High-Dose Spinal Cord Stimulation Reduces Long-Term Pain Medication Use in Patients With Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Who Obtained at Least 50% Pain Intensity and Medication Reduction During a Trial Period: A Registry-Based Cohort Study

Factors Predicting Clinically Relevant Pain Relief After Spinal Cord Stimulation for Patients With Chronic Low Back and/or Leg Pain: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression

RATIONALE

To optimize results with spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for chronic low back pain (CLBP) and/or leg pain, including persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS), careful patient selection based on proved predictive factors is essential. Unfortunately, the necessary selection process required to optimize outcomes of SCS remains challenging.

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to evaluate predictive factors of clinically relevant pain relief after SCS for patients with CLBP and/or radicular leg pain, including PSPS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In August 2023, PubMed, Cinahl, Cochrane, and EMBASE were searched to identify studies published between January 2010 and August 2023. Studies reporting the percentage of patients with ≥50% pain relief after SCS in patients with CLBP and leg pain, including PSPS at 12 or 24 months, were included. Meta-analysis was conducted to pool results for back, leg, and general pain relief. Predictive factors for pain relief after 12 months were examined using univariable and multivariable meta-regression.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies (2220 patients) were included for further analysis. The mean percentages of patients with substantial pain relief were 68% for leg pain, 63% for back pain, and 73% for general pain at 12 months follow-up, and 63% for leg pain, 59% for back pain, and 71% for general pain at 24 months follow-up assessment. The implantation method and baseline Oswestry Disability Index made the multivariable meta-regression model for ≥50% back pain relief. Sex and pain duration made the final model for ≥50% leg pain relief. Variable stimulation and implantation method made the final model for general pain relief.

CONCLUSIONS

This review supports SCS as an effective pain-relieving treatment for CLBP and/or leg pain, and models were developed to predict substantial back and leg pain relief. To provide high-grade evidence for predictive factors, SCS studies of high quality are needed in which standardized factors predictive of SCS success, based on in-patient improvements, are monitored and reported.

Exploring Patient Satisfaction and Other Outcome Measures With Pain Relief in Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Single-Site, Cohort Audit

Context Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an approved treatment for chronic pain of neuropathic origin. Initial research suggests a close relationship between pain relief and patient satisfaction with SCS. Objectives To see whether similar patterns were observed in our center and to identify areas of improvement, this single-site, cohort audit explored the association between pain relief and satisfaction as well as specific factors that influence satisfaction at follow-up in patients with fully implanted SCS. Methods Age, gender, pain condition, SCS system, average pain (numerical rating scale, NRS), and worst pain (NRS) scores at baseline and the most recent follow-up visit were collected. Percentage change in average pain was calculated, and the patients were allocated to one of three pain improvement groups: <30%, 30%-50%, or >50%. A telephone survey explored patient outcomes including patient satisfaction, sleep, fatigue, quality of life (QoL), walking ability, and medication use. Chi-square tests of independence were performed. Results The final sample comprised 87 patients (<30%: n = 26; 30%-50%: n = 29; >50%: n = 32). The pain improvement group was significantly associated with satisfaction (p = 0.010): all patients in the >50% improvement group reported being either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with SCS. The pain improvement group was also significantly associated with change in sleep (p < 0.001), fatigue (p = 0.001), QoL (p = 0.003), and opioid consumption (p = 0.010). Improvements were most frequently reported in the >50% improvement group. Conclusion Findings point to an association between pain relief and patient satisfaction with SCS. Other factors, including sleep, fatigue, QoL, and opioid consumption, may influence this association and deserve further exploration.

Cross-Country Differences in Pain Medication Before and After Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Pooled Analysis of Individual Patient Data From Two Prospective Studies in the United Kingdom and Belgium

OBJECTIVES

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can reduce the need for opioids; however, the influence on the full spectrum of pain medication is less known. The aims of this study were to explore general prescription practices for patients scheduled for SCS, potential differences in prescriptions between Belgium and United Kingdom, and the influence of SCS on pain medication.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Individual patient data from the TRIAL-STIM study in the United Kingdom and DISCOVER in Belgium were pooled. Medication use was collected before SCS and three months after SCS from 180 chronic pain patients. The Medication Quantification Scale III (MQS) was used to calculate a total score for medication use, as well as subscores for several classes. Differences in prescription practices between United Kingdom and Belgium were evaluated with two-sided Wilcoxon tests. To evaluate differences in medication use after three months of SCS between United Kingdom and Belgium, Tweedie-generalized linear models were calculated.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant difference (-6.40 [95% CI from -3.40 to -9.10]) between the median total MQS score in United Kingdom and Belgium before SCS. Additionally, a significant difference was found for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (-3.40 [95% CI -3.40 to -6.80]), neuropathic agents (-2.30 [95% CI -0.40 to -3.80]), and benzodiazepines (1.83e^-05 [95% CI 2.64^-05 to 7.45^-05]) between United Kingdom and Belgium, before SCS. Tweedie-generalized models revealed a statistically significant interaction between country and time for MQS, neuropathic agents, and opioids.

CONCLUSIONS

Our combined analysis revealed differences in prescription practice in patients scheduled for SCS implantation between Belgium and United Kingdom. NSAIDs and neuropathic mood agents are more frequently used in the United Kingdom, presumably due to easier access to repeat prescriptions and over the counter medications. After three months of SCS, a decrease in medication use is observed in both countries, with higher reductions in Belgium, presumably due to strict regulations concerning reimbursement criteria.

