Trigeminal and occipital peripheral nerve stimulation for craniofacial pain: a single-institution experience and review of the literature

Trigeminal Postherpetic Neuralgia: From Pathophysiology to Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Trigeminal postherpetic neuralgia (TG-PHN) is a neuropathic pain condition complicating herpes zoster (HZ) attributed to the trigeminal nerve. It poses significant challenges due to its persistent and debilitating nature. This review explores the clinical characteristics of TG-PHN, analyzes its pathophysiological underpinnings, and addresses existent and potential therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

TG-PHN is one of the most common and complex PHN locations. It has distinguishing clinical and pathophysiological characteristics, starting with viral triggered injuries to the trigeminal ganglion (TG) and peripheral tissue and involving the ascending and descending brain modulation pathways. Current therapies include vaccines, oral and topical medications, and interventional approaches, like nerve blocks and neurostimulation. This review covers TG-PHN's clinical and physiological components, treatment options, and potential future targets for improved management. By exploring the complexities of this condition, we aim to contribute to developing more effective and targeted therapies for patients suffering from trigeminal PHN.

A surgical decision aid for occipital neuralgia with literature review and single center case series

BACKGROUND

Occipital neuralgia (ON) is a debilitating headache disorder. Due to the rarity of this disorder and lack of high-level evidence, a clear framework for choosing the optimal surgical approach for medically refractory ON incorporating shared decision making with patients does not exist.

METHODS

A literature review of studies reporting pain outcomes of patients who underwent surgical treatment for ON was performed, as well as a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent surgery for ON within our institution.

RESULTS

Thirty-two articles met the inclusion criteria. A majority of the articles were retrospective case series (22/32). The mean number of patients across the studies was 34 (standard deviation (SD) 39). Among the 13 studies that reported change in pain score on 10-point scales, a study of 20 patients who had undergone C2 and/or C3 ganglionectomies reported the greatest reduction in pain intensity after surgery. The studies evaluating percutaneous ablative methods including radiofrequency ablation and cryoablation showed the smallest reduction in pain scores overall. At our institution from 2014 to 2023, 11 patients received surgical treatment for ON with a mean follow-up of 187 days (SD 426).

CONCLUSION

Based on these results, the first decision aid for selecting a surgical approach to medically refractory ON is presented. The algorithm prioritizes nerve sparing followed by non-nerve sparing techniques with the incorporation of patient preference. Shared decision making is critical in the treatment of ON given the lack of clear scientific evidence regarding the superiority of a particular surgical method.

The Untold Story of Occipital Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Cluster Headache: Surgical Technique in Relation to Clinical Efficacy

OBJECTIVES

Approximately one in every 1000 adults experiences cluster headache (CH). Although occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) appears encouraging in treatment for most patients with refractory CH, some patients do not reach adequate pain relief with ONS. A reason for failure of ONS might be anatomical variations and different surgical approaches. Therefore, an extensive literature analysis was performed, and cadaveric experimentation was combined with our clinical experience to provide a standardized proposal for ONS and obtain optimal management of patients with refractory CH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 36 articles published between 1998 and 2023 were analyzed to retrieve information on the anatomical landmarks and surgical technique of ONS. For the cadaveric experimentation (N = 1), two electrodes were inserted from the region over the foramen magnum and projected toward the lower third of the mastoid process.

RESULTS

The existence of multiple approaches of ONS has been confirmed by the present analysis. Discrepancies have been found in the anatomical locations and corresponding landmarks of the greater and lesser occipital nerve. The surgical approaches differed in patient positioning, electrode placement, and imaging techniques, with an overall efficacy range of 35.7% to 90%.

CONCLUSIONS

Reports on the surgical approach of ONS remain contradictory, hence emphasizing the need for standardization. Only if all implanting physicians perform the ONS surgery using a standardized protocol, can future data be combined and outcomes compared and analyzed.

