Simultaneous trial of deep brain and motor cortex stimulation in chronic intractable neuropathic pain

Anatomo-physiological basis and applied techniques of electrical neuromodulation in chronic pain

Chronic pain, a complex and debilitating condition, poses a significant challenge to both patients and healthcare providers worldwide. Conventional pharmacological interventions often prove inadequate in delivering satisfactory relief while carrying the risks of addiction and adverse reactions. In recent years, electric neuromodulation emerged as a promising alternative in chronic pain management. This method entails the precise administration of electrical stimulation to specific nerves or regions within the central nervous system to regulate pain signals. Through mechanisms that include the alteration of neural activity and the release of endogenous pain-relieving substances, electric neuromodulation can effectively alleviate pain and improve patients' quality of life. Several modalities of electric neuromodulation, with a different grade of invasiveness, provide tailored strategies to tackle various forms and origins of chronic pain. Through an exploration of the anatomical and physiological pathways of chronic pain, encompassing neurotransmitter involvement, this narrative review offers insights into electrical therapies' mechanisms of action, clinical utility, and future perspectives in chronic pain management.

Exploring the Thalamus as a Target for Neuropathic Pain Management: An Integrative Review

Neuropathic pain (NP), resulting from damage to the somatosensory system, is characterized by either spontaneous or evoked pain. In the context of NP, wherein aberrant signaling pathways contribute to the perception of pain, the thalamus emerges as a key player. This structure is integral to the pain network that includes connections to the dorsal horn of the spinal cord, highlighting its role in the affective-motivational aspects of pain perception. Given its significant involvement, the thalamus is targeted in advanced treatments such as thalamotomy and deep brain stimulation (DBS) when traditional therapies fail, emphasizing the need to understand its function in NP to improve management strategies. This review aimed to provide an overview of the role of the thalamus in the transmission of nociceptive information in NP by discussing the existing evidence, including the effectiveness and safety of current techniques in the management and treatment of NP. This is an integrative review involving the qualitative analysis of scientific articles published in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. A total of 687 articles were identified, and after selection, 15 articles were included in this study. All studies reviewed demonstrated varying degrees of effectiveness of DBS and thalamotomy in alleviating painful symptoms, although the relief was often temporary. Many studies noted a reduction in pain perception at the conclusion of treatment compared to pre-treatment levels, with this decrease maintained throughout patient follow-ups. However, adverse events associated with these treatments were also reported. In conclusion, there are some benefits, albeit temporary, to using thalamotomy and DBS to alleviate the painful symptoms of NP. Both procedures are considered advanced forms of surgical intervention that aim to modulate pain pathways in the brain, providing significant relief for patients suffering from chronic pain resistant to conventional treatment. Despite limitations, these surgical interventions offer renewed hope for patients facing disabling chronic pain and can provide a significant improvement in quality of life.

Long-Term Results of Cortical Motor Stimulation for Neuropathic Peripheral and Central Pain: Real-World Evidence From Two Independent Centers

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Cortical motor stimulation (CMS) is used to modulate neuropathic pain. The literature supports its use; however, short follow-up studies might overestimate its real effect. This study brings real-world evidence from two independent centers about CMS methodology and its long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Patients with chronic refractory neuropathic pain were implanted with CMS. The International Classification of Headache Disorders 3rd Edition was used to classify craniofacial pain and the Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions Scale score to explore its neuropathic nature. Demographics and clinical and surgical data were collected. Pain intensity at 6, 12, and 24 months and last follow-up was registered. Numeric rating scale reduction of ≥50% was considered a good response. The Clinical Global Impression of Change scale was used to report patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Twelve males (38.7%) and 19 females (61.3%) with a mean age of 55.8 years (±11.9) were analyzed. Nineteen (61.5%) were diagnosed from painful trigeminal neuropathy (PTN), and seven (22.5%) from central poststroke pain. The mean follow-up was 51 months (±23). At 6 months, 42% (13/31) of the patients were responders, all of them being PTN (13/19; 68.4%). At last follow-up, only 35% (11/31) remained responders (11/19 PTN; 58%). At last follow-up, the global Numeric rating scale reduction was 34% ( P = .0001). The Clinical Global Impression of Change scale punctuated 2.39 (±0.94) after 3 months from the surgery and 2.95 (±1.32) at last follow-up ( P = .0079). Signs of suspicious placebo effect were appreciated in around 40% of the nonresponders.

