Long-term follow-up of motor cortex stimulation for neuropathic pain in 23 patients

Rates and Predictors of Pain Reduction With Intracranial Stimulation for Intractable Pain Disorders

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Intracranial modulation paradigms, namely deep brain stimulation (DBS) and motor cortex stimulation (MCS), have been used to treat intractable pain disorders. However, treatment efficacy remains heterogeneous, and factors associated with pain reduction are not completely understood.

METHODS

We performed an individual patient review of pain outcomes (visual analog scale, quality-of-life measures, complications, pulse generator implant rate, cessation of stimulation) after implantation of DBS or MCS devices. We evaluated 663 patients from 36 study groups and stratified outcomes by pain etiology and implantation targets.

RESULTS

Included studies comprised primarily retrospective cohort studies. MCS patients had a similar externalized trial success rate compared with DBS patients (86% vs 81%; P = .16), whereas patients with peripheral pain had a higher trial success rate compared with patients with central pain (88% vs 79%; P = .004). Complication rates were similar for MCS and DBS patients (12% vs 15%; P = .79). Patients with peripheral pain had lower likelihood of device cessation compared with those with central pain (5.7% vs 10%; P = .03). Of all implanted patients, mean pain reduction at last follow-up was 45.8% (95% CI: 40.3-51.2) with a 31.2% (95% CI: 12.4-50.1) improvement in quality of life. No difference was seen between MCS patients (43.8%; 95% CI: 36.7-58.2) and DBS patients (48.6%; 95% CI: 39.2-58) or central (41.5%; 95% CI: 34.8-48.2) and peripheral (46.7%; 95% CI: 38.9-54.5) etiologies. Multivariate analysis identified the anterior cingulate cortex target to be associated with worse pain reduction, while postherpetic neuralgia was a positive prognostic factor.

CONCLUSION

Both DBS and MCS have similar efficacy and complication rates in the treatment of intractable pain. Patients with central pain disorders tended to have lower trial success and higher rates of device cessation. Additional prognostic factors include anterior cingulate cortex targeting and postherpetic neuralgia diagnosis. These findings underscore intracranial neurostimulation as an important modality for treatment of intractable pain disorders.

Implantable Subdural Cortical Stimulation for Chronic Intractable Pain Treatment-The Mayo Experience and Review of Literature

OBJECTIVES

Motor cortex stimulation (MCS) is an effective technique in treating chronic intractable pain for some patients. However, most studies are small case series (n < 20). Heterogeneity in technique and patient selection makes it difficult to draw consistent conclusions. In this study, we present one of the largest case series of subdural MCS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medical records of patients who underwent MCS at our institute between 2007 and 2020 were reviewed. Studies with at least 15 patients were summarized for comparison.

RESULTS

The study included 46 patients. Mean age was 56.2 ± 12.5 years (SD). Mean follow-up was 57.2 ± 41.9 months. Male-to-female ratio was 13:33. Of the 46 patients, 29 had neuropathic pain in trigeminal nerve territory/anesthesia dolorosa; nine had postsurgical/posttraumatic pain; three had phantom limb pain; two had postherpetic pain, and the rest had pain secondary to stroke, chronic regional pain syndrome, and tumor. The baseline numeric rating pain scale (NRS) was 8.2 ± 1.8 of 10, and the latest follow-up score was 3.5 ± 2.9 (mean improvement of 57.3%). Responders comprised 67% (31/46)(NRS ≥ 40% improvement). Analysis showed no correlation between percentage of improvement and age (p = 0.352) but favored male patients (75.3% vs 48.7%, p = 0.006). Seizures occurred in 47.8% of patients (22/46) at some point but were all self-limiting, with no lasting sequelae. Other complications included subdural/epidural hematoma requiring evacuation (3/46), infection (5/46), and cerebrospinal fluid leak (1/46). These complications resolved with no long-term sequelae after further interventions.

CONCLUSION

Our study further supports the use of MCS as an effective treatment modality for several chronic intractable pain conditions and provides a benchmark to the current literature.

