1
|
Hasoon J, Vu PD, Mousa B, Markaryan AR, Sarwary ZB, Pinkhasova D, Chen GH, Gul F, Robinson CL, Simopoulos TT, Gill J, Viswanath O. Device-Related Complications Associated with Cylindrical Lead Spinal Cord Stimulator Implants: A Comprehensive Review. Curr Pain Headache Rep 2024; 28:941-947. [PMID: 38850491 DOI: 10.1007/s11916-024-01280-0] [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: 05/30/2024] [Indexed: 06/10/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an increasingly utilized therapy for the treatment of neuropathic pain conditions. Though minimally invasive and reversable, there are several important device-related complications that physicians should be aware of before offering this therapy to patients. The aim of this review is to synthesize recent studies in device-related SCS complications pertaining to cylindrical lead implantation and to discuss etiologies, symptoms and presentations, diagnostic evaluation, clinical implications, and treatment options. RECENT FINDINGS Device-related complications are more common than biologic complications. Device-related complications covered in this review include lead migration, lead fracture, lead disconnection, generator failure, loss of charge, generator flipping, hardware related pain, and paresthesia intolerance. The use of SCS continues to be an effective option for neuropathic pain conditions. Consideration of complications prior to moving forward with SCS trials and implantation is a vital part of patient management and device selection. Knowledge of these complications can provide physicians and other healthcare professionals the ability to maximize patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jamal Hasoon
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX, USA.
| | - Peter D Vu
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX, USA
| | - Bakir Mousa
- University of Arizona College of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | | | | | | | - Grant H Chen
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, McGovern Medical School, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, TX, USA
| | - Farah Gul
- Department of Internal Medicine, Khyber Medical College, Peshawar, Pakistan
| | - Christopher L Robinson
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Thomas T Simopoulos
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jatinder Gill
- Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Omar Viswanath
- Department of Anesthesiology, Creighton University School of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Deer TR, Russo MA, Sayed D, Pope JE, Grider JS, Hagedorn JM, Falowski SM, Al-Kaisy A, Slavin KV, Li S, Poree LR, Eldabe S, Meier K, Lamer TJ, Pilitsis JG, De Andrés J, Perruchoud C, Carayannopoulos AG, Moeschler SM, Hadanny A, Lee E, Varshney VP, Desai MJ, Pahapill P, Osborn J, Bojanic S, Antony A, Piedimonte F, Hayek SM, Levy RM. The Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)®: Recommendations for the Mitigation of Complications of Neurostimulation. Neuromodulation 2024; 27:977-1007. [PMID: 38878054 DOI: 10.1016/j.neurom.2024.04.004] [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: 01/30/2024] [Revised: 03/27/2024] [Accepted: 04/08/2024] [Indexed: 08/09/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The International Neuromodulation Society convened a multispecialty group of physicians based on expertise and international representation to establish evidence-based guidance on the mitigation of neuromodulation complications. This Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)® project intends to update evidence-based guidance and offer expert opinion that will improve efficacy and safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS Authors were chosen on the basis of their clinical expertise, familiarity with the peer-reviewed literature, research productivity, and contributions to the neuromodulation literature. Section leaders supervised literature searches of MEDLINE, BioMed Central, Current Contents Connect, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed from 2017 (when NACC last published guidelines) to October 2023. Identified studies were graded using the United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria for evidence and certainty of net benefit. Recommendations are based on the strength of evidence or consensus when evidence was scant. RESULTS The NACC examined the published literature and established evidence- and consensus-based recommendations to guide best practices. Additional guidance will occur as new evidence is developed in future iterations of this process. CONCLUSIONS The NACC recommends best practices regarding the mitigation of complications associated with neurostimulation to improve safety and efficacy. The evidence- and consensus-based recommendations should be used as a guide to assist decision-making when clinically appropriate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy R Deer
- The Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USA.