CONCLUSION

CMS might show long-term efficacy for neuropathic pain syndromes, with the effect on PTN being more robust in the long term. Multicentric clinical trials are needed to confirm the efficacy of this therapy for this and other conditions.

Deep brain stimulation for chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has shown promise in effectively treating chronic pain. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of DBS in this context.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature search using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, following the PRISMA guidelines. A well-constructed search strategy was utilized. Our literature search identified two groups of subjects: one group underwent DBS specifically for chronic pain treatment (DBS-P), while the second group received DBS for other indications (DBS-O), such as Parkinson's disease or dystonia, with pain perception investigated as a secondary outcome in this population. Meta-analysis was performed using R version 4.2.3 software. Heterogeneity was assessed using the tau^2 and I^2 indices, and Cochran's Q-test was conducted.

Results

The analysis included 966 patients in 43 original research studies with chronic pain who underwent DBS (340 for DBS-P and 625 for DBS-O). Subgroup analysis revealed that DBS-P exhibited a significant effect on chronic pain relief, with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of 1.65 and a 95% confidence interval (CI) of [1.31; 2.00]. Significant heterogeneity was observed among the studies, with an I^2 value of 85.8%. However, no significant difference was found between DBS-P and DBS-O subgroups. Subgroup analyses based on study design, age, pain diseases, and brain targets demonstrated varying levels of evidence for the effectiveness of DBS across different subgroups. Additionally, meta-regression analyses showed no significant relationship between age or pain duration and DBS effectiveness for chronic pain.

Conclusion

These findings significantly contribute to the expanding body of knowledge regarding the utility of DBS in the management of chronic pain. The study underscores the importance of conducting further research to enhance treatment outcomes and elucidate patient-specific factors that are associated with treatment response.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=428442, identifier CRD42023428442.

The Impact of Burst Motor Cortex Stimulation on Cardiovascular Autonomic Modulation in Chronic Pain: A Feasibility Study for a New Approach to Objectively Monitor Therapeutic Effects

INTRODUCTION

Chronic refractory pain of various origin occurs in 30-45% of pain patients, and a considerable proportion remains resistant to pharmacological and behavioral therapies, requiring adjunctive neurostimulation therapies. Chronic pain is known to stimulate sympathetic outflow, yet the impact of burst motor cortex stimulation (burstMCS) on objectifiable autonomic cardiovascular parameters in chronic pain remains largely unknown.

METHODS

In three patients with chronic pain (2 facial pain/1 post-stroke pain), we compared pain intensity using a visual analog scale (VAS 1-10) and parameters of autonomic cardiovascular modulation at supine rest, during parasympathetic challenge with six cycles per minute of metronomic deep breathing, and during sympathetic challenge (active standing) at baseline and after 4 months of burstMCS compared to age-/gender-matched healthy controls.

RESULTS

While two out of three patients were responsive after 4 months of adjunctive burstMCS (defined as pain reduction of > 30%), no differences were found in any of the three patients regarding the R-R intervals of adjacent QRS complexes (RRI, 642 vs. 676 ms) and blood pressure (BP, 139/88 vs. 141/90 mmHg). Under resting conditions, parameters of parasympathetic tone [normalized units of high-frequency oscillations of RRI (RRI-HFnu power) 0.24 vs. 0.38, root-mean-square differences of successive RRI (RRI-RMSSD) 7.7 vs. 14.7 ms], total autonomic cardiac modulation [RRI total power 129.3 vs. 406.2 ms2, standard deviation of RRI (RRI-SD) 11.6 vs. 18.5 ms, coefficient of variation of RRI (RRI-CV) 1.9 vs. 3.7%], and baroreceptor reflex sensitivity (BRS, 1.9 vs. 2.3 ms/mmHg) increased, and parameters of sympathetic tone [normalized units of low-frequency oscillations of RRI (RRI-LFnu power) 0.76 vs. 0.62] and sympatho-vagal balance [ratio of RR-LF to RRI-HF power (RRI-LF/HF ratio) 3.4 vs. 1.9] decreased after 4 months of burstMCS. Low-frequency oscillations of systolic blood pressure (SBP-LF power), a parameter of sympathetic cardiovascular modulation, increased slightly (17.6 vs. 20.4 mmHg2). During parasympathetic stimulation, the expiratory-inspiratory ratio (E/I ratio) increased slightly, while upon sympathetic stimulation, the ratio between the shortest RRI around the 15th heartbeat and the longest RRI around the 30th heartbeat after standing up (RRI 30/15 ratio) remained unchanged.