Systemic and Peripheral Mechanisms of Cortical Stimulation-Induced Analgesia and Refractoriness in a Rat Model of Neuropathic Pain

Epidural motor cortex stimulation (MCS) is an effective treatment for refractory neuropathic pain; however, some individuals are unresponsive. In this study, we correlated the effectiveness of MCS and refractoriness with the expression of cytokines, neurotrophins, and nociceptive mediators in the dorsal root ganglion (DRG), sciatic nerve, and plasma of rats with sciatic neuropathy. MCS inhibited hyperalgesia and allodynia in two-thirds of the animals (responsive group), and one-third did not respond (refractory group). Chronic constriction injury (CCI) increased IL-1β in the nerve and DRG, inhibited IL-4, IL-10, and IL-17A in the nerve, decreased β-endorphin, and enhanced substance P in the plasma, compared to the control. Responsive animals showed decreased NGF and increased IL-6 in the nerve, accompanied by restoration of local IL-10 and IL-17A and systemic β-endorphin. Refractory animals showed increased TNF-α and decreased IFNγ in the nerve, along with decreased TNF-α and IL-17A in the DRG, maintaining low levels of systemic β-endorphin. Our findings suggest that the effectiveness of MCS depends on local control of inflammatory and neurotrophic changes, accompanied by recovery of the opioidergic system observed in neuropathic conditions. So, understanding the refractoriness to MCS may guide an improvement in the efficacy of the technique, thus benefiting patients with persistent neuropathic pain.

Long-term follow-up of motor cortex stimulation on central poststroke pain in thalamic and extrathalamic stroke

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the long-term effects of motor cortex stimulation (MCS) on central poststroke pain (CPSP) in patients with thalamic and extrathalamic stroke.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 21 cases of CPSP patients who were treated with MCS. Pain intensity was evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) before the operation and at follow-up assessments. Sleep quality was evaluated using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI).

RESULTS

The average follow-up time was 65.43 ± 26.12 months. In the thalamus stroke group (n = 11), the mean preoperative VAS score was 8.18 ± 0.75 and the final mean follow-up VAS score was 4.0 ± 2.14. The mean total NPSI score at the last follow-up (20.45 ± 12.7) was significantly reduced relative to the pre-MCS score (30.27 ± 8.97, p < 0.001). Similarly, the mean PSQI value at the last follow-up (12.63 ± 1.91) was significantly reduced compared with the pre-MCS value (16.55 ± 1.97, p < 0.001). In the extrathalamic stroke group (n = 11), the mean preoperative VAS score was 8.2 ± 0.79 and the final mean follow-up VAS score was 6.6 ± 2.12. The mean total NPSI score before MCS was not statistically different from that at the last follow-up. There were no statistical differences in sleep quality before versus after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Motor cortex stimulation has higher long-term efficacy in CPSP patients with stroke confined to the thalamus than in CPSP patients with stroke involving extrathalamic structures.

Motor cortex stimulation in chronic neuropathic orofacial pain syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Invasive motor Cortex Stimulation (iMCS) was introduced in the 1990's for the treatment of chronic neuropathic orofacial pain (CNOP), although its effectiveness remains doubtful. However, CNOP is known to be a heterogeneous group of orofacial pain disorders, which can lead to different responses to iMCS. Therefore, this paper investigated (1) whether the effectiveness of iMCS is significantly different among different CNOP disorders and (2) whether other confounding factors can be impacting iMCS results in CNOP. A systematic review and meta-analysis using a linear mixed-model was performed. Twenty-three papers were included, totaling 140 CNOP patients. Heterogeneity of the studies showed to be 55.8%. A visual analogue scale (VAS) measured median pain relief of 66.5% (ranging from 0-100%) was found. Linear mixed-model analysis showed that patients suffering from trigeminal neuralgia responded significantly more favorable to iMCS than patients suffering from dysfunctional pain syndromes (p = 0.030). Also, patients suffering from CNOP caused by (supra)nuclear lesions responded marginally significantly better to iMCS than patients suffering from CNOP due to trigeminal nerve lesions (p = 0.049). No other confounding factors were elucidated. This meta-analysis showed that patients suffering from trigeminal neuralgia and patients suffering from (supra)nuclear lesions causing CNOP responded significantly more favorable than others on iMCS. No other confounding factors were found relevant.

