on the new therapeutic strategies that target dorsal root ganglia (DRGs) in the peripheral nervous system for a better and safer treatment of chronic pain.

AREAS COVERED

Despite the complex nature of chronic pain and its underlying mechanisms, we do know that changes in the plasticity and modality of neurons in DRGs play a pivotal role. DRG neurons are heterogenous and offer potential pain targets for different therapeutic interventions. We discuss the last advancements of these interventions, which include the use of systemic and local administrations, selective nerve drug delivery, and gene therapy. In particular, we provide updates and further details on the molecular characterization of primary sensory neurons, new analgesics entering the market, and future gene therapy approaches.

EXPERT OPINION

DRGs and primary sensory neurons are promising targets for chronic pain treatment due to their key role in pain signaling, unique anatomical location, and the potential for different targeted therapeutic interventions.

Painful Peripheral Neuropathies of the Lower Limbs and/or Lower Extremities Treated with Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Systematic Review with Narrative Synthesis

Introduction

Painful peripheral neuropathy (PPN) is a debilitating condition with varied etiologies. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is increasingly used when conservative treatments fail to provide adequate pain relief. Few published reviews have examined SCS outcomes in all forms of PPN.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of SCS in PPN. The PubMed database was searched up to February 7th, 2022, for peer-reviewed studies of SCS that enrolled PPN patients with pain symptoms in their lower limbs and/or lower extremities. We assessed the quality of randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data were tabulated and presented narratively.

Results

Twenty eligible studies documented SCS treatment in PPN patients, including 10 kHz SCS, traditional low-frequency SCS (t-SCS), dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS), and burst SCS. In total, 451 patients received a permanent implant (10 kHz SCS, n=267; t-SCS, n=147; DRGS, n=25; burst SCS, n=12). Approximately 88% of implanted patients had painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). Overall, we found clinically meaningful pain relief (≥30%) with all SCS modalities. Among the studies, RCTs supported the use of 10 kHz SCS and t-SCS to treat PDN, with 10 kHz SCS providing a higher reduction in pain (76%) than t-SCS (38-55%). Pain relief with 10 kHz SCS and DRGS in other PPN etiologies ranged from 42-81%. In addition, 66-71% of PDN patients and 38% of nondiabetic PPN patients experienced neurological improvement with 10 kHz SCS.

Conclusion

Our review found clinically meaningful pain relief in PPN patients after SCS treatment. RCT evidence supported the use of 10 kHz SCS and t-SCS in the diabetic neuropathy subpopulation, with more robust pain relief evident with 10 kHz SCS. Outcomes in other PPN etiologies were also promising for 10 kHz SCS. In addition, a majority of PDN patients experienced neurological improvement with 10 kHz SCS, as did a notable subset of nondiabetic PPN patients.

Spinal Cord Stimulation With Additional Peripheral Nerve/Field Stimulation Versus Spinal Cord Stimulation Alone on Back Pain and Quality of Life in Patients With Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS) or failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) refers to new or persistent pain following spinal surgery for back or leg pain in a subset of patients. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a neuromodulation technique that can be considered in patients with predominant leg pain refractory to conservative treatment. Patients with predominant low back pain benefit less from SCS. Another neuromodulation technique for treatment of chronic low back pain is subcutaneous stimulation or peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS). We investigated the effect of SCS with additional PNFS on pain and quality of life of patients with PSPS compared with that of SCS alone after 12 months.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a comparative study of patients with PSPS who responded to treatment with either SCS + PNFS or SCS only following a multicenter randomized clinical trial protocol. In total, 75 patients completed the 12-month follow-up: 21 in the SCS-only group and 54 in the SCS + PNFS group. Outcome measures were pain (visual analog scale), quality of life (36-Item Short Form Survey [SF-36]), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]), overall health (EuroQol Five-Dimension [EQ-5D]), disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), and pain assessed by the McGill questionnaire.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. Both groups showed a significant reduction in back and leg pain at 12 months compared with baseline measurements. No significant differences were found between the groups in effect on both primary (pain) and secondary parameters (SF-36, HADS, EQ-5D, ODI, and McGill pain).

CONCLUSION

In a subgroup of patients with chronic back and leg pain, SCS alone provided similar long-term pain relief and quality-of-life improvement as PNFS in addition to SCS. In patients with refractory low back pain not responding to SCS alone, adding PNFS should be recommended.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT01776749.

Narrative review of current neuromodulation modalities for spinal cord injury

Neuromodulation is a developing field of medicine that includes a vast array of minimally invasive and non-invasive therapies including transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), peripheral nerve stimulation, and spinal cord stimulation (SCS). Although the current literature surrounding the use of neuromodulation in managing chronic pain is abundant, there is an insufficient amount of evidence specifically regarding neuromodulation in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). Given the pain and functional deficits that these patients face, that are not amenable to other forms conservative therapy, the purpose of this narrative review is to examine and assess the use of various neuromodulation modalities to manage pain and restore function in the SCI population. Currently, high-frequency spinal cord stimulation (HF-SCS) and burst spinal cord stimulation (B-SCS) have been shown to have the most promising effect in improving pain intensity and frequency. Additionally, dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S) and TMS have been shown to effectively increase motor responses and improve limb strength. Although these modalities carry the potential to enhance overall functionality and improve a patient's degree of disability, there is a lack of long-term, randomized-controlled trials in the current space. Additional research is warranted to further support the clinical use of these emerging modalities to provide improved pain management, increased level of function, and ultimately an overall better quality of life in the SCI population.

Best Practices for Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation for Chronic Pain: Guidelines from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience

With continued innovations in neuromodulation comes the need for evolving reviews of best practices. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S) has significantly improved the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), and it has broad applicability across a wide range of other conditions. Through funding and organizational leadership by the American Society for Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN), this best practices consensus document has been developed for the selection, implantation, and use of DRG stimulation for the treatment of chronic pain syndromes. This document is composed of a comprehensive narrative literature review that has been performed regarding the role of the DRG in chronic pain and the clinical evidence for DRG-S as a treatment for multiple pain etiologies. Best practice recommendations encompass safety management, implantation techniques, and mitigation of the potential complications reported in the literature. Looking to the future of neuromodulation, DRG-S holds promise as a robust intervention for otherwise intractable pain.