CONCLUSION

Four months of adjunctive burstMCS was associated with an increase in parameters reflecting both total and parasympathetic autonomic modulation and baroreceptor reflex sensitivity. In contrast, sympathetic tone declined in our three patients, suggesting stimulation-associated improvement not only in subjectively perceived VAS pain scores, but also in objectifiable parameters of autonomic cardiovascular modulation.

Network targets for therapeutic brain stimulation: towards personalized therapy for pain

Precision neuromodulation of central brain circuits is a promising emerging therapeutic modality for a variety of neuropsychiatric disorders. Reliably identifying in whom, where, and in what context to provide brain stimulation for optimal pain relief are fundamental challenges limiting the widespread implementation of central neuromodulation treatments for chronic pain. Current approaches to brain stimulation target empirically derived regions of interest to the disorder or targets with strong connections to these regions. However, complex, multidimensional experiences like chronic pain are more closely linked to patterns of coordinated activity across distributed large-scale functional networks. Recent advances in precision network neuroscience indicate that these networks are highly variable in their neuroanatomical organization across individuals. Here we review accumulating evidence that variable central representations of pain will likely pose a major barrier to implementation of population-derived analgesic brain stimulation targets. We propose network-level estimates as a more valid, robust, and reliable way to stratify personalized candidate regions. Finally, we review key background, methods, and implications for developing network topology-informed brain stimulation targets for chronic pain.

Brain stimulation for chronic pain management: a narrative review of analgesic mechanisms and clinical evidence

Chronic pain constitutes one of the most common chronic complaints that people experience. According to the International Association for the Study of Pain, chronic pain is defined as pain that persists or recurs longer than 3 months. Chronic pain has a significant impact on individuals' well-being and psychosocial health and the economy of healthcare systems as well. Despite the availability of numerous therapeutic modalities, treatment of chronic pain can be challenging. Only about 30% of individuals with non-cancer chronic pain achieve improvement from standard pharmacological treatment. Therefore, numerous therapeutic approaches were proposed as a potential treatment for chronic pain including non-opioid pharmacological agents, nerve blocks, acupuncture, cannabidiol, stem cells, exosomes, and neurostimulation techniques. Although some neurostimulation methods such as spinal cord stimulation were successfully introduced into clinical practice as a therapy for chronic pain, the current evidence for brain stimulation efficacy in the treatment of chronic pain remains unclear. Hence, this narrative literature review aimed to give an up-to-date overview of brain stimulation methods, including deep brain stimulation, motor cortex stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, cranial electrotherapy stimulation, and reduced impedance non-invasive cortical electrostimulation as a potential treatment for chronic pain.

Overcoming clinical challenges of refractory neuropathic pain

INTRODUCTION

: Refractory neuropathic pain (ReNP), and its definition, is widely disputed amongst clinicians due in part to unclear categorical diagnosing guidelines, overall time duration of neuropathic pain, and the exhaustiveness of treatment options. Usually ReNP is defined as chronic, intractable, and unresponsive neuropathic pain that have otherwise been untreatable.

AREAS COVERED

: In this narrative review, we discuss and summarize the effectiveness of prospective ReNP research conducted over the past 10 years. This research looks at pharmacological and interventional therapies in clinical trial settings. The pharmacological therapies discussed include the use of adjuvant treatments to improve the safety and efficacy of conventional approaches. Different modalities of administration, such as injection therapy and intrathecal drug delivery systems, provide targeted drug delivery. Interventional therapies such as neuromodulation, pulse radiofrequency, and nerve lesioning are more invasive, however, they are increasingly utilized in the field, as reflected in ongoing clinical trials.