Motor cortex stimulation: a systematic literature-based analysis of effectiveness and case series experience

Background

Aim to quantitatively analyze the clinical effectiveness for motor cortex stimulation (MCS) to refractory pain.

Methods

The literatures were systematically searched in database of Cocharane library, Embase and PubMed, using relevant strategies. Data were extracted from eligible articles and pooled as mean with standard deviation (SD). Comparative analysis was measured by non-parametric t test and linear regression model.

Results

The pooled effect estimate from 12 trials (n = 198) elucidated that MCS shown the positive effect on refractory pain, and the total percentage improvement was 35.2% in post-stroke pain and 46.5% in trigeminal neuropathic pain. There is no statistical differences between stroke involved thalamus or non-thalamus. The improvement of plexus avulsion (29.8%) and phantom pain (34.1%) was similar. The highest improvement rate was seen in post-radicular plexopathy (65.1%) and MCS may aggravate the pain induced by spinal cord injury, confirmed by small sample size. Concurrently, Both the duration of disease (r = 0.233, p = 0.019*) and the time of follow-up (r = 0.196, p = 0.016*) had small predicative value, while age (p = 0.125) had no correlation to post-operative pain relief.

Conclusions

MCS is conducive to the patients with refractory pain. The duration of disease and the time of follow-up can be regarded as predictive factor. Meanwhile, further studies are needed to reveal the mechanism of MCS and to reevaluate the cost-benefit aspect with better-designed clinical trials.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12883-019-1273-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[Motor cortex stimulation in deafferentation facial pain]

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate the results of treatment of poorly controlled deafferentation facial pain using motor cortex stimulation and to review the relevant literature.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 8 patients (3 males and 5 females) with deafferentation facial pain who were implanted with a system of constant motor cortex stimulation at the Illinois University in Chicago in 2004-2016 and Novosibirsk Federal Center of Neurosurgery in 2017. The patients' age ranged from 37 to 81 years (mean age, 57.5 years). Scale-based assessment of the pain severity was performed at admission to hospital, at discharge, and during follow-up. The visual analogue pain scale, Barrow Neurological Institute pain scale (BNIPS), and McLaughlin scale were used.

RESULTS

Immediately after surgery, a significant improvement in the form of pain reduction by 80-100% occurred in 4 patients. The pain intensity at discharge from the hospital decreased by 55%, on average. During the follow-up period, the efficacy of motor cortex stimulation was assessed (McLaughlin scale) as very good by 3 of the 8 patients, as good by 4 patients, and as unsatisfactory by 1 patient.

CONCLUSION

Our findings and recent studies have demonstrated that motor cortex stimulation is one of the treatment options for deafferentation facial pain. Even a slight decrease in the intensity of excruciating and debilitating pain (assessed by patients as a good effect) gives grounds for application of the procedure. Further research is needed to define more precise criteria for selecting patients for this treatment and to increase the efficacy of stimulation.

New Insights in Trigeminal Anatomy: A Double Orofacial Tract for Nociceptive Input

Orofacial pain in patients relies on the anatomical pathways that conduct nociceptive information, originating from the periphery towards the trigeminal sensory nucleus complex (TSNC) and finally, to the thalami and the somatosensorical cortical regions. The anatomy and function of the so-called trigeminothalamic tracts have been investigated before. In these animal-based studies from the previous century, the intracerebral pathways were mapped using different retro- and anterograde tracing methods. We review the literature on the trigeminothalamic tracts focusing on these animal tracer studies. Subsequently, we related the observations of these studies to clinical findings using fMRI trials. The intracerebral trigeminal pathways can be subdivided into three pathways: a ventral (contralateral) and dorsal (mainly ipsilateral) trigeminothalamic tract and the intranuclear pathway. Based on the reviewed evidence we hypothesize the co-existence of an ipsilateral nociceptive conduction tract to the cerebral cortex and we translate evidence from animal-based research to the human anatomy. Our hypothesis differs from the classical idea that orofacial pain arises only from nociceptive information via the contralateral, ventral trigeminothalamic pathway. Better understanding of the histology, anatomy and connectivity of the trigeminal fibers could contribute to the discovery of a more effective pain treatment in patients suffering from various orofacial pain syndromes.