Dorsal root ganglia control nociceptive input to the central nervous system

Accumulating observations suggest that peripheral somatosensory ganglia may regulate nociceptive transmission, yet direct evidence is sparse. Here, in experiments on rats and mice, we show that the peripheral afferent nociceptive information undergoes dynamic filtering within the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) and suggest that this filtering occurs at the axonal bifurcations (t-junctions). Using synchronous in vivo electrophysiological recordings from the peripheral and central processes of sensory neurons (in the spinal nerve and dorsal root), ganglionic transplantation of GABAergic progenitor cells, and optogenetics, we demonstrate existence of tonic and dynamic filtering of action potentials traveling through the DRG. Filtering induced by focal application of GABA or optogenetic GABA release from the DRG-transplanted GABAergic progenitor cells was specific to nociceptive fibers. Light-sheet imaging and computer modeling demonstrated that, compared to other somatosensory fiber types, nociceptors have shorter stem axons, making somatic control over t-junctional filtering more efficient. Optogenetically induced GABA release within DRG from the transplanted GABAergic cells enhanced filtering and alleviated hypersensitivity to noxious stimulation produced by chronic inflammation and neuropathic injury in vivo. These findings support "gating" of pain information by DRGs and suggest new therapeutic approaches for pain relief.

The Roles of Imaging Biomarkers in the Management of Chronic Neuropathic Pain

Chronic neuropathic pain (CNP) affects around 10% of the general population and has a significant social, emotional, and economic impact. Current diagnosis techniques rely mainly on patient-reported outcomes and symptoms, which leads to significant diagnostic heterogeneity and subsequent challenges in management and assessment of outcomes. As such, it is necessary to review the approach to a pathology that occurs so frequently, with such burdensome and complex implications. Recent research has shown that imaging methods can detect subtle neuroplastic changes in the central and peripheral nervous system, which can be correlated with neuropathic symptoms and may serve as potential markers. The aim of this paper is to review available imaging methods used for diagnosing and assessing therapeutic efficacy in CNP for both the preclinical and clinical setting. Of course, further research is required to standardize and improve detection accuracy, but available data indicate that imaging is a valuable tool that can impact the management of CNP.

High-Resolution Spinal Motor Mapping Using Thoracic Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients With Chronic Pain

BACKGROUND

High-resolution spinal cord stimulation (HR-SCS) paddle can stimulate medial-dorsal columns and extend stimulation coverage to the laterally positioned spinal targets.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the medio-lateral selectivity of an HR-SCS paddle in patients with chronic pain.

METHODS

During standard-of-care spinal cord stimulation (SCS) placement, epidurally evoked electromyography and antidromic dorsal column-evoked potentials were recorded in 12 subjects using an HR-SCS paddle with 8 medio-lateral sites spanning the full epidural width at thoracic T9-12 and a commercial paddle consecutively.

RESULTS

Recruitment maps were aligned with respect to physiological midline which was overlapping with anatomic midline in 10 of 11 cases. Overlapping contacts between the HR-SCS and commercial paddles exhibited similar patterns while HR-SCS demonstrated higher precision targeting of certain dermatomes. Spinal motor maps showed that the lateral contacts triggered stronger responses in medial gastrocnemius, adductor magnus, and tibialis anterior while the medial contacts triggered stronger responses in gluteus maximus and adductor hallucis. The time-locked popliteal fossa responses indicated ipsilateral activation by HR-SCS at the lateral contacts and bilateral activation at the medial contacts with stronger ipsilateral responses.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first to perform high-resolution medio-lateral SCS mapping in patients with chronic pain. These results show promise that HR-SCS may provide additional ipsilateral recruitment within the extremities which improve targeting of focal pain in the lower extremities. Furthermore, this study supports the functional use of intraoperative neuromonitoring as a decision tool to determine physiological midline in thoracic SCS surgeries and provides a full methodological framework.

Spinal Cord Stimulation as Treatment for Cancer and Chemotherapy-Induced Pain

Neuropathic pain is a rampant disease exacting a significant toll on patients, providers, and health care systems around the globe. Neuromodulation has been successfully employed to treat many indications including failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), phantom limb pain (PLP), radiculopathies, and intractable pelvic pain, among many others. Recent studies have also demonstrated efficacy for cancer-related pain and chemotherapy induced neuropathy with these techniques. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is the most commonly employed technique and involves implantation of percutaneous or paddle leads targeting the dorsal columns of the spinal cord with the goal of disrupting the pain signals traveling to the brain. Tonic, high frequency, and burst waveforms have all been shown to reduce pain and disability in chronic pain patients. Closed-loop SCS systems that automatically adjust stimulation parameters based on feedback (such as evoked compound action potentials) are becoming increasingly used to help ease the burden placed on patients to adjust their programming to their pain and position. Additionally, dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) is a newer technique that allows for dermatomal coverage especially in patients with pain in up to two dermatomes. Regardless of the technique chosen, neuromodulation has been shown to be cost-effective and efficacious and should be given full consideration in patients with chronic pain conditions.

Generating Appropriate and Reliable Evidence for Value Assessment of Medical Devices: An Ispor Medical Devices and Diagnostics Special Interest Group Report

Background: Health Technology Assessment methods have become an important health policy tool. Yet recommendations for what constitutes appropriate and reliable evidence for assessment of medical devices are still debated because methods to evaluate pharmaceuticals are often, and incorrectly, the starting point for assessments.

Objectives:

The study aims to: (i) propose recommendations on appropriate methodologies to assess the evidence on medical devices (ii) identify assessment methods that can be used to measure device value and (iii) suggest key areas for future work

Methods:

ISPOR's Medical Devices and Diagnostics Special Interest Group conducted a comprehensive search of databases and gray literature on evidence development and value assessment on medical devices. The literature search was supplemented with hand searching from high impact journals in the related field. The 10-person expert working group obtained written comments through multiple rounds of review from internal and external stakeholders. Recommendations were made to guide future research.

Results:

Multi-criteria decision analysis was identified as a useful approach to assess the value of treatment. Consideration should be given to resource use measures; valid and reliable functional status questionnaires; and general and disease-specific, health-related, quality-of-life measures in economic evaluations of device use. For future work, best practices for value framework design.

Conclusions:

Integration of value-based evidence in an evidence-generation and -synthesis process is needed to support market access and adoption. Methodological recommendations for measuring value can be challenging when the selection of domains and assessment of value are not device-specific.