EXPERT OPINION

: Based on the current data from RCTs and systematic reviews, it is clear that single drug therapy cannot be effective and has significant limitations. Transitioning to interventional modalities that showed more promising results sooner rather than later may be even more cost-efficient than attempting different conservative treatments with a high failure rate.

Intrathecal Morphine Infusion for Trigeminal Deafferentation Pain Following Percutaneous Intervention for Unexplained Facial Pain: A Case Report

Chronic pain in painful post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathy, formerly called trigeminal deafferentation pain (TDP) or anesthesia dolorosa, is virtually incurable neuropathic pain. In severe cases, no effective method has yet been established. A 58-year-old woman presented with chronic dysesthetic pain in the right side of her face that had persisted for 8 years. It was caused by percutaneous balloon compression for an unexplained, persistent right gingival pain. The TDP did not respond to any medications or radiosurgery. Considering the typical occipital neuralgia that occurred later, the incomprehensible gum pain was interpreted as referred trigeminal pain from occipital neuralgia. Decompression of the greater occipital nerve improved occipital neuralgia; however, TDP did not respond to internal neurolysis or invasive brain stimulation. The last attempt was made to administer an intrathecal opioid because of pain sufficiently severe to cause suicidal ideation. Trial administration of intrathecal opioids had some effect on pain relief. Although incomplete, the effects of intrathecal morphine infusion were maintained up to 1 year later. Invasive neurosurgical interventions should be cautiously performed for continuous pain in persistent idiopathic facial pain and referred facial pain cases that do not show typical neuralgic pain in primary trigeminal neuralgia because of the risk of TDP.

Centromedian-Parafascicular and Somatosensory Thalamic Deep Brain Stimulation for Treatment of Chronic Neuropathic Pain: A Contemporary Series of 40 Patients

Introduction: The treatment of neuropathic and central pain still remains a major challenge. Thalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) involving various target structures is a therapeutic option which has received increased re-interest. Beneficial results have been reported in several more recent smaller studies, however, there is a lack of prospective studies on larger series providing long term outcomes. Methods: Forty patients with refractory neuropathic and central pain syndromes underwent stereotactic bifocal implantation of DBS electrodes in the centromedian-parafascicular (CM-Pf) and the ventroposterolateral (VPL) or ventroposteromedial (VPM) nucleus contralateral to the side of pain. Electrodes were externalized for test stimulation for several days. Outcome was assessed with five specific VAS pain scores (maximum, minimum, average pain, pain at presentation, allodynia). Results: The mean age at surgery was 53.5 years, and the mean duration of pain was 8.2 years. During test stimulation significant reductions of all five pain scores was achieved with either CM-Pf or VPL/VPM stimulation. Pacemakers were implanted in 33/40 patients for chronic stimulation for whom a mean follow-up of 62.8 months (range 3-180 months) was available. Of these, 18 patients had a follow-up beyond four years. Hardware related complications requiring secondary surgeries occurred in 11/33 patients. The VAS maximum pain score was improved by ≥50% in 8/18, and by ≥30% in 11/18 on long term follow-up beyond four years, and the VAS average pain score by ≥50% in 10/18, and by ≥30% in 16/18. On a group level, changes in pain scores remained statistically significant over time, however, there was no difference when comparing the efficacy of CM-Pf versus VPL/VPM stimulation. The best results were achieved in patients with facial pain, poststroke/central pain (except thalamic pain), or brachial plexus injury, while patients with thalamic lesions had the least benefit. Conclusion: Thalamic DBS is a useful treatment option in selected patients with severe and medically refractory pain.

Resolution of symptoms in idiopathic thalamic pain syndrome after implantation of a cervical and thoracic percutaneous spinal cord stimulator

Background:

Thalamic pain syndrome is classically described as chronic pain after an infarct of the thalamus. It leads to a decrease in the quality of life, especially for patients with inadequate treatment. Supportive imaging, such as a thalamic lesion or infarct, is widely accepted as necessary to diagnose this condition.