| | | | - Dawood Sayed
- The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA
| | | | - Jay S Grider
- UKHealthCare Pain Services, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, KY, USA
| | - Jonathan M Hagedorn
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | | | - Adnan Al-Kaisy
- Guy's and St. Thomas National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, The Walton Centre for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Liverpool, UK
| | - Konstantin V Slavin
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA; Neurology Section, Jesse Brown Veterans Administration Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Sean Li
- National Spine & Pain Centers, Shrewsbury, NJ, USA
| | - Lawrence R Poree
- Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Sam Eldabe
- The James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK
| | - Kaare Meier
- Department of Anesthesiology (OPINord), Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Arhus, Denmark; Department of Neurosurgery (Afd. NK), Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Arhus, Denmark
| | | | | | - Jose De Andrés
- Valencia School of Medicine, Anesthesia Critical Care and Pain Management Department, General University Hospital, Valencia, Spain
| | | | - Alexios G Carayannopoulos
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and Comprehensive Spine Center, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USA; Brown University Warren Alpert Medical School (Neurosurgery), Providence, RI, USA
| | - Susan M Moeschler
- Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Amir Hadanny
- Department of Neurosurgery, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA
| | - Eric Lee
- Mililani Pain Center, Mililani, HI, USA
| | - Vishal P Varshney
- Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Mehul J Desai
- International Spine, Pain & Performance Center, Virginia Hospital Center, Monument Research Institute, George Washington University School of Medicine, Arlington, VA, USA
| | - Peter Pahapill
- Functional Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA
| | - J Osborn
- St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Stana Bojanic
- Department of Neurosurgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - Ajay Antony
- The Orthopaedic Institute, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Fabian Piedimonte
- School of Medicine, University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Salim M Hayek
- Case Western Reserve University, University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Robert M Levy
- Neurosurgical Services, Clinical Research, Anesthesia Pain Care Consultants, Tamarac, FL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kurt E, Kollenburg L, Joosten S, van Dongen R, Engels Y, Henssen D, Vissers K. Preoperative Counseling in Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Designated Driver in Implantable Pulse Generator-Related Inconveniences? Neuromodulation 2024:S1094-7159(24)00630-5. [PMID: 39001726 DOI: 10.1016/j.neurom.2024.05.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2024] [Revised: 05/26/2024] [Accepted: 05/31/2024] [Indexed: 07/15/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been reported to cause substantial pain relief and improved quality of life (QoL) in patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS). Despite implantable pulse generator (IPG)-related inconveniences such as pain, shame, and discomfort affecting QoL and patient satisfaction, these are often neglected. Hence, the current study aims to determine the associations between patient satisfaction, IPG-related inconveniences, and preoperative counseling in a homogeneous group of patients with PSPS receiving SCS with IPG implantation in the gluteal or abdominal area. MATERIALS AND METHODS Retrospective data on sample characteristics were gathered from the EPIC (electronic health record software) digital patient data base. Prospective data on patient satisfaction were obtained with a questionnaire that covered various topics such as shame, pain, disturbances in daily/intense activities, night rest and/or sleep, discomfort caused by clothing, and preoperative counseling. The exact location of the IPG and its scar were determined with photo analysis. Thereafter, the site of IPG placement was classified into separate quadrants within the gluteal and abdominal area. Patient satisfaction was defined as accepting the current location of the IPG without having the wish to undergo revision surgery. RESULTS In total, 81 participants (50.9 ± 10 years) were included in this analysis, with patient satisfaction observed in 61 patients (75.3%). Among satisfied patients, more extensive preoperative counseling concerning IPG pain and discomfort was reported compared with patients who were not satisfied (p < 0.001). When comparing the two groups, significant differences were found in shame (8/81, 9.9%), IPG site pain (21/81, 25.9%), disturbance of activities (42/81, 51.9%), and clothing-related discomfort (42/81, 51.9%). CONCLUSIONS On the basis of the current results, shared decision-making and comprehensive preoperative provision of information are recommended to optimize patient satisfaction regarding IPG pain, discomfort, and inconveniences. Although many patients experience these disadvantages despite successful SCS for pain related to PSPS, most of them accept this if they have received adequate preoperative information about expectations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erkan Kurt