Comparison of Spinal Cord Stimulation vs. Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation vs. Association of Both in Patients with Refractory Chronic Back and/or Lower Limb Neuropathic Pain: An International, Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Crossover Trial (BOOST-DRG Study)

While spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-established therapy to address refractory persistent spinal pain syndrome after spinal surgery (PSPS-T2), its lack of spatial selectivity and reported discomfort due to positional effects can be considered as significant limitations. As alternatives, new waveforms, such as burst stimulation and different spatial neural targets, such as dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS), have shown promising results. Comparisons between DRGS and standard SCS, or their combination, have never been studied on the same patients. "BOOST DRG" is the first prospective, randomized, double-blinded, crossover study to compare SCS vs. DRGS vs. SCS+DRGS. Sixty-six PSPS-T2 patients will be recruited internationally in three centers. Before crossing over, patients will receive each stimulation modality for 1 month, using tonic conventional stimulation. After 3 months, stimulation will consist in switching to burst for 1 month, and patients will choose which modality/waveform they receive and will then be reassessed at 6 and 12 months. In addition to our primary outcome based on pain rating, this study is designed to assess quality of life, functional disability, psychological distress, pain surface coverage, global impression of change, medication quantification, adverse events, brain functional imaging and electroencephalography, with the objective being to provide a multidimensional insight based on composite pain assessment.

Alternative Dorsal Root Ganglion Neuromodulation Electrode Implantation: A Report of 2 Cases with 3 Different Techniques

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 The traditional percutaneous placement of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) electrodes may not be eligible for every patient. In this tertiary spine surgery and interventional pain therapy center, alternative neurostimulation implantation techniques were developed and applied where standard percutaneous approaches failed or were contraindicated.

CASE PRESENTATION

 Three alternative implantation techniques can be used: (1) open surgical placement of DRG leads, (2) two-lead insertion via a lateral to medial transforaminal approach (level L3), and (3) percutaneous approach with two leads close to the spinal nerves L4 (peripheral nerve stimulation).

RESULTS

 The placement of the leads occurred without complications and resulted in similar expected outcomes as with the common percutaneous technique with long-term stable pain suppression at 7 months and 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

 In patients in whom the DRG cannot be approached by the standard percutaneous approach, at least three alternatives may be used in experienced hands resulting in stable pain suppression of similar magnitude.

Implanted spinal neuromodulation interventions for chronic pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Implanted spinal neuromodulation (SNMD) techniques are used in the treatment of refractory chronic pain. They involve the implantation of electrodes around the spinal cord (spinal cord stimulation (SCS)) or dorsal root ganglion (dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS)), and a pulse generator unit under the skin. Electrical stimulation is then used with the aim of reducing pain intensity.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy, effectiveness, adverse events, and cost-effectiveness of implanted spinal neuromodulation interventions for people with chronic pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, Web of Science (ISI), Health Technology Assessments, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry from inception to September 2021 without language restrictions, searched the reference lists of included studies and contacted experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SNMD interventions with placebo (sham) stimulation, no treatment or usual care; or comparing SNMD interventions + another treatment versus that treatment alone. We included participants ≥ 18 years old with non-cancer and non-ischaemic pain of longer than three months duration. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were disability, analgesic medication use, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and health economic outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened database searches to determine inclusion, extracted data and evaluated risk of bias for prespecified results using the Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Outcomes were evaluated at short- (≤ one month), medium- four to eight months) and long-term (≥12 months). Where possible we conducted meta-analyses. We used the GRADE system to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 unique published studies that randomised 908 participants, and 20 unique ongoing studies. All studies evaluated SCS. We found no eligible published studies of DRGS and no studies comparing SCS with no treatment or usual care. We rated all results evaluated as being at high risk of bias overall. For all comparisons and outcomes where we found evidence, we graded the certainty of the evidence as low or very low, downgraded due to limitations of studies, imprecision and in some cases, inconsistency. Active stimulation versus placebo SCS versus placebo (sham) Results were only available at short-term follow-up for this comparison. Pain intensity Six studies (N = 164) demonstrated a small effect in favour of SCS at short-term follow-up (0 to 100 scale, higher scores = worse pain, mean difference (MD) -8.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) -15.67 to -1.78, very low certainty). The point estimate falls below our predetermined threshold for a clinically important effect (≥10 points). No studies reported the proportion of participants experiencing 30% or 50% pain relief for this comparison. Adverse events (AEs) The quality and inconsistency of adverse event reporting in these studies precluded formal analysis. Active stimulation + other intervention versus other intervention alone SCS + other intervention versus other intervention alone (open-label studies) Pain intensity Mean difference Three studies (N = 303) demonstrated a potentially clinically important mean difference in favour of SCS of -37.41 at short term (95% CI -46.39 to -28.42, very low certainty), and medium-term follow-up (5 studies, 635 participants, MD -31.22 95% CI -47.34 to -15.10 low-certainty), and no clear evidence for an effect of SCS at long-term follow-up (1 study, 44 participants, MD -7 (95% CI -24.76 to 10.76, very low-certainty). Proportion of participants reporting ≥50% pain relief We found an effect in favour of SCS at short-term (2 studies, N = 249, RR 15.90, 95% CI 6.70 to 37.74, I2 0% ; risk difference (RD) 0.65 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.74, very low certainty), medium term (5 studies, N = 597, RR 7.08, 95 %CI 3.40 to 14.71, I2 = 43%; RD 0.43, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.73, low-certainty evidence), and long term (1 study, N = 87, RR 15.15, 95% CI 2.11 to 108.91 ; RD 0.35, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.49, very low certainty) follow-up. Adverse events (AEs) Device related No studies specifically reported  device-related adverse events at short-term follow-up. At medium-term follow-up, the incidence of lead failure/displacement (3 studies N = 330) ranged from 0.9 to 14% (RD 0.04, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.11, I2 64%, very low certainty). The incidence of infection (4 studies, N = 548) ranged from 3 to 7% (RD 0.04, 95%CI 0.01, 0.07, I2 0%, very low certainty). The incidence of reoperation/reimplantation (4 studies, N =5 48) ranged from 2% to 31% (RD 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.21, I2 86%, very low certainty). One study (N = 44) reported a 55% incidence of lead failure/displacement (RD 0.55, 95% CI 0.35, 0 to 75, very low certainty), and a 94% incidence of reoperation/reimplantation (RD 0.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.07, very low certainty) at five-year follow-up. No studies provided data on infection rates at long-term follow-up. We found reports of some serious adverse events as a result of the intervention. These included autonomic neuropathy, prolonged hospitalisation, prolonged monoparesis, pulmonary oedema, wound infection, device extrusion and one death resulting from subdural haematoma. Other No studies reported the incidence of other adverse events at short-term follow-up. We found no clear evidence of a difference in otherAEs at medium-term (2 studies, N = 278, RD -0.05, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.06, I2 0%) or long term (1 study, N = 100, RD -0.17, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.02) follow-up. Very limited evidence suggested that SCS increases healthcare costs. It was not clear whether SCS was cost-effective.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found very low-certainty evidence that SCS may not provide clinically important benefits on pain intensity compared to placebo stimulation. We found low- to very low-certainty evidence that SNMD interventions may provide clinically important benefits for pain intensity when added to conventional medical management or physical therapy. SCS is associated with complications including infection, electrode lead failure/migration and a need for reoperation/re-implantation. The level of certainty regarding the size of those risks is very low. SNMD may lead to serious adverse events, including death. We found no evidence to support or refute the use of DRGS for chronic pain.