Neuromodulation for Craniofacial Pain and Headaches

Headaches and facial pain are highly prevalent diseases but are often difficult to treat. Though there have been significant advances in medical management, many continue to suffer from refractory pain. Neuromodulation has been gaining interest for its therapeutic purposes in many chronic pain conditions, including headaches and facial pain. There are many potential targets of neuromodulation for headache and facial pain, and some have more robust evidence in favor of their use than others. Despite the need for more high-quality research, the available evidence for the use of neuromodulation in treating headaches and facial pain is promising. Considering the suffering that afflicts patients with intractable headache, neuromodulation may be an appropriate tool to improve not only pain but also disability and quality of life.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for the Management of Pediatric Neuropathic Pain

The management of neuropathic pain in children poses an enormous challenge for pediatricians and pain management physicians. Current treatment options include physical therapy and medication management. Peripheral nerve stimulation/neuromodulation is a novel and minimally invasive treatment that can be initiated and monitored in an outpatient setting. This new technology can be a useful tool for treating pain secondary to pediatric neuropathy and chronic refractory pain after conservative management. Our case report describes the use of a peripheral nerve stimulator in the successful management of pediatric neuropathic leg pain.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation of the Lesser Occipital and Greater Auricular Nerve for Post Herpetic Neuralgia in a Case of Ramsay Hunt Syndrome: Case Report

Background

Post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN) is a painful condition that presents after herpes zoster reactivation in the peripheral and central nervous system. When medical treatment fails, options are limited, and patients may suffer with chronic pain indefinitely.

Case Presentation

We present the case of a gentleman with a 3-year history of PHN in the distribution of the right lesser occipital and greater auricular nerves that failed to respond to medical treatment. He underwent a trial of neuromodulation, and post-operative pain scores improved by 80%, and at 60 days post-operatively his average pain score was 0 out of 10.

Conclusions

PNS is an effective and safe option for the treatment of chronic pain, and we present a report of successful treatment of PHN in a particularly difficult anatomic distribution. PNS of the lesser occipital and greater auricular nerves is a novel treatment for PHN and shows promise as an effective, safe therapy when other treatment fails.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulator for Chronic Pain From Quadriceps Tendon Rupture: A Case Report

Chronic pain from quadriceps tendon rupture (QTR) presents a significant challenge for both orthopedic surgeons and pain management physicians. Current treatment options include physical therapy and medication management. Patients with refractory pain often end up using opioids and suffer from a prolonged disability that affects the quality of their life. A peripheral nerve stimulator is a novel treatment option for QTR. It is a minimally invasive treatment option that can be used to manage refractory cases in the future. We report a case of successful management of chronic pain in a patient with bilateral QTR with a femoral peripheral nerve stimulator.

Outcome of Surgical Treatments of Chronic Pain Caused by Trigeminal Neuropathy

BACKGROUND

Trigeminal neuropathy represents a subset of several facial pain syndromes that are difficult to diagnose and treat. Although many surgical modalities are available, outcomes remain suboptimal. The aim of this study is to present our experience in management of trigeminal neuropathy with a focus on the effectiveness and long-term efficacy of the different surgical procedures.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted from December 2012 until February 2020.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (19 females, 9 males) were included in this study. They had 40 surgical interventions. At last follow-up, 1 patient (33.3%) treated by spinal cord stimulation (SCS) had no pain recurrence and 2 patients (66.6%) had their devices removed because of therapeutic failure. Median time to pain recurrence after SCS was 19.5 months (interquartile range [IQR], 29.79 months). Six patients were treated with peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS). At last follow-up, 2 patients had satisfactory pain relief, whereas half of the patients had no improvement. For the 17 patients treated with computed tomography-guided trigeminal tractotomy/nucleotomy, true failure occurred 7 times in 6 patients. Median time to pain recurrence was 5.6 months (IQR, 6.2). Of the 6 patients treated with caudalis DREZ, 3 (50%) had satisfactory pain relief for >1 year and the median time to pain recurrence was 3.9 months (IQR, 29.53).

CONCLUSIONS

Trigeminal neuropathy is a difficult to treat entity of facial pain syndromes. The long-term efficacy of available interventions does not meet patients' satisfaction. More organized prospective studies with longer follow-up are needed to define the patient population best served by each surgical modality.

Clinical outcomes and complications of peripheral nerve field stimulation in the management of refractory trigeminal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) is a tool in the armamentarium of treatment options for trigeminal pain. The efficacy of this modality in mitigating trigeminal pain remains unclear. The aim of this study was to examine the existing literature on PNFS and elucidate pain score outcomes associated with its use in patients with trigeminal pain.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the PRISMA framework. The PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were queried on June 10, 2020. Studies reporting pain outcomes in more than 5 adult patients treated with PNFS for facial pain were included. The primary outcome of the study was the mean difference in the visual analog scale (VAS) score from the last follow-up to baseline, and it was analyzed by an inverse-variance, random-effect model. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and a funnel plot.

