1
|
Stotts R, Jain R, DO AA, Al-Jumah R. Management of Post Dural Puncture Headache During Spinal Cord Stimulation Trials: A Review of Current Literature. Curr Pain Headache Rep 2024:10.1007/s11916-024-01289-5. [PMID: 38916716 DOI: 10.1007/s11916-024-01289-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/19/2024] [Indexed: 06/26/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW The purpose of this review is to evaluate, discuss and explain the current literature regarding management of post dural puncture headaches (PDPH) during spinal cord stimulation (SCS) trials. RECENT FINDINGS Although an epidural blood patch (EBP) remains the gold standard in treatment of PDPH, current literature describes other modalities including various peripheral nerve blocks and pharmacological treatments to reduce PDPH symptoms. PDPH management in SCS centers around conservative treatment and EBP. It has been shown that some practitioners choose prophylactic measures and/or an EBP at the time of the lead placement. Recent literature regarding obstetric anesthesia related PDPH management has included newer potential modalities for addressing symptom improvement that can also be applied to PDPH from SCS trial dural punctures. Due to limited data overall, further studies are needed to effectively provide a guideline on optimal treatment protocols for PDPH after dural puncture in SCS trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ronnie Stotts
- University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA
| | - Rishabh Jain
- University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Koushik SS, Raghavan J, Saranathan S, Slinchenkova K, Viswanath O, Shaparin N. Complications of Spinal Cord Stimulators-A Comprehensive Review Article. Curr Pain Headache Rep 2024; 28:1-9. [PMID: 37855944 DOI: 10.1007/s11916-023-01178-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/03/2023] [Indexed: 10/20/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Spinal cord stimulation has been increasing in influence as an option to regulate pain, especially in the chronic pain patient population. However, even with the numerous changes made to this technology since its inception, it is still prone to various complications such as hardware issues, neurological injury/epidural hematoma, infections, and other biological concerns. The purpose of this article is to thoroughly review and evaluate literature pertaining to the complications associated with percutaneous spinal cord stimulation. RECENT FINDINGS Lead migration is generally the most common complication of percutaneous spinal cord stimulation; however, recent utilization of various anchoring techniques has been discussed and experienced clinical success in decreasing the prevalence of lead migration and lead fractures. With newer high-frequency systems gaining traction to improve pain management and decrease complications as compared to traditional systems, rechargeable implantable pulse generators have been the preferred power source. However, recent findings may suggest that these rechargeable implantable pulse generators do not significantly increase battery life as much as was proposed. Intraoperative neuromonitoring has seen success in mitigating neurological injury postoperatively and may see more usage in the future through more testing. Though the occurrence of infection and biological complications, including dural puncture and skin erosion, has been less frequent over time, they should still be treated in accordance with established protocols. While many complications can arise following percutaneous spinal cord stimulator implantation, the procedure is less invasive than open implantation and has seen largely positive patient feedback. Hardware complications, the more common issues that can occur, rarely indicate a serious risk and can generally be remedied through reoperation. However, less common cases such as neurological injury, infections, and biological complications require prompt diagnosis to improve the condition of the patient and prevent significant damage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarang S Koushik
- Department of Anesthesiology, Valleywise Health Medical Center, Creighton University School of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
| | - Jagun Raghavan
- Pre-Medical Student, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
| | | | - Kateryna Slinchenkova
- Department of Anesthesiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
| | - Omar Viswanath
- Innovative Pain and Wellness, LSU Health Sciences Center School of Medicine, Creighton University School of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Naum Shaparin
- Department of Anesthesiology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Madan E, Hussain N, Gill JS, Simopoulos TT. The contralateral oblique fluoroscopic view is associated with a lower incidence of postdural puncture headache in patients undergoing percutaneous spinal cord stimulation. Pain Pract 2023; 23:886-891. [PMID: 37381678 DOI: 10.1111/papr.13265] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2023] [Revised: 06/01/2023] [Accepted: 06/20/2023] [Indexed: 06/30/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a minimally invasive therapy that is increasingly used to treat refractory neuropathic pain. Although this technique has a low incidence of serious long-term adverse sequelae, the risk of complications such as inadvertent dural puncture remains. OBJECTIVES The goal of this article was to determine the impact of the contralateral oblique (CLO) fluoroscopic view incidence of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) during spinal cord stimulator implantation as compared to lateral fluoroscopic view. METHODS This was a single academic institution retrospective analysis of electronic medical records spanning an approximate 20-year time period. Operative and postoperative notes were reviewed for details on dural puncture, including technique and spinal level of access, the development of a PDPH, and subsequent management. RESULTS Over nearly two decades, a total of 1637 leads inserted resulted in 5 PDPH that were refractory to conservative measures but responded to epidural blood patch without long-term complications. The incidence of PDPH per lead insertion utilizing loss of resistance and lateral fluoroscopic guidance was 0.8% (4/489). However, adoption of CLO guidance was associated with a lower rate of PDPH at 0.08% (1/1148), p < 0.02. CONCLUSIONS The incorporation of the CLO view to guide epidural needle placement can decrease the odds of a PDPH during percutaneous SCS procedures. This study further provides real-world data supporting the potential enhanced accuracy of epidural needle placement in order to avoid unintentional puncture or trauma to deeper spinal anatomic structures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elena Madan