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.

Stimulation of the dorsal root ganglion using an Injectrode®

Objective. The goal of this work was to compare afferent fiber recruitment by dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation using an injectable polymer electrode (Injectrode^®) and a more traditional cylindrical metal electrode.Approach. We exposed the L6 and L7 DRG in four cats via a partial laminectomy or burr hole. We stimulated the DRG using an Injectrode or a stainless steel (SS) electrode using biphasic pulses at three different pulse widths (80, 150, 300μs) and pulse amplitudes spanning the range used for clinical DRG stimulation. We recorded antidromic evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) in the sciatic, tibial, and common peroneal nerves using nerve cuffs. We calculated the conduction velocity of the ECAPs and determined the charge-thresholds and recruitment rates for ECAPs from Aα, Aβ, and Aδfibers. We also performed electrochemical impedance spectroscopy measurements for both electrode types.Main results. The ECAP thresholds for the Injectrode did not differ from the SS electrode across all primary afferents (Aα, Aβ, Aδ) and pulse widths; charge-thresholds increased with wider pulse widths. Thresholds for generating ECAPs from Aβfibers were 100.0 ± 32.3 nC using the SS electrode, and 90.9 ± 42.9 nC using the Injectrode. The ECAP thresholds from the Injectrode were consistent over several hours of stimulation. The rate of recruitment was similar between the Injectrodes and SS electrode and decreased with wider pulse widths.Significance. The Injectrode can effectively excite primary afferents when used for DRG stimulation within the range of parameters used for clinical DRG stimulation. The Injectrode can be implanted through minimally invasive techniques while achieving similar neural activation to conventional electrodes, making it an excellent candidate for future DRG stimulation and neuroprosthetic applications.

Dorsal root ganglion stimulation for patients with refractory pain due to anterior cutaneous nerve entrapment syndrome: A case series

BACKGROUND

Anterior cutaneous nerve entrapment syndrome (ACNES) is a painful condition that can be refractory in a small percentage of patients. Abdominal pain caused by thoracic nerve entrapment in the abdominal wall characterizes ACNES. In the small number of refractory patients to all standard treatments, medication overuse and abuse are serious problems. Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation might be a good treatment to improve pain scores and to lower medication use.

METHODS

We describe the retrospective analysis of nine cases of patients who underwent DRG stimulation for refractory ACNES using a treatment algorithm. We focused on reported pain intensity scores, medication use, and adverse events.

RESULTS

All nine patients experienced a decrease in pain intensity during the trial period and received a permanent pulse generator implantation. Three months after permanent implantation, eight of nine patients showed a pain reduction of more than 50%. Medication use was substantially lower.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This case series shows that DRG stimulation might be a very good treatment for refractory ACNES.

Single-Center Retrospective Analysis of Device-Related Complications Related to Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation for Pain Relief in 31 Patients

INTRODUCTION

Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation is a form of neuromodulation used to treat neuropathic pain due to a myriad of etiologies. Though this relatively new therapy has been shown to be quite effective, complications associated with the implantation of this therapy have not been well documented.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to describe the device-related complications associated with DRG stimulator implantations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective analysis of 31 patients who underwent full implantation of neuromodulation hardware marketed for DRG stimulation. The predefined endpoints included device-related complications associated with DRG implantations, such as hardware failure, explantation procedures, and revision surgery. Additional endpoints included percentage of patients receiving therapy and pain as measured using the visual analog scale (VAS) pain scale at initial, six-month, and 12-month follow-up after hardware implantation.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients were included out of 42 patients trialed. Baseline VAS in patients was 7.7 (31 patients). At initial follow-up, six-month follow-up, and one-year follow-up, VAS scores were 4.7 (31 patients), 5.3 (20 patients), and 5.5 (13 patients), respectively. Paired t-test between preoperative VAS (mean 7.3) and one-year follow-up VAS (5.5) demonstrated statistical significance (p = 0.027). At initial, six-month, and one-year follow-up, 30/31 (97%), 19/24 (79%), and 18/23 (78%) patients were confirmed to be receiving DRG stimulation therapy after permanent implant. Of the 31 patients who were implanted with a permanent system, 8 (26%) were explanted and an additional 10 (29%) required revision surgery.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we examine the various device-related complications associated with DRG stimulation requiring repeat surgery. High rates of hardware failure, revision surgery, and explantation of stimulators illustrate the need for hardware optimization to improve patient outcomes.

Analgesic Effects of Tonic and Burst Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in Rats With Painful Tibial Nerve Injury

OBJECTIVES

Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation is effective in treating chronic pain. While burst stimulation has been proven to enhance the therapeutic efficacy in spinal cord stimulation, currently only a tonic stimulation waveform is clinically used in DRG stimulation. We hypothesized that burst DRG stimulation might also produce analgesic effect in a preclinical neuropathic pain model. We evaluated both the therapeutic effects of burst DRG stimulation and the possible effects of DRG stimulation upon inflammation within the DRG in a preclinical neuropathic pain model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Rats received either a painful tibial nerve injury or sham surgery. Analgesic effects of DRG stimulation were evaluated by testing a battery of evoked pain-related behaviors as well as measuring the positive affective state associated with relief of spontaneous pain using conditioned place preference. Histological evidence for neuronal trauma or neuroinflammation was evaluated.

RESULTS

All of the waveforms tested (20 Hz-tonic, 20 Hz-burst, and 40 Hz-burst) have similar analgesic effects in sensory tests and conditioned place preference. Long-term DRG stimulation for two weeks does not change DRG expression of markers for nerve injury and neuroinflammation.

CONCLUSIONS

DRG stimulation using burst waveform might be also suitable for treating neuropathic pain.