RESULTS

Of the 4597 studies screened for inclusion, 46 relevant full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Eleven observational cohort studies from the 46 articles were found to be eligible, and reported on a total of 109 patients. In 86% (94/109) of cases, trial stimulation was successful and followed by a permanent system implantation. VAS scores improved by 75% (mean difference 6.32/10 points, 95% CI 5.38-7.27 points) compared to baseline. Seventy-six percent (42/55) of patients became medication free or required lower doses of medications. The complication rate necessitating surgical revision was estimated at 32% per procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the belief that PNFS provides effective, long-term pain control for trigeminal pain. Statistical heterogeneity was considerable across all studies. Future work should be aimed at conducting double-blind randomized controlled trials to determine the utility of PNFS for treating various forms of trigeminal pain for which limited therapeutic options exist.

Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience for the Use of Implantable Peripheral Nerve Stimulation in the Treatment of Chronic Pain

The objective of this peripheral nerve stimulation consensus guideline is to add to the current family of consensus practice guidelines and incorporate a systematic review process. The published literature was searched from relevant electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science from database inception to March 29, 2021. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies that described peripheral nerve stimulation in patients in terms of clinical outcomes for various pain conditions, physiological mechanism of action, surgical technique, technique of placement, and adverse events. Twenty randomized controlled trials and 33 prospective observational studies were included in the systematic review process. There is Level I evidence supporting the efficacy of PNS for treatment of chronic migraine headaches via occipital nerve stimulation; chronic hemiplegic shoulder pain via stimulation of nerves innervating the trapezius, supraspinatus, and deltoid muscles; failed back surgery syndrome via subcutaneous peripheral field stimulation; and lower extremity neuropathic and lower extremity post-amputation pain. Evidence from current Level I studies combined with newer technologies facilitating less invasive and easier electrode placement make peripheral nerve stimulation an attractive alternative for managing patients with complex pain disorders. Peripheral nerve stimulation should be used judiciously as an adjunct for chronic and acute postoperative pain following adequate patient screening and positive diagnostic nerve block or stimulation trial.

A Review of Medical and Surgical Options for the Treatment of Facial Pain

Facial pain is a common medical complaint that is easily misdiagnosed. As a result, this pain often goes mistreated. Despite this, there are a variety of pharmacologic, surgical, and neuromodulatory options for the treatment of facial pain. In this review, the authors detail the forms of facial pain and their treatment options. They discuss the common medications used in the first-line treatment of facial pain and the second-line surgical and neuromodulatory options available to patients when pharmacologic options fail.

Case Report: Novel Anchoring Technique and Surgical Nuances for Trigeminal Ganglion Stimulation in the Treatment of Post-Herpetic Trigeminal Neuropathic Facial Pain

Introduction

Trigeminal ganglion stimulation is a neuromodulatory surgical procedure utilized to treat trigeminal neuropathic pain. This technique involves the placement of a stimulating electrode adjacent to the trigeminal ganglion and can be trialed before permanent implantation. Wider adoption by surgical practitioners is currently limited by complications such as lead migration from the trigeminal ganglion, which can result in loss of therapy and cannot be rectified without repeat surgery. We describe a novel surgical modification that successfully anchors the trigeminal ganglion electrode long-term.

Objective

To describe a novel surgical technique for the anchoring of trigeminal ganglion stimulation electrodes and a case report of a patient with post-herpetic trigeminal neuropathic pain treated with this approach.

Methods

An electrode was inserted percutaneously through the foramen ovale into Meckel's cave, adjacent to the trigeminal ganglion. The lead was anchored using a modification of an existing anchoring device, which was inserted into the buccal incision. The lead was connected to a generator for therapeutic stimulation. The location of the lead was followed radiographically using serial lateral skull radiographs.

Results

A 74-year-old male with post-herpetic trigeminal neuropathic pain, who had failed prior surgical therapies, underwent trigeminal ganglion stimulation. The trial lead was anchored using standard techniques and migrated outward within 7 days, rendering the trial electrode ineffective. The permanent lead was anchored using the described novel technique and remained in position without clinically significant outward migration nor loss in targeted stimulation until the last follow-up at 6 months.