Goals, Expectations, and the Definition of Success for Neuromodulation for Pain According to Representatives of Neuromodulation Device Manufacturers

Representatives of neuromodulation device manufacturers are expected to facilitate the relationship between patients and healthcare providers. Nevertheless, the goals, expectations, and definition of success for neuromodulation for pain have not yet been explored. Representatives present at the 2nd Joint Congress of the INS European Chapters in September 2021 completed a survey to ascertain their opinions about the goals to achieve with neuromodulation, the factors that they expect to change, and their definition of success for neuromodulation. In total, 39 representatives completed the survey. To provide excellent service for patients (22.4%), to become a trusted partner for physicians (21.5%), and to provide excellent service for physicians (20.7%) were the highest ranked goals. The most frequently reported factors that were expected to change were pain intensity (23.1%), patient satisfaction (19.7%), mobility/functioning (14.5%), and capacity to return to work (13.7%). Within the definitions of success, increased quality of life of the patient was stated in 21% of the definitions, closely followed by pain control (19.3%) and happiness/patient satisfaction (15.8%). The goals of representatives of neuromodulation device manufacturers seem to focus on ensuring a good relationship with physicians on the one hand and providing good service towards patients on the other hand, whereby pain control, quality of life, and patient satisfaction seem to be important for company representatives.

Patient Selection for Spinal Cord Stimulation in Treatment of Pain: Sequential Decision-Making Model - A Narrative Review

Despite the well-known efficacy of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in chronic pain management, patient selection in clinical practice remains challenging. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the factors that can influence the process of patient selection for SCS treatment. A sequential decision-making model is presented within a tier system that operates in clinical practice. The first level incorporates the underlying disease as a primary indication for SCS, country-related reimbursement rules, and SCS screening-trial criteria in combination with underlying psychological factors as initial selection criteria in evaluating patient eligibility for SCS. The second tier is aligned with the individualized approach within precision pain medicine, whereby individual goals and expectations and the potential need for preoperative optimizations are emphasized. Additionally, this tier relies on results from prediction models to provide an estimate of the efficacy of SCS in the long term. In the third tier, selection bias, MRI compatibility, and ethical beliefs are included, together with recent technological innovations, superiority of specific stimulation paradigms, and new feedback systems that could indirectly influence the decision-making of the physician. Both patients and physicians should be aware of the different aspects that influence patient selection in relation to SCS for pain management to make an independent decision on whether or not to initiate a treatment trajectory with SCS.

Does Neuromodulation Reduce Chronic Pain Patient Emergency Department Utilization?

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain (CP) affects roughly 100 million adults in the United States. These subjects present disproportionately to the emergency department (ED). Neuromodulation (NM) has been shown to reduce ED visits longitudinally in subjects.

OBJECTIVE

To compare ED utilization rates between subjects with CP with and without NM.

METHODS

Subjects with failed back surgery syndrome, complex regional pain syndrome, or neuropathic pain diagnosis who visited the hospital between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2019, were included. Subjects were divided into a NM-treated cohort and a non-NM cohort. Demographic information, medications, and pain provider visits were obtained. Pain-related ED visits between 2017 and 2019 were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 2516 subjects were identified; 291 (11.6%) previously underwent NM. The non-NM cohort had significantly higher rate of pain-related ED visits compared with the NM cohort (15.1% vs 10.0%, P = .018). Younger age (odds ratio [OR] = 0.888 [0.843-0.935]), shorter distance to the hospital (OR = 0.807 [0.767-0.849]), lower household income (OR = 0.865 [0.831-0.901]), opioid use (OR = 1.375 [1.291-1.465]), nonopioid use (OR = 1.079 [1.033-1.128]), and non-NM therapy (OR = 1.751 [1.283-2.390]) were significant predictors of ED visits. Opioid use was the only significant predictor (OR = 6.124 [1.417-26.473]) associated with ED visits in the NM cohort.

CONCLUSION

Subjects who underwent NM had fewer visits to the ED when compared with similar subjects who received conventional treatment. Opioid use prompted increased ED utilization in both cohorts. We posit that NM leads to improvement in pain outcomes, integration with multidisciplinary pain specialists, and reduction in severity and frequency of acute pain exacerbations, thereby limiting health care resource utilization.

Detoxification of Neuromodulation Eligible Patients by a Standardized Protocol: A Retrospective Pilot Study

OBJECTIVES

Patients eligible for spinal cord stimulation (SCS) generally experience excruciating pain, requiring more opioid consumption, which is usually an indication for SCS implantation. After final implantation, SCS has the ability to stabilize or decrease opioid usage in half of the patients. In this study, opioids were actively eliminated prior to implantation of any neuromodulation device with a standardized detoxification protocol. This pilot study aims to explore the feasibility, effectiveness, and safety of this opioid detoxification protocol prior to neuromodulation techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective pilot study, 70 patients who were taking opioids and who were eligible for neuromodulation techniques, underwent the detoxification program. A combined in- and out-patient clinic protocol was applied, whereby clonidine was the main component of both parts of the program. A multidisciplinary team with pain physicians and psychologists was responsible for performing this detoxification program. Safety and feasibility were systematically recorded during the hospitalization.

RESULTS

No serious safety issues were reported. At the start of the program, patients reported a mild sedative effect of clonidine. Additionally, most patients presented mild symptoms of opioid withdrawal, which were partially countered by the sedative effect of clonidine. Both patients and the medical staff found this protocol feasible in clinical practice. Concerning the effectiveness, a statistically significant decrease in median morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) was found with a MME of 175 (Q1-Q3: 118.1-240) at baseline and at the last available follow-up visit the MME was 0 (Q1-Q3: 0-16.88).

CONCLUSIONS

This standardized detoxification program has proven its effectiveness, safety, and feasibility in this single-center experience pilot study in patients eligible for neuromodulation techniques.