The Dorsal Root Ganglion as a Novel Neuromodulatory Target to Evoke Strong and Reproducible Motor Responses in Chronic Motor Complete Spinal Cord Injury: A Case Series of Five Patients

OBJECTIVES

Current strategies for motor recovery after spinal cord injury (SCI) aim to facilitate motor performance through modulation of afferent input to the spinal cord using epidural electrical stimulation (EES). The dorsal root ganglion (DRG) itself, the first relay station of these afferent inputs, has not yet been targeted for this purpose. The current study aimed to determine whether DRG stimulation can facilitate clinically relevant motor response in motor complete SCI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five patients with chronic motor complete SCI were implanted with DRG leads placed bilaterally on level L4 during five days. Based on personalized stimulation protocols, we aimed to evoke dynamic (phase 1) and isotonic (phase 2) motor responses in the bilateral quadriceps muscles. On days 1 and 5, EMG-measurements (root mean square [RMS] values) and clinical muscle force measurements (MRC scoring) were used to measure motor responses and their reproducibility.

RESULTS

In all patients, DRG-stimulation evoked significant phase 1 and phase 2 motor responses with an MRC ≥4 for all upper leg muscles (rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, and biceps femoris) (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively), leading to a knee extension movement strong enough to facilitate assisted weight bearing. No significant differences in RMS values were observed between days 1 and 5 of the study, indicating that motor responses were reproducible.

CONCLUSION

The current paper provides first evidence that bilateral L4 DRG stimulation can evoke reproducible motor responses in the upper leg, sufficient for assisted weight bearing in patients with chronic motor complete SCI. As such, a new target for SCI treatment has surfaced, using existing stimulation devices, making the technique directly clinically accessible.

Analgesic dorsal root ganglionic field stimulation blocks conduction of afferent impulse trains selectively in nociceptive sensory afferents

Increased excitability of primary sensory neurons after peripheral nerve injury may cause hyperalgesia and allodynia. Dorsal root ganglion field stimulation (GFS) is effective in relieving clinical pain associated with nerve injury and neuropathic pain in animal models. However, its mechanism has not been determined. We examined effects of GFS on transmission of action potentials (APs) from the peripheral to central processes by in vivo single-unit recording from lumbar dorsal roots in sham injured rats and rats with tibial nerve injury (TNI) in fiber types defined by conduction velocity. Transmission of APs directly generated by GFS (20 Hz) in C-type units progressively abated over 20 seconds, whereas GFS-induced Aβ activity persisted unabated, while Aδ showed an intermediate pattern. Activity generated peripherally by electrical stimulation of the sciatic nerve and punctate mechanical stimulation of the receptive field (glabrous skin) was likewise fully blocked by GFS within 20 seconds in C-type units, whereas Aβ units were minimally affected and a subpopulation of Aδ units was blocked. After TNI, the threshold to induce AP firing by punctate mechanical stimulation (von Frey) was reduced, which was reversed to normal during GFS. These results also suggest that C-type fibers, not Aβ, mainly contribute to mechanical and thermal hypersensitivity (von Frey, brush, acetone) after injury. Ganglion field stimulation produces use-dependent blocking of afferent AP trains, consistent with enhanced filtering of APs at the sensory neuron T-junction, particularly in nociceptive units.

The Effectiveness of Dorsal Root Ganglion Neurostimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Pelvic Pain and Chronic Neuropathic Pain of the Lower Extremity: A Comprehensive Review of the Published Data

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of dorsal root ganglion neurostimulation for the treatment of refractory, focal pain in the pelvis and lower extremities.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was ≥50% pain relief. Secondary outcomes were physical function, mood, quality of life, opioid usage, and complications.

RESULTS

One pragmatic randomized controlled trial, four prospective cohort studies, and eight case series met the inclusion criteria. A worst-case scenario analysis from the randomized controlled trial reported ≥50% pain relief in 74% of patients with dorsal root ganglion neurostimulation vs. 51% of patients who experienced at least 50% relief with spinal cord stimulation at 3 months. Cohort data success rates ranged from 43% to 83% at ≤6 months and 27% to 100% at >6 months. Significant improvements were also reported in the secondary outcomes assessed, including mood, quality of life, opioid usage, and health care utilization, though a lack of available quantitative data limits further statistical analysis. Complication rates vary, though the only randomized controlled trial reported a higher rate of adverse events than that seen with traditional neurostimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

In accordance with the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system, low-quality evidence supports dorsal root ganglion neurostimulation as a more effective treatment than traditional neurostimulation for pain and dysfunction associated with complex regional pain syndrome or causalgia. Very low-quality evidence supports dorsal root ganglion neurostimulation for the treatment of chronic pelvic pain, chronic neuropathic groin pain, phantom limb pain, chronic neuropathic pain of the trunk and/or limbs, and diabetic neuropathy.

Interventional Therapies for Pain in Cancer Patients: a Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pain is a prevalent symptom in the lives of patients with cancer. In light of the ongoing opioid epidemic and increasing awareness of the potential for opioid abuse and addiction, clinicians are progressively turning to interventional therapies. This article reviews the interventional techniques available to mitigate the debilitating effects that untreated or poorly treated pain have in this population.

RECENT FINDINGS

A range of interventional therapies and technical approaches are available for the treatment of cancer-related pain. Many of the techniques described may offer effective analgesia with less systemic toxicity and dependency than first- and second-line oral and parenteral agents. Neuromodulatory techniques including dorsal root ganglion stimulation and peripheral nerve stimulation are increasingly finding roles in the management of oncologic pain. The goal of this pragmatic narrative review is to discuss interventional approaches to cancer-related pain and the potential of such therapies to improve the quality of life of cancer patients.

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation for Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Neuropathy

ABSTRACT

Chemotherapy-induced neuropathy has limited treatment options, and conventional medications used to treat neuropathic pain often do not provide adequate pain relief for patients with a history of cancer. Neuromodulation such as dorsal root ganglion stimulation remains a treatment that has been studied for chronic painful conditions such as low back pain, pelvic pain, complex regional pain syndrome, and phantom limb pain. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation has been presented for treatment of chemotherapy-induced neuropathy, but with limited duration of follow-up. We present a case of pain resolution after placement of a dorsal root ganglion stimulation for persistent chemotherapy-induced neuropathy. Our patient developed burning pain and allodynia in both feet 3 mos into her chemotherapy regimen, with worsened symptoms after cessation of chemotherapy. After failure of conservative pharmacotherapies, a 7-day dorsal root ganglion stimulation trial was implanted, resulting in 100% pain relief. A dorsal root ganglion stimulation was then implanted permanently, and our patient reported continued resolution of symptoms at evaluation 3 yrs after placement. To the author's knowledge, this is the first case of sustained relief with dorsal root ganglion stimulation placement for chemotherapy-induced neuropathy and presents a treatment option that warrants further investigation.