Case Description:

In this case report, we describe the case of a patient who developed allodynia and hyperesthesia with a hemibody distribution characteristic of thalamic pain syndrome, despite having no clear inciting event or identifiable thalamic lesion. This patient was successfully treated with cervical and thoracic spinal cord stimulation (SCS).

Conclusion:

We suggest that this patient may have presented with a non-lesional thalamic pain syndrome, supported by the classic hemibody allodynia and hyperesthesia and the response to SCS. Further, we demonstrate that SCS was an effective method to control this central pain disorder.

Burst Motor Cortex Stimulation Evokes Sustained Suppression of Thalamic Stroke Pain: A Narrative Review and Single-Case Overview

Chronic refractory central post-stroke pain (CPSP), one of the most disabling consequences of cerebral stroke, occurs in up to 10% of patients with CPSP. Because a considerable proportion of these patients with chronic pain remain resistant to pharmacological and behavioral therapies, adjunctive invasive and non-invasive brain stimulation therapies are needed. We performed a review of human studies applying burst and conventional motor cortex stimulation (burstMCS and cMCS, respectively) for chronic pain states, on the basis of data sources identified through searches of PubMed, MEDLINE/OVID, and SCOPUS, as well as manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Our aim was to review and discuss clinical data on the indications of burstMCS for various chronic pain states originating from central stroke (excluding trigeminal facial pain). In addition, we assessed the efficacy and safety of burst versus cMCS for central post-stroke pain with an extended follow-up of 5 years in a 60-year-old man. According to our review, uncontrolled observational human cohort studies and one RCT using cMCS waveforms have revealed a meaningful clinical response; however, these studies lacked placebo groups and extended observation periods. In our case report, we found that 3 months of adjunctive cMCS reduced pain levels [visual analog scale (VAS) pre: 9/10 versus VAS post 7/10], whereas the pain decreased further under burstMCS (VAS pre: 7/10 versus VAS post: 2/10); the study involved a follow-up of 5 years and the following parameters: burst rate 40 Hz (500 Hz), 1–1.75 mA, 1 ms, bipolar configuration. To date, only limited evidence exists for the efficacy and safety of burst motor cortex stimulation for the treatment of refractory chronic pain. BurstMCS resulted in significantly decreased post-stroke pain observed after 5 years of cMCS. The available literature suggests similar efficacy as that of conventional (tonic) motor cortex stimulation, although the results are preliminary. Mechanistically, the precise mechanism of action is not fully understood. However, burstMCS may interact with the nociceptive thalamic-cingulate and descending spinal pain networks. To determine the potential utility of this treatment, large-scale sham-controlled trials comparing cMCS and burstMCS are highly recommended.

Neuromodulation for Medically Refractory Neuropathic Pain: Spinal Cord Stimulation, Deep Brain Stimulation, Motor Cortex Stimulation, and Posterior Insula Stimulation

BACKGROUND

The treatment of neuropathic pain (NP) continues to be controversial as well as an economic health issue and a challenge to health care. Neurosurgery can offer different methods of neuromodulation that may improve patients' condition, including deep brain stimulation (DBS), motor cortex stimulation (MCS), spinal cord stimulation (SCS), and posterior insula stimulation (PIS). There is no consensus of opinion as to the final effects of these procedures, which stimulation parameters to select, the correct timing, or how to select the patients who will best benefit from these procedures.

OBJECTIVE

To review the evidence available regarding these 4 procedures and the management of NP.

METHODS

We conducted a PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library database search from 1990 to 2020. The strategy of the search concentrated on the following keywords: "neuropathic pain," "chronic pain," "deep brain stimulation," "motor cortex stimulation," "spinal cord stimulation," "insula stimulation," and "neuromodulation." Studies that provided data regarding the immediate and long-term effectiveness of the procedure, anatomic stimulation target, percentage of pain control, and cause of the NP were included.