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Nasir Hussain
- Department of Anesthesiology, The Ohio State University, Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Jatinder S Gill
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Thomas T Simopoulos
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lo Bianco G, Tinnirello A, Papa A, Marchesini M, Day M, Palumbo GJ, Terranova G, Di Dato MT, Thomson SJ, Schatman ME. Interventional Pain Procedures: A Narrative Review Focusing On Safety and Complications. PART 2 Interventional Procedures For Back Pain. J Pain Res 2023; 16:761-772. [PMID: 36925622 PMCID: PMC10010974 DOI: 10.2147/jpr.s396215] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2022] [Accepted: 03/04/2023] [Indexed: 03/18/2023] Open
Abstract
In patients where conservative approaches have failed to relieve from chronic pain, interventional procedures may be an option in well selected patients. In recent years there has been an increase in the use and development of invasive procedures. Concomitantly, there has also been an increase in the complications associated with these procedures. Taken this into consideration, it is important for healthcare providers to take a cautious and vigilant approach, with a focus on patient safety, in order to minimize the risk of adverse events and ensure the best possible outcome for the patient. This may include careful selection of patients for procedures, use of proper techniques and equipment, and close monitoring and follow-up after the procedure. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the primary complications associated with commonly performed image-guided (fluoroscopy or ultrasound-guided) interventional procedures and provide strategies to reduce the risk of these complications. We conclude that although complications from interventional pain procedures can be mitigated to a certain degree, they cannot be eliminated altogether. In order to avoid adverse events, patient safety should be given considerable attention and physicians should be constantly aware of the possibility of developing complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuliano Lo Bianco
- Department of Biomedical and Biotechnological Sciences, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
- Anesthesiology and Pain Department, Fondazione Istituto G. Giglio, Cefalù, Italy
| | - Andrea Tinnirello
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine Department, ASST Franciacorta, Ospedale di Iseo, Iseo, 25049, Italy
| | - Alfonso Papa
- Pain Department, AO “Ospedali dei Colli”, Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Italy
| | - Maurizio Marchesini
- Mininvasive Surgery Department, Unit of Pain Medicine IRCCS Maugeri Pavia, Pavia, 27100, Italy
| | - Miles Day
- Pain Research, The Pain Center at Grace Clinic, Texas Tech University HSC, Lubbock, TX, USA
| | - Gaetano Joseph Palumbo
- Azienda Ospedale - Università Padova, Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Padova, Italy
| | - Gaetano Terranova
- Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Department, Asst Gaetano Pini, Milano, Italy
| | | | - Simon J Thomson
- Pain Management, Mid and South Essex University Hospitals NHSFT, Basildon, SS16 5NL, UK
| | - Michael E Schatman
- Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care, and Pain Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Population Health – Division of Medical Ethics, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Schyns-van den Berg AM, Gupta A. Postdural puncture headache - revisited. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2023. [DOI: 10.1016/j.bpa.2023.02.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/08/2023]
|
6
|
Bajaj G, Southerland WA, Badiola I, Bell R. Post-dural Puncture Headache After Removal of Trail Spinal Cord Stimulator Leads: A Case Report. Cureus 2022; 14:e29665. [DOI: 10.7759/cureus.29665] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
|
7
|
Incidence and Predictors of Inadvertent Dural Puncture After Percutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Retrospective Data Base Analysis. Neuromodulation 2022:S1094-7159(22)00760-7. [PMID: 35977852 DOI: 10.1016/j.neurom.2022.06.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2022] [Accepted: 06/26/2022] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Inadvertent dural puncture (IDP) is a known complication associated with traditional neuraxial procedures; however, its characterization after percutaneous spinal cord stimulation (SCS) lead placement has yet to be clearly established in large population studies. This retrospective analysis aims to understand the incidence and associated characteristics of patients with IDP after percutaneous SCS lead placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS The PearlDiver Mariner database of national all-payer claims was used to identify patients who received percutaneous SCS leads and had a claim for IDP (intraoperative IDP or postdural puncture headache [PDPH] claim) within 45 days. The primary outcome was to determine the overall incidence of IDP. Secondary outcomes included an evaluation of associated risk factors for IDP and treatments used in symptomatic management. RESULTS A total of 90,952 patients who underwent percutaneous lead SCS placement were included. The incidence of IDP was 0.48% (436/90,952 patients). Older age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.95-0.97; p < 0.0001) and male sex (OR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.53-0.81; p < 0.001) had a lower odds of having a claim for IDP, whereas a history of IDP was associated with a higher OR (95% CI) by 13.72 times (10.72-17.58) (p < 0.0001). Of the IDP patients, 64% (277/436 patients) had a claim for a therapeutic blood patch. Discrepancy in type of claim for IDP was observed, with most being for PDPH. CONCLUSIONS Our findings suggest that IDP after percutaneous SCS lead placement is an uncommon event; however, certain factors are associated with its development. Overall, early recognition of IDP after percutaneous SCS lead placement is imperative to facilitate the delivery of targeted treatments and prevent further harmful consequences to the patient.