Review of complex regional pain syndrome and the role of the neuroimmune axis

Background

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a progressive and painful disease of the extremities that is characterized by continuous pain inconsistent with the initial trauma. CRPS is caused by a multi-mechanism process that involves both the peripheral and central nervous system, with a prominent role of inflammation in CRPS pathophysiology. This review examines what is currently known about the CRPS inflammatory and pain mechanisms, as well as the possible impact of neurostimulation therapies on the neuroimmune axis of CRPS.

Study design

A narrative review of preclinical and clinical studies provided an overview of the pain and inflammatory mechanisms in CRPS and addressed the effect of neurostimulation on immunomodulation.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted based on the PRISMA guidelines between September 2015 to September 2020. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

Results

Sixteen preclinical and eight clinical studies were reviewed. Preclinical studies identified different mechanisms of pain development in the acute and chronic CRPS phases. Several preclinical and clinical studies investigating inflammatory mechanisms, autoimmunity, and genetic profiles in CRPS, supported a role of neuroinflammation in the pathophysiology of CRPS. The immunomodulatory effects of neurostimulation therapy is still unclear, despite clinical improvement in the CRPS patients.

Conclusions

Increasing evidence supports a role for inflammation and neuroinflammation in CRPS pathophysiology. Preliminary neurostimulation findings, together with the role of (neuro)inflammation in CRPS, seems to provide a compelling rationale for its use in CRPS pain treatment. The possible immunomodulatory effects of neurostimulation opens new therapeutic possibilities, however further research is needed to gain a better understanding of the working mechanisms.

Dorsal Root Ganglion (DRG) and Chronic Pain

Context

Chronic neuropathic pain is a common condition, and up to 11.9% of the population have been reported to suffer from uncontrolled neuropathic pain. Chronic pain leads to significant morbidity, lowered quality of life, and loss of workdays, and thus carries a significant price tag in healthcare costs and lost productivity. dorsal root ganglia (DRG) stimulation has been recently increasingly reported and shows promising results in the alleviation of chronic pain. This paper reviews the background of DRG stimulation, anatomical, and clinical consideration and reviews the clinical evidence to support its use.

Evidence Acquisition

The DRG span the length of the spinal cord and house the neurons responsible for sensation from the periphery. They may become irritated by direct compression or local inflammation. Glial cells in the DRG respond to nerve injury, producing inflammatory markers and contribute to the development of chronic pain, even after the resolution of the original insult. While the underlying mechanism is still being explored, recent studies explored the efficacy of DRG stimulation and neuromodulation for chronic pain treatment.

Results

Several reported cases and a small number of randomized trials were published in recent years, describing different methods of DRG stimulation and neuromodulation with promising results. Though evidence quality is mostly low, these results provide evidence to support the utilization of this technique.

Conclusions

Chronic neuropathic pain is a common condition and carries significant morbidity and impact on the quality of life. Recent evidence supports the use of DRG neuromodulation as an effective technique to control chronic pain. Though studies are still emerging, the evidence appears to support this technique. Further studies, including large randomized trials evaluating DRG modulation versus other interventional and non-interventional techniques, are needed to further elucidate the efficacy of this method. These studies are also likely to inform the patient selection and the course of treatment.

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation for the Treatment of Non-Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Related Chronic Pain Syndromes: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

While the majority of indications and approvals for dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) are for the refractory management of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), emerging evidence has suggested that DRGS may be favorably used for a plethora of other chronic pain phenomena. Consequently, we aimed to characterize the use and efficacy of DRGS for these non-CRPS-related chronic pain syndromes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of clinical studies demonstrating the use of DRGS for non-CRPS-related chronic pain syndromes. The literature search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL plus across August and September 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 28 reports comprising 354 total patients were included in the analysis. Of the chronic pain syndromes presented, axial low back pain, chronic pelvic and groin pain, other peripheral neuropathies, and studies with multiple concomitant pain syndromes, a majority demonstrated >50% mean pain reduction at the time of last follow-up following DRGS. Physical function, quality of life (QOL), and lesser pain medication usage also were repeatedly reported to be significantly improved.

CONCLUSIONS

DRGS continues to lack supportive evidence from well designed, high level studies and recommendations from consensus committee experts. However, we present repeated and consistent evidence from lower level studies showing success with the use of DRGS for various non-CRPS chronic pain syndromes in reducing pain along with increasing function and QOL from one week to three years. Due to such low-level, high bias evidence, we strongly encourage the continuation of high-level studies in order to provide a stronger foundation for the use of DRGS in non-CRPS chronic pain patients. However, it may be reasonable and appropriate to evaluate patients for DRGS candidacy on a case-by-case basis particularly if they manifest focal pain syndromes refractory to noninterventional measures and may not be ideal candidates for other forms of neuromodulation.

Quantitative Sensory Testing of Spinal Cord and Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in Chronic Pain Patients

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

The physiological mechanisms underlying the pain-modulatory effects of clinical neurostimulation therapies, such as spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS), are only partially understood. In this pilot prospective study, we used patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and quantitative sensory testing (QST) to investigate the physiological effects and possible mechanisms of action of SCS and DRGS therapies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We tested 16 chronic pain patients selected for SCS and DRGS therapy, before and after treatment. PROs included pain intensity, pain-related symptoms (e.g., pain interference, pain coping, sleep interference) and disability, and general health status. QST included assessments of vibration detection theshold (VDT), pressure pain threshold (PPT) and tolerance (PPToL), temporal summation (TS), and conditioned pain modulation (CPM), at the most painful site.

RESULTS

Following treatment, all participants reported significant improvements in PROs (e.g., reduced pain intensity [p < 0.001], pain-related functional impairment [or pain interference] and disability [p = 0.001 for both]; better pain coping [p = 0.03], sleep [p = 0.002]), and overall health [p = 0.005]). QST showed a significant treatment-induced increase in PPT (p = 0.002) and PPToL (p = 0.011), and a significant reduction in TS (p = 0.033) at the most painful site, but showed no effects on VDT and CPM. We detected possible associations between a few QST measures and a few PROs. Notably, higher TS was associated with increased pain interference scores at pre-treatment (r = 0.772, p = 0.009), and a reduction in TS was associated with the reduction in pain interference (r = 0.669, p = 0.034) and pain disability (r = 0.690, p = 0.027) scores with treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary findings suggest significant clinical and therapeutic benefits associated with SCS and DRGS therapies, and the possible ability of these therapies to modulate pain processing within the central nervous system. Replication of our pilot findings in future, larger studies is necessary to characterize the physiological mechanisms of SCS and DRGS therapies.