- Department of Neurosurgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands; Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| | - Linda Kollenburg
- Department of Neurosurgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Sisley Joosten
- Department of Neurosurgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Robert van Dongen
- Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Yvonne Engels
- Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Dylan Henssen
- Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Kris Vissers
- Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
García Baos J, Huete Marañés Á, Mingote Á, Mendiola de la Osa A, Herrero Trujillano M, Ágreda García C, Martínez Rodríguez SH, García Fernández J. A pain in the pocket: Prevalence of pocket pain in patients with implantation of neuromodulation systems: A retrospective study. REVISTA ESPANOLA DE ANESTESIOLOGIA Y REANIMACION 2024:S2341-1929(24)00120-3. [PMID: 38972352 DOI: 10.1016/j.redare.2024.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Revised: 02/05/2024] [Accepted: 02/27/2024] [Indexed: 07/09/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Implantable pulse generator (IPG) is a neurostimulation therapy mediated by electrodes and surgically implanted in a subcutaneous "pocket" used for the control of numerous pathologies. This study examines both the prevalence of pain associated with IPG implantation ("pain pocket syndrome") and its associated characteristics. MATERIALS AND METHODS 56 patients with an IPG were included in the study. A health questionnaire was conducted to determine the presence of pain associated with the pocket and its neuropathic characteristics, as well as associated aesthetic concerns, location, situations that accentuate or alleviate pain, medications used for baseline and pocket pain control and other factors associated. RESULTS Pain in the area of implantation of the IPG had a prevalence of 52.6% of patients (n = 27), in our sample, with a mean score on the visual analogic scale (VAS) of 4.9 points [3.9-5.8 points], with neuropathic characteristics in 53.3% (n = 16) of the patients with pain, with differences between the mean VAS score of the female (5.5 [4.3-5.8 points]) and males (3.5 points [2.1-4.9 points]) (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION Pocket pain is a condition with a higher prevalence than described in previous studies, being of a higher intensity in females, involving a moderate pain in the area of implantation of the neuromodulating therapy. This pain has neuropathic characteristics and could require a repositioning intervention. Hence, more studies in this field should be carried to detect and prevent this syndrome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J García Baos
- CEU San Pablo University, Faculty of Medicine, Madrid, Spain
| | - Á Huete Marañés
- CEU San Pablo University, Faculty of Medicine, Madrid, Spain
| | - Á Mingote
- Anesthesia, Critical Care Department and Pain Unit, Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda Universitary Hospital, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain; Autonomous University of Madrid, Faculty of Medicine, Madrid, Spain.
| | - A Mendiola de la Osa
- Anesthesia, Critical Care Department and Pain Unit, Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda Universitary Hospital, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain
| | - M Herrero Trujillano
- Anesthesia, Critical Care Department and Pain Unit, Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda Universitary Hospital, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain
| | - C Ágreda García
- Anesthesia, Critical Care Department and Pain Unit, Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda Universitary Hospital, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain
| | - S H Martínez Rodríguez
- Anesthesia, Critical Care Department and Pain Unit, Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda Universitary Hospital, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain; Autonomous University of Madrid, Faculty of Medicine, Madrid, Spain
| | - J García Fernández