Collapse
|
8
|
Southerland WA, Hasoon J, Urits I, Viswanath O, Simopoulos TT, Imani F, Karimi-Aliabadi H, Aner MM, Kohan L, Gill J. Dural Puncture During Spinal Cord Stimulator Lead Insertion: Analysis of Practice Patterns. Anesth Pain Med 2022; 12:e127179. [PMID: 36158140 PMCID: PMC9364517 DOI: 10.5812/aapm-127179] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2022] [Accepted: 04/29/2022] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an important modality for intractable pain not amenable to less conservative measures. During percutaneous SCS lead insertion, a critical step is safe access to the epidural space, which can be complicated by a dural puncture. Objectives In this review, we present and analyze the practices patterns in the event of a dural puncture during a SCS trial or implantation. Methods We conducted a survey of the practice patterns regarding spinal cord stimulation therapy. The survey was administered to members of the Spine Intervention Society and American Society of Regional Anesthesia specifically inquiring decision making in case of inadvertent dural puncture during spinal cord stimulator lead insertion. Results A maximum of 193 responded to a question regarding dural punctures while performing a SCS trial and 180 responded to a question regarding dural punctures while performing a SCS implantation. If performing a SCS trial and a dural puncture occurs, a majority of physicians chose to continue the procedure at a different level (56.99%), followed by abandoning the procedure (27.98%), continuing at the same level (10.36%), or choosing another option (4.66%). Similarly, if performing a permanent implantation and a dural puncture occurs, most physicians chose to continue the procedure at a different level (61.67%), followed by abandoning the procedure (21.67%), continuing at the same level (10.56%), or choosing another option (6.11%). Conclusions Whereas the goals of the procedure would support abandoning the trial but continuing with the permanent in case of inadvertent dural puncture, we found that decision choices were minimally influenced by whether the dural puncture occurred during the trial or the permanent implant. The majority chose to continue with the procedure at a different level while close to a quarter chose to abandon the procedure. This article sets a time stamp in practice patterns from March 20, 2020 to June 26, 2020. These results are based on contemporary SCS practices as demonstrated by this cohort, rendering the options of abandoning or continuing after dural puncture as reasonable methods. Though more data is needed to provide a consensus, providers can now see how others manage dural punctures during SCS procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Warren A. Southerland
- Department of Anesthesia, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jamal Hasoon
- Department of Anesthesia, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA
- Pain Specialists of America, Austin, TX, USA
- Corresponding Author: Department of Anesthesia, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Ivan Urits
- Department of Anesthesia, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Department of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, USA
| | - Omar Viswanath
- Department of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, USA
- Valley Anesthesiology and Pain Consultants, Envision Physician Services, Phoenix, AZ, USA
- Department of Anesthesiology, Phoenix, University of Arizona College of Medicine–Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Thomas T. Simopoulos
- Department of Anesthesia, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Farnad Imani
- Pain Research Center, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Hakimeh Karimi-Aliabadi
- Department of Anesthesiology, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran
- Corresponding Author: Department of Anesthesiology, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
| | - Musa M Aner
- Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Center for Pain and Spine, Geisel School of Medicine, Lebanon, NH, USA
| | - Lynn Kohan
- Pain Management Center; University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Jatinder Gill
- Department of Anesthesia, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
D'Souza RS, Olatoye OO, Butler CS, Barman RA, Ashmore ZM, Hagedorn JM. Adverse Events Associated With 10-kHz Dorsal Column Spinal Cord Stimulation: A 5-Year Analysis of the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) Database. Clin J Pain 2022; 38:320-327. [PMID: 35132023 DOI: 10.1097/ajp.0000000000001026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2021] [Accepted: 12/17/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND High-frequency (10-kHz) spinal cord stimulation (SCS) continues to be an emerging therapy in chronic pain management. The same complications that plagued earlier SCS systems may affect newer stimulation technologies, although there is limited data on the type of complications and surgical management of these complications. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to systematically examine real-world complications associated with 10-kHz SCS reported on the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. MATERIALS AND METHODS The MAUDE database was queried for entries reported between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020. Entries were classified into procedural complications, device-related complications, patient complaints, surgically managed complications, serious adverse events, and/or other complications. Primary outcomes included type and frequency of complications, and surgical management of complications. RESULTS A total of 1651 entries were analyzed. Most entries were categorized as procedural complications (72.6%), followed by serious adverse events (10.5%), device-related complications (10.5%), and patient complaints (9.9%). Most complications were managed surgically with explant (50.9%) rather than revision (5.0%) or incision/drainage (6.6%). Of procedural complications, the most common entries included non-neuraxial infection (52.9%), new neurological symptoms (14.7%), and dural puncture (9.5%). Of device-related complications, the most common entries included lead damage (41.6%), erosion (18.5%), and difficult insertion (11.5%). CONCLUSION This retrospective 5-year analysis of complications from10-kHz SCS provides a real-world assessment of safety data unique for this stimulation modality. This analysis may help inform future clinical decisions, lead to device enhancement and optimization, and improve mitigation of risks to provide safe and efficacious use of 10-kHz SCS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ryan S D'Souza
- Division of Pain Medicine Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine
| | - Oludare O Olatoye
- Division of Pain Medicine Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine
| | - Casey S Butler
- Division of Pain Medicine Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine
| | - Ross A Barman
- Departments of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine
| | - Zachary M Ashmore
- Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Rochester, MN
| | - Jonathan M Hagedorn
- Division of Pain Medicine Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Deer TR, Lamer TJ, Pope JE, Falowski SM, Provenzano DA, Slavin K, Golovac S, Arle J, Rosenow JM, Williams K, McRoberts P, Narouze S, Eldabe S, Lad SP, De Andrés JA, Buchser E, Rigoard P, Levy RM, Simpson B, Mekhail N. The Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC) Safety Guidelines for the Reduction of Severe Neurological Injury. Neuromodulation 2017; 20:15-30. [PMID: 28042918 DOI: 10.1111/ner.12564] [Citation(s) in RCA: 81] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2016] [Accepted: 11/07/2016] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Neurostimulation involves the implantation of devices to stimulate the brain, spinal cord, or peripheral or cranial nerves for the purpose of modulating the neural activity of the targeted structures to achieve specific therapeutic effects. Surgical placement of neurostimulation devices is associated with risks of neurologic injury, as well as possible sequelae from the local or systemic effects of the intervention. The goal of the Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC) is to improve the safety of neurostimulation. METHODS The International Neuromodulation Society (INS) is dedicated to improving neurostimulation efficacy and patient safety. Over the past two decades the INS has established a process to use best evidence to improve care. This article updates work published by the NACC in 2014. NACC authors were chosen based on nomination to the INS executive board and were selected based on publications, academic acumen, international impact, and diversity. In areas in which evidence was lacking, the NACC used expert opinion to reach consensus. RESULTS The INS has developed recommendations that when properly utilized should improve patient safety and reduce the risk of injury and associated complications with implantable devices. CONCLUSIONS On behalf of INS, the NACC has published recommendations intended to reduce the risk of neurological injuries and complications while implanting stimulators.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Konstantin Slavin
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | | | - Jeffrey Arle
- Department of Neurosurgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Joshua M Rosenow
- Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Kayode Williams
- Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | - Samer Narouze
- Summa Western Reserve Hospital, Cuyahoga Falls, OH, USA
| | - Sam Eldabe
- The James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK
| | - Shivanand P Lad
- Division of Neurosurgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Jose A De Andrés
- Valencia School of Medicine, Hospital General Universitario, Valencia, Spain
| | - Eric Buchser
- Anaesthesia and Pain Management Department, EHC Hosptial, Morges, and CHUV University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | | | | | - Brian Simpson
- Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|