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation as Treatment for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome of the Foot Refractory to Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Case Report

The ACCURATE study demonstrated non-inferiority and superiority of dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) over traditional spinal cord stimulation (t-SCS) in patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Yet, its efficacy in patients who had previously failed SCS therapy is unknown. A mid-60-year-old-male patient with right foot CRPS previously implanted with SCS system experienced relapse in pain. The patient was offered DRGS at right L5/S1 with 90% pain reduction. The patient subsequently proceeded to implant with continued pain relief. This case report demonstrates the effectiveness of DRGS in a patient who previously failed SCS. DRGS can be a viable salvage treatment option in the face of tolerance or loss of efficacy with SCS.

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation for the Management of Intractable Painful Polyneuropathy: A Prospective Pilot Study

OBJECTIVES

Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) is a promising neurostimulation modality in the treatment of painful polyneuropathy. The aim of this prospective pilot study was to investigate the effect of DRGS on pain intensity in patients with intractable painful polyneuropathy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nine patients with chronic, intractable painful polyneuropathy in the lower limbs were recruited. In each subject, between two and four DRGS leads were placed at the level of the L5 and S1 dorsal root ganglion. If trial stimulation was successful, a definitive implantable pulse generator (IPG) was implanted. Pain intensity was scored using an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) and reported as median and interquartile range (IQR), and compared to baseline values using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Additionally, patients' global impression of change (PGIC), pain extent, presence of neuropathic pain, physical functioning, quality of life, and mood were assessed.

RESULTS

Eight out of nine patients had a successful trial phase, of which seven received an IPG. Daytime pain decreased from a median (IQR) NRS score of 7.0 (5.9-8.3) to 2.0 (1.0-3.5) and 3.0 (1.6-4.9) in the first week and at six months after implantation, respectively. Similar effects were observed for night time and peak pain scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that DRGS significantly reduces both pain intensity and PGIC in patients with intractable painful polyneuropathy in the lower extremities. Large-scale clinical trials are needed to prove the efficacy of DRGS in intractable painful polyneuropathy.

Very Low Frequencies Maintain Pain Relief From Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation: An Evaluation of Dorsal Root Ganglion Neurostimulation Frequency Tapering

BACKGROUND

Dorsal root ganglion neurostimulation (DRG-S) is effective in treating various refractory chronic pain syndromes. In preclinical studies, DRG-S at very low frequencies (<5 Hz) reduces excitatory output in the superficial dorsal horn. Clinically, we have also observed the effectiveness of DRG-S at low frequencies. We conducted a case series to describe the effect of very low-frequency DRG-S stimulation on clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

DRG-S for refractory low back pain was initiated at parameters consistent with published values. Thereafter, the stimulation frequency of DRG-S was reduced in a stepwise fashion to the lowest frequency that maintained pain relief. Pain intensity, disability, and general health status data were collected at baseline, prior to initiation of tapering, and at four weeks after each patient's lowest effective stimulation frequency was reached.

RESULTS

After device activation (N = 20), DRG-S frequency was tapered from 16 to 4 Hz over a 4- to 17-week period, reducing charge-per-second by nearly two-thirds. Even so, pain relief was maintained at more than 75%, with consistent findings in the other measures.

CONCLUSION

DRG-S may have utility in treating chronic pain at lower stimulation frequencies than previously recognized. We have previously theorized that the mechanism of action may involve preferential recruitment of low-threshold mechanoreceptor fibers via the endogenous opioid system. Of clinical relevance, lower frequency stimulation maintains DRG-S efficacy regarding improvements in pain, disability, and quality of life. It can extend battery life and may potentially lead to the development of smaller implantable pulse generators.

Multicenter Retrospective Analysis of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulator Placement Using Intraoperative Neuromonitoring in Asleep Patients During Early Periods of Adoption

OBJECTIVES

Intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) has been used in the implantation of spinal cord stimulation for both safety and confirmation of lead placement. It is less well defined in its use for dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulator placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of 304 leads placed in 93 patients undergoing DRG stimulation therapy with its placement utilizing IONM in asleep patients by four implanting physicians in four separate centers. The first year, or early adoption period, of placements for each site was chosen as the included cases to evaluate.

RESULTS

There were a total of 14 IONM alerts across the 304 lead placements. There were two complications, no permanent or severe adverse events, and no revisions. All alerts led to a change in approach as a corrective action. The two complications were a patient requiring a blood patch for an undetected CSF leak, while the other was a generator site seroma that resolved with conservative care. A single patient experienced transient calf paresthesia's in the post-operative period.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective series demonstrates the utility and accuracy of IONM in not only confirming proper dorsal placement of a DRG electrode but also in maintaining a low adverse event profile. It further demonstrates that its utility in the real world with new users can be safe and accurate with an ease of integration.

Dorsal root ganglion stimulation for treatment of complex regional pain syndrome of the foot

This is a case of a 54-year-old man presenting with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type 1 of the right lower extremity, which was most debilitating in the plantar aspect of the right foot. The patient had prior treatment with thoracic spinal cord stimulation; however, the foot pain remained intractable. Given that his pain was predominantly in his foot and remained debilitating despite thoracic spinal cord stimulation, it was recommended that the patient undergo a trial of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation. The surgical technique for placement of dorsal root ganglion stimulators is demonstrated in this operative video.

The video can be found here: https://youtu.be/_1xMxFZa6tU

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation Alleviates Pain-related Behaviors in Rats with Nerve Injury and Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Dorsal root ganglion field stimulation is an analgesic neuromodulation approach in use clinically, but its mechanism is unknown as there is no validated animal model for this purpose. The authors hypothesized that ganglion stimulation is effective in reducing pain-like behaviors in preclinical chronic pain models.

METHODS

The authors provided ganglion stimulation or spinal cord stimulation to rats with traumatic neuropathy (tibial nerve injury), or osteoarthritis induced by intraarticular knee monosodium iodoacetate, or without injury (naïve). Analgesia was evaluated by testing a battery of pain-related reflexive, functional, and affective behaviors.