RESULTS

The most frequent causes of NP were phantom limb pain and central poststroke pain in the MCS group; central poststroke pain, phantom limb pain, and spinal cord injury (SCI) in the DBS group; and complex regional pain syndrome and failed back surgery syndrome in the SCS group. Pain improvement varied between 35% and 80% in the MCS group and 50% and 60% in the DBS group. In the SCS group, successful rates varied between 38% and 89%.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review highlights the literature supporting SCS, DBS, MCS, and PIS methods for the treatment of NP. We found consistent evidence supporting MCS, DBS, and SCS as possible treatments for NP; however, we were not able to define which procedure should be indicated for each cause. Furthermore, we did not find enough evidence to justify the routine use of PIS. We conclude that unanswered points need to be discussed in this controversial field and emphasize that new research must be developed to treat patients with NP, to improve their quality of life.

Optogenetic stimulation of the motor cortex alleviates neuropathic pain in rats of infraorbital nerve injury with/without CGRP knock-down

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have reported that electrical stimulation of the motor cortex is effective in reducing trigeminal neuropathic pain; however, the effects of optical motor cortex stimulation remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed to investigate whether optical stimulation of the primary motor cortex can modulate chronic neuropathic pain in rats with infraorbital nerve constriction injury.

METHODS

Animals were randomly divided into a trigeminal neuralgia group, a sham group, and a control group. Trigeminal neuropathic pain was generated via constriction of the infraorbital nerve and animals were treated via selective inhibition of calcitonin gene-related peptide in the trigeminal ganglion. We assessed alterations in behavioral responses in the pre-stimulation, stimulation, and post-stimulation conditions. In vivo extracellular recordings were obtained from the ventral posteromedial nucleus of the thalamus, and viral and α-CGRP expression were investigated in the primary motor cortex and trigeminal ganglion, respectively.

RESULTS

We found that optogenetic stimulation significantly improved pain behaviors in the trigeminal neuralgia animals and it provided more significant improvement with inhibited α-CGRP state than active α-CGRP state. Electrophysiological recordings revealed decreases in abnormal thalamic firing during the stimulation-on condition.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that optical motor cortex stimulation can alleviate pain behaviors in a rat model of trigeminal neuropathic pain. Transmission of trigeminal pain signals can be modulated via knock-down of α-CGRP and optical motor cortex stimulation.

Cingulate-mediated approaches to treating chronic pain

Anterior midcingulate cortex (aMCC) has been shown to be involved in most of the functional imaging studies investigating acute pain. For 10-15 years, it has even been a main focus of interest for pain studies, considering that neurons in the aMCC could encode for pain intensity. This latter function is now presumed to occur in secondary somatosensory (SII) area and/or insular cortices, while anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) is supposed to sustain other functions such as pain-related attention, arousal, motor withdrawal reflex, pain modulations, and engagement of endogenous pain control system. The quantitative imaging studies have shown a rich density of opioid receptors in the ACC. Thus, the perigenual subdivision has been suggested to participate in top-down controls of pain, (including the placebo effects known to be opioid mediated), mainly (but not exclusively) through the connection between the orbitofrontal/subgenual ACC and the periaqueductal gray (PAG). From this rationale, this area may lead to neurosurgical targeting including electrical stimulation for intractable pain in the future. A number of imaging studies have also reported activity changes in the posterior cingulate cortex during pain and proposed its speculative involvement to modulate the conscious experience of pain according to elements from the context and awareness of the self and others.

The Current State of Deep Brain Stimulation for Chronic Pain and Its Context in Other Forms of Neuromodulation

Chronic intractable pain is debilitating for those touched, affecting 5% of the population. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) has fallen out of favour as the centrally implantable neurostimulation of choice for chronic pain since the 1970–1980s, with some neurosurgeons favouring motor cortex stimulation as the ‘last chance saloon’. This article reviews the available data and professional opinion of the current state of DBS as a treatment for chronic pain, placing it in the context of other neuromodulation therapies. We suggest DBS, with its newer target, namely anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), should not be blacklisted on the basis of a lack of good quality study data, which often fails to capture the merits of the treatment.

Deep Brain Stimulation for the Treatment of Dejerine-Roussy Syndrome

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Patients who suffer from Dejerine-Roussy syndrome commonly experience severe poststroke hemibody pain which has historically been attributed to thalamic lesions. Despite pharmacological treatment, a significant proportion of the population is resistant to traditional therapy. Deep brain stimulation is often appropriate for the treatment of resistant populations. In this review we aim to summarize the targets that are used to treat Dejerine-Roussy syndrome and provide insight into their clinical efficacy.