- Anesthesia, Critical Care Department and Pain Unit, Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda Universitary Hospital, Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain; Autonomous University of Madrid, Faculty of Medicine, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Burke L, Desai MJ. Pocket pain following spinal cord stimulator generator implantation: A narrative review of this under-reported risk. Pain Pract 2024; 24:659-669. [PMID: 38102862 DOI: 10.1111/papr.13336] [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] [Indexed: 12/17/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-established treatment option for chronic pain. Pain over the implantable pulse generator, or pocket pain, is an incompletely understood risk of SCS implantation which may limit the efficacy of treatment and patient quality of life. The goal of this narrative review is to analyze the literature to gain a more thorough understanding of the incidence and risk factors for the development of pocket pain to help guide treatment options and minimize its occurrence in the future. METHODS A literature review was conducted investigating the development of pocket pain in patients with SCS for the management of a variety of pain conditions. RESULTS In total, 305 articles were included in the original database search and 50 met the criteria for inclusion. The highest level of evidence for papers that specifically investigated pocket pain was level III. Four retrospective, observational analyses included pocket pain as a primary outcome. The remainder of the included studies listed pocket pain as an adverse event of SCS implantation. CONCLUSIONS There is a relative dearth of primary literature that examines the incidence, characteristics, and health economic implications of pocket pain in patients with SCS. This highlights the need for large-scale, high-quality prospective or randomized controlled trials examining pocket pain. This may ultimately help prevent and reduce pocket pain leading to improved efficacy of treatment and greater patient quality of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lindsay Burke
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| | - Mehul J Desai
- International Spine, Pain & Performance Center, Washington, DC, USA
- School of Medicine and Health Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Salmon J, Bates D, Du Toit N, Verrills P, Yu J, Taverner MG, Mohabbati V, Green M, Heit G, Levy R, Staats P, Ruais J, Kottalgi S, Makous J, Mitchell B. Early Experience With a Novel Miniaturized Spinal Cord Stimulation System for the Management of Chronic Intractable Pain of the Back and Legs. Neuromodulation 2023; 26:172-181. [PMID: 36608962 DOI: 10.1016/j.neurom.2022.11.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2022] [Accepted: 11/03/2022] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION A novel, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) system with a battery-free miniaturized implantable pulse generator (IPG) was used in this feasibility study. The system uses an external power source that communicates bidirectionally with the IPG (< 1.5 cm3). Human factors, subject comfort, and effects on low back and leg pain were evaluated in this first-in-human study. MATERIALS AND METHODS A prospective, multicenter, open-label clinical trial was initiated to evaluate the safety and performance of a novel miniaturized stimulator in the treatment of chronic, intractable leg and low-back pain. Eligible subjects were recruited for the study and gave consent. Subjects who passed the screening/trial phase (defined as ≥ 50% decrease in pain) continued to the long-term implant phase and were followed up at predefined time points after device activation. Interim clinical and usability outcomes were captured and reported at 90 days. RESULTS Results of 22 subjects who chose a novel pulsed stimulation pattern therapy using the battery-free IPG (< 1.5 cm3) are described here. At 90-days follow-up, the average pain reduction was 79% in the leg (n = 22; p < 0.0001) and 76% in the low back (n = 21; p < 0.0001) compared with baseline. Responder rates (≥ 50% pain relief) at 90 days were 86% in leg pain (19/22) and 81% in low-back pain (17/21). Subjects rated the level of comfort of the external wearable power source to be 0.41 ± 0.73 at 90 days on an 11-point rating scale (0 = very comfortable, 10 = very uncomfortable). DISCUSSION These interim results from the ongoing study indicate the favorable efficacy and usability of a novel, externally powered, battery-free SCS IPG (< 1.5 cm3) for leg and low-back pain. Study subjects wore the external power source continuously and found it comfortable, and the system provided significant pain relief. These preliminary findings warrant further investigation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is ACTRN12618001862235.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John Salmon
- Pain Care Perth and Western Australia, Pain Management, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Dan Bates
- Metro Pain Group, Pain Management, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Neels Du Toit
- Metro Pain Group, Pain Management, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Paul Verrills
- Metro Pain Group, Pain Management, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - James Yu
- Sydney Spine and Pain, Pain Management, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Vahid Mohabbati
- Sydney Pain Management Centre, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Matthew Green
- Pain Medicine of South Australia, Pain Management, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Gary Heit
- Department of Neurosurgery, Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue, Vietnam
| | - Robert Levy
- Institute for Neuromodulation, Neurosurgery, Boca Raton, FL, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Bruce Mitchell
- Metro Pain Group, Pain Management, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|