RESULTS

In rats with nerve injury, multilevel L4 and L5 ganglion stimulation decreased hypersensitivity to noxious mechanical stimulation more (area under curve, -1,447 ± 423 min × % response; n = 12) than single level ganglion stimulation at L4 ([-960 ± 251 min × % response; n = 8; P = 0.012] vs. L4 and L5), and L5 ([-676 ± 295 min × % response; n = 8; P < 0.0001] vs. L4 and L5). Spontaneous pain-like behavior, evaluated by conditioned place preference, responded to single L4 (Pretest [-93 ± 65 s] vs. Test [87 ± 82 s]; P = 0.002; n = 9), L5 (Pretest [-57 ± 36 s] vs. Test [137 ± 73 s]; P = 0.001; n = 8), and multilevel L4 and L5 (Pretest: -81 ± 68 s vs. Test: 90 ± 76 s; P = 0.003; n = 8) ganglion stimulation. In rats with osteoarthritis, multilevel L3 and L4 ganglion stimulation reduced sensitivity to knee motion more (-156 ± 28 min × points; n = 8) than L3 ([-94 ± 19 min × points in knee bend test; n = 7; P = 0.002] vs. L3 and L4) or L4 ([-71 ± 22 min × points; n = 7; P < 0.0001] vs. L3 and L4). Conditioned place preference during osteoarthritis revealed analgesic effectiveness for ganglion stimulation when delivered at L3 (Pretest [-78 ± 77 s] vs. Test [68 ± 136 s]; P = 0.048; n = 9), L4 (Pretest [-96 ± 51 s] vs. Test [73 ± 111 s]; P = 0.004; n = 9), and L3 and L4 (Pretest [-69 ± 52 s; n = 7] vs. Test [55 ± 140 s]; P = 0.022; n = 7).

CONCLUSIONS

Dorsal root ganglion stimulation is effective in neuropathic and osteoarthritic preclinical rat pain models with peripheral pathologic origins, demonstrating effectiveness of ganglion stimulation in a placebo-free setting and justifying this model as a suitable platform for mechanistic studies.

Sensory restoration by epidural stimulation of the lateral spinal cord in upper-limb amputees

Restoring somatosensory feedback to people with limb amputations is crucial to improve prosthetic control. Multiple studies have demonstrated that peripheral nerve stimulation and targeted reinnervation can provide somatotopically relevant sensory feedback. While effective, the surgical procedures required for these techniques remain a major barrier to translatability. Here, we demonstrate in four people with upper-limb amputation that epidural spinal cord stimulation (SCS), a common clinical technique to treat pain, evoked somatosensory percepts that were perceived as emanating from the missing arm and hand. Over up to 29 days, stimulation evoked sensory percepts in consistent locations in the missing hand regardless of time since amputation or level of amputation. Evoked sensations were occasionally described as naturalistic (e.g. touch or pressure), but were often paresthesias. Increasing stimulus amplitude increased the perceived intensity linearly, without increasing area of the sensations. These results demonstrate the potential of SCS as a tool to restore somatosensation after amputations.

Even some of the most advanced prosthetic arms lack an important feature: the ability to relay information about touch or pressure to the wearer. In fact, many people prefer to use simpler prostheses whose cables and harnesses pass on information about tension. However, recent studies suggest that electrical stimulation might give prosthesis users more sensation and better control.

After an amputation, the nerves that used to deliver sensory information from the hand still exist above the injury. Stimulating these nerves can help to recreate sensations in the missing limb and improve the control of the prosthesis. Still, this stimulation requires complicated surgical interventions to implant electrodes in or around the nerves. Spinal cord stimulation – a technique where a small electrical device is inserted near the spinal cord to stimulate nerves – may be an easier alternative. This approach only requires a simple outpatient procedure, and it is routinely used to treat chronic pain conditions.

Now, Chandrasekaran, Nanivadekar et al. show that spinal cord stimulation can produce the feeling of sensations in a person’s missing hand or arm. In the experiments, four people who had an arm amputation underwent spinal cord stimulation over 29 days. During the stimulation, the participants reported feeling electrical buzzing, vibration, or pressure in their missing limb. Changing the strength of the electric signals delivered to the spinal cord altered the intensity of these sensations.

The experiments are a step toward developing better prosthetics that restore some sensation. Further studies are now needed to determine whether spinal cord stimulation would allow people to perform sensory tasks with a prosthetic, for example handling an object that they cannot see.

Proclaim™ DRG Neurostimulator System for the management of chronic, intractable pain

Chronic pain is consistently listed as one of the most costly and disabling health problems worldwide. In an effort to treat these suffering individuals, significant amounts of time and energy have been devoted to discover safe and effective pain relieving treatments. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation is the newest treatment modality to be created for chronic intractable pain. In this manuscript, we review the history and development, published research and safety profile of the Proclaim™ DRG Neurostimulator System (Abbott, TX, USA). At last, we offer our outlook on future developments with dorsal root ganglion stimulation.

Three-Year Outcomes After Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain After Peripheral Nerve Injury of Upper and Lower Extremities

OBJECTIVES

Traumatic peripheral nerve injuries (PNI) often result in severe neuropathic pain which typically becomes chronic, is recalcitrant to common analgesics, and is associated with sleep disturbances, anxiety, and depression. Pharmacological treatments proven to be effective against neuropathic pain are not well tolerated due to side effects. Neuromodulative interventions such as peripheral nerve or spinal cord stimulation have generated mixed results and may be limited by reduced somatotopic specificity. Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation may be more effective in this etiology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-seven patients were trialed with a DRG neurostimulation system for PNI; trial success (defined as ≥50% pain relief) was 85%, and 23 patients received a permanent stimulator. However, 36-month outcome data was only available for 21 patients. Pain, quality of life, mental and physical function, and opioid usage were assessed at baseline and at 3-, 6-, 12-, 18-, 24-, and 36 months post-permanent implant. Implant-related complications were also documented.

RESULTS

Compared to baseline, we observed a significant pain relief (p < 0.001) at 3 (58%), 12 (66%), 18 (69%), 24 (71%), and 36 months (73%) in 21 patients (52.5 ± 14.2 years; 12 female), respectively. Mental and physical function showed immediate and sustained improvements. Participants reported improvements in quality of life. Opioid dosage reduced significantly (p < 0.001) at 3 (30%), 12 (93%), 18 (98%), 24 (99%), and 36 months (99%), and 20 of 21 patients were completely opioid-free after 36 months. There were five lead migrations and two electrode fractures (corrected by surgical intervention) and one wound infection (conservatively managed).

CONCLUSIONS

DRG neuromodulation appears to be a safe, effective, and durable option for treating neuropathic pain caused by PNI. The treatment allows cessation of often ineffective pharmacotherapy (including opioid misuse) and significantly improves quality of life.