Conclusion

Trigeminal ganglion stimulation is an effective therapeutic option for medically refractory trigeminal neuropathic pain. The novel surgical adaptation described prevents the outward migration of the lead and enables stable long-term lead placement.

60-Day PNS Treatment May Improve Identification of Delayed Responders and Delayed Non-Responders to Neurostimulation for Pain Relief

Objective

Conventional neurostimulation typically involves a brief (eg, ≤10-day) trial to assess presumed effectiveness prior to permanent implantation. Low trial conversion rates and high explant rates due to inadequate pain relief highlight the need for improved patient identification strategies. The development of a 60-day percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) system enables evaluation of outcomes following an extended temporary treatment period of up to 60 days, that may obviate or validate the need for permanent implant. The present study provides the first real-world evidence regarding patient response throughout a 60-day PNS treatment period.

Methods

Anonymized data listings were compiled from patients who underwent implantation of temporary percutaneous leads and opted-in to provide real-world data to the device manufacturer during routine interactions with device representatives throughout the 60-day treatment.

Results

Overall, 30% (222/747) of patients were early responders (≥50% pain relief throughout treatment). Another 31% (231/747) of patients initially presented as non-responders but surpassed 50% pain relief by the end of treatment. Conversely, 32% (239/747) of patients were non-responders throughout treatment. An additional 7% (55/747) of patients initially presented as responders but fell below 50% relief by the end of the treatment period.

Conclusion

An extended, 60-day PNS treatment may help identify delayed responders, providing the opportunity for sustained relief and improving access to effective PNS treatment. Compared to a conventionally short trial of ≤10 days, a longer 60-day PNS treatment may also help reduce explant rates by identifying delayed non-responders unlikely to benefit long-term. These scenarios support the importance of an extended 60-day temporary PNS stimulation period to help inform stepwise treatment strategies that may optimize outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

Sensorimotor effects of plasticity-inducing percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation protocols

BACKGROUND

Electrical stimulation of skin afferents can induce somatosensory plasticity in humans. Nevertheless, it is unknown if this is possible to do through percutaneous stimulation of a peripheral nerve, which will allow for regional anaesthesia interventions. Furthermore, potentiation protocols applied over mainly non-nociceptive fibers inhibit nociception in rodents, but this has not been tested in humans.

OBJECTIVE

to determine whether a protocol aiming to depress the nociceptive circuit and another aiming to potentiate non-nociceptive circuits produce regional hypoalgesia and changes in motor function, applied through percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (pPNS), and to assess which of them is more promising for pain relief, immediately and 24 hours after intervention.

METHODS

PT-cLF protocol aims to depress the nociceptive pathway through Pain Threshold, continuous Low Frequency stimulation and ST-bHF aims to produce potentiation of the non-nociceptive pathway, through Sensory Threshold burst stimulation at High Frequency. All subjects (n=29) went through both protocols and a control condition in a randomized and blinded crossover design.

RESULTS

Compared to control, ST-bHF induced distal hypoalgesia, towards electrical (p=0.04) and mechanical stimuli (p=0.02) and produced mechanical hypoesthesia (p=0.02). Contrarily, hypoalgesia was not observed after PT-cLF (p>0.05) but increased electrical motor threshold (p=0.04), reduced motor recruitment (p=0.03), and the subjects reported feeling reduced strength (p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

This works provides evidence that is possible to induce antinociceptive plasticity in a wide territory using pPNS. Moreover, it demonstrates for the first time in humans that a protocol aiming to produce long-term potentiation applied predominantly over non-nociceptive afferents induces hypoesthesia and hypoalgesia.