METHODS

In reviewing the literature, we defined stimulation success as achievement of a minimum of 50% pain relief.

RESULTS

Contemporary targets for deep brain stimulation are the ventral posterior medial/ventral posterior lateral thalamic nuclei, periaqueductal/periventricular gray matter, the ventral striatum/anterior limb of the internal capsule, left centromedian thalamic nuclei, the nucleus ventrocaudalis parvocellularis internis, and the posterior limb of the internal capsule.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to technological advancements in deep brain stimulation, its therapeutic effects must be reevaluated. Despite a lack of controlled evidence, deep brain stimulation has been effectively used as a therapeutic in clinical pain management. Further clinical investigation is needed to definitively evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of deep brain stimulation in treating the drug-resistant patient population.

Thalamic Deep Brain Stimulation for Neuropathic Pain: Efficacy at Three Years' Follow-Up

OBJECT

Chronic neuropathic pain is estimated to affect 3-4.5% of the worldwide population, posing a serious burden to society. Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) is already established for movement disorders and also used to treat some "off-label" conditions. However, DBS for the treatment of chronic, drug refractory, neuropathic pain, has shown variable outcomes with few studies performed in the last decade. Thus, this procedure has consensus approval in parts of Europe but not the USA. This study prospectively evaluated the efficacy at three years of DBS for neuropathic pain.

METHODS

Sixteen consecutive patients received 36 months post-surgical follow-up in a single-center. Six had phantom limb pain after amputation and ten deafferentation pain after brachial plexus injury, all due to traumas. To evaluate the efficacy of DBS, patient-reported outcome measures were collated before and after surgery, using a visual analog scale (VAS) score, University of Washington Neuropathic Pain Score (UWNPS), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36).

RESULTS

Contralateral, ventroposterolateral sensory thalamic DBS was performed in sixteen patients with chronic neuropathic pain over 29 months. A postoperative trial of externalized DBS failed in one patient with brachial plexus injury. Fifteen patients proceeded to implantation but one patient with phantom limb pain after amputation was lost for follow-up after 12 months. No surgical complications or stimulation side effects were noted. After 36 months, mean pain relief was sustained, and the median (and interquartile range) of the improvement of VAS score was 52.8% (45.4%) (p = 0.00021), UWNPS was 30.7% (49.2%) (p = 0.0590), BPI was 55.0% (32.0%) (p = 0.00737), and SF-36 was 16.3% (30.3%) (p = 0.4754).

CONCLUSIONS

DBS demonstrated efficacy at three years for chronic neuropathic pain after traumatic amputation and brachial plexus injury, with benefits sustained across all pain outcomes measures and slightly greater improvement in phantom limb pain.

Deep brain stimulation versus motor cortex stimulation for neuropathic pain: A minireview of the literature and proposal for future research

The treatment of neuropathic pain remains a public health concern. A growing cohort of patients is plagued by medically refractory, unrelenting severe neuropathic pain that ruins their quality of life and productivity. For this group, neurosurgery can offer two different kinds of neuromodulation that may help: deep brain simulation (DBS) and motor cortex stimulation (MCS). Unfortunately, there is no consensus on how to perform these procedures, which stimulation parameters to select, how to measure success, and which patients may benefit. This brief review highlights the literature supporting each technique and attempts to provide some comparisons and contrasts between DBS and MCS for the treatment of neuropathic pain. Finally, we highlight the current unanswered questions in the field and suggest future research strategies that may advance the care of our patients with neuropathic pain.

Lateral Hypothalamic Stimulation Reduces Hyperalgesia Through Spinally Descending Orexin-A Neurons in Neuropathic Pain

No evidence to date shows that lateral hypothalamic (LH) stimulation produces orexin-A-mediated antinociception in the spinal cord dorsal horn (SCDH) in a model of neuropathic pain. We conducted experiments to examine the effect of orexin-A-mediated LH stimulation in female rats with chronic constriction injury (CCI) on thermal hyperalgesia. Rats receiving carbachol into the LH demonstrated antinociception on both the left CCI and right nonligated paws (p < .05). Rats were given carbachol in the LH followed by intrathecal injection of the orexin-1 (OX1) receptor antagonist SB-334867, which blocked LH-induced antinociception compared with control groups (p < .05) in the left paw, but not in the right paw. These findings support the hypothesis that LH stimulation produces antinociception in rats with thermal hyperalgesia from neuropathic pain via an orexin-A connection between the LH and the SCDH. Identification of this pathway may lead to studies using orexins to manage clinical pain.

A single thalamic target for deep brain stimulation to treat hemi-body pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

Patients experiencing hemi-body pain represent a difficult problem when using the thalamus as a DBS target given its anatomical topology.

METHODS

A 50-year-old HIV positive male underwent a right unilateral thalamic DBS to treat his severe left hemi-body central post-stroke pain following years of unsuccessful medication therapy.

RESULTS

The final active contact of the electrode corresponded to stimulation of the nucleus ventrocaudalis parvocellularis internis, which has provided prolonged pain relief.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge this was the first time this pattern of pain was treated by a single thalamic DBS electrode, suggesting stimulation in this region may be a feasible target for achieving relief from chronic severe hemi-body pain.

Deep brain stimulation for chronic pain

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a neurosurgical intervention popularised in movement disorders such as Parkinson's disease, and also reported to improve symptoms of epilepsy, Tourette's syndrome, obsessive compulsive disorders and cluster headache. Since the 1950s, DBS has been used as a treatment to relieve intractable pain of several aetiologies including post stroke pain, phantom limb pain, facial pain and brachial plexus avulsion. Several patient series have shown benefits in stimulating various brain areas, including the sensory thalamus (ventral posterior lateral and medial), the periaqueductal and periventricular grey, or, more recently, the anterior cingulate cortex. However, this technique remains "off label" in the USA as it does not have Federal Drug Administration approval. Consequently, only a small number of surgeons report DBS for pain using current technology and techniques and few regions approve it. Randomised, blinded and controlled clinical trials that may use novel trial methodologies are desirable to evaluate the efficacy of DBS in patients who are refractory to other therapies. New imaging techniques, including tractography, may help optimise electrode placement and clinical outcome.

Results of motor cortex stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain syndromes

AIM

The article is aimed to demonstrate our experience in motor cortex stimulation (MCS) in patients with chronic neuropathic pain syndromes, assess the clinical efficacy of the technique in short-term and long-term follow-up, and analyze potential predictors of the MCS efficacy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty patients were implanted with MCS electrodes at the Burdenko Neurosurgical Institute in the period between 2004 and 2014. The mean age of patients was 52 years (26 to 74 years). The patients suffered from neuropathic pain syndromes of different genesis (post-stroke, multiple sclerosis, atypical facial pain, phantom limb pain, brachial plexus injury, spinal cord injury, complex regional pain syndrome I). All patients underwent neurological examination with verification of neuropathic pain (DN4, Pain Detect, LANSS). The pain intensity and its effect on quality of life were assessed before operation and during follow-up according to 10-point visual-analog scales (modified Brief Pain Inventory). Before surgery, all patients underwent several repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) sessions. After implantation of epidural electrodes, test MCS was performed.

RESULTS

Test stimulation was positive in 19 (95%) patients. All these patients were implanted with a chronic MCS system. The mean follow-up was 49.3 months (from 3 to 96 months). In short-term follow-up (fist 6 months), a positive result of MCS was observed in 17 patients, and a reduction in the pain intensity ranged from 37.5% to 90%. In long-term follow up (from 12 to 96 months), 14 patients had positive MCS RESULTS: and a reduction in the pain intensity amounted to 25% to 60%. All patients with positive MCS results received significantly decreased doses of opioids and tramadol. Two patients developed infectious complications, but there was no neurological deficit. Analysis of the factors affecting the efficacy of motor cortex stimulation did not reveal a statistically significant effect of rTMS and the presence and intensity of motor deficit.

CONCLUSION

Chronic epidural MCS is an effective and safety method for the treatment of some chronic neurogenic medically-refractory pain syndromes. Further research is necessary to specify the patient selection criteria and the MCS efficacy predictors.