Ultrasound does not activate but can inhibit in vivo mammalian nerves across a wide range of parameters

Ultrasound (US) has been shown to stimulate brain circuits, however, the ability to excite peripheral nerves with US remains controversial. To the best of our knowledge, there is still no in vivo neural recording study that has applied US stimulation to a nerve isolated from surrounding tissue to confirm direct activation effects. Here, we show that US cannot excite an isolated mammalian sciatic nerve in an in vivo preparation, even at high pressures (relative to levels recommended in the FDA guidance for diagnostic ultrasound) and for a wide range of parameters, including different pulse patterns and center frequencies. US can, however, reliably inhibit nerve activity whereby greater suppression is correlated with increases in nerve temperature. By prohibiting the nerve temperature from increasing during US application, we did not observe suppressive effects. Overall, these findings demonstrate that US can reliably inhibit nerve activity through a thermal mechanism that has potential for various health disorders, though future studies are needed to evaluate the long-term safety of therapeutic ultrasound applications.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Treatment of Headaches: An Evidence-Based Review

Headaches are one of the most common medical complaints worldwide, and treatment is often made difficult because of misclassification. Peripheral nerve stimulation has emerged as a novel treatment for the treatment of intractable headaches in recent years. While high-quality evidence does exist regarding its use, efficacy is generally limited to specific nerves and headache types. While much research remains to bring this technology to the mainstream, clinicians are increasingly able to provide safe yet efficacious pain control.

Short-Term Peripheral Nerve Stimulation Relieve Pain for Elder Herpes Zoster Ophthalmicus Patients: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

Ophthalmic postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is the final stage of herpes zoster (HZ) ophthalmicus and a severe refractory neuropathic pain, thus there is no curative treatment that could alleviate pain and reduce the incidence of ophthalmic PHN now. The purpose of this study is to evaluate therapeutic efficacy of short-term peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) for elder patients with HZ ophthalmicus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective study from March 2015 to August 2019 in our pain department. All the HZ ophthalmicus patients underwent supraorbital nerve short-term PNS were included. The patients' data, including numeric rating scale (NRS), 36-Item short form health survey (SF-36), and analgesic consumptions, were retrospectively analyzed. Severe side effects also were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 68 patients were enrolled in this study. The NRS scores were significantly decreased at different time points after short-term PNS compared to baseline (p < 0.001). The SF-36 scores, including general health, social function, emotional role, mental health, bodily pain, physical functioning, physical role, and vitality, were significantly improved at different time points after treatment (p < 0.001). The average dosages of tramadol and pregabalin administered (mg/d) were both significantly reduced compared to baseline (p < 0.001). There was no bleeding, infection, pain increase, and other side effects after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term PNS is an effective and safe therapeutic alternative for elder patients with HZ ophthalmicus and could reduce the incidence of ophthalmic PHN.

Comparison of Peripheral Neurectomy vs. Medical Treatment for Migraine: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Migraine is a common form of primary neurologic headache. Many patients are chronic migraineurs and suffer from a significant disability and adverse effects of drugs. There are various surgical options available to treat migraines, including peripheral neurectomies.

Objective

To study the surgical and functional outcomes of migraine surgeries using peripheral neurectomies and compare them with conservatively treated patients.

Materials and Methods

Migraine patients who had a unilateral onset pain were given local bupivacaine block at the suspected trigger site, and those who were relieved were given the option for surgery. In the operative group, the peripheral nerve of the trigger site was lysed under local anesthesia. The conservative group was continued with the standard treatment. Evaluations with a baseline and 6 months visual analog score (VAS), migraine headache index (MHI), migraine disability assessment test (MIDAS), and pain self-efficacy questionnaire (PSEQ) scores were done.

Results

A total of 26 patients got benefitted with the local bupivacaine block, out of which 13 underwent surgery. At baseline, the VAS, MHI, MIDAS, and PSEQ scores were similar in both the groups. The operative group had significant (P < 0.001) improvement in all these parameters 6 months after the surgery. All patients of the operative group got free from prophylactic migraine treatment; however, 11 out of 13 patients still needed occasional  use of analgesics. There was one complication of transient temporal numbness.

Conclusion

Migraine surgery using peripheral neurectomies was more effective than chronic drug treatment in appropriately selected patients.

Long-Term Experience with Occipital and Supraorbital Nerve Stimulation for the Various Headache Disorders-A Retrospective Institutional Case Series of 96 Patients

OBJECTIVE

We have provided long-term data on clinically meaningful pain alleviation for drug-refractory headache disorders using occipital (ONS) and supraorbital nerve stimulation (SONS).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 96 patients with migraine, cervicogenic headache, cluster headache, neuropathic pain of the scalp, tension-type headache, and new daily persistent headache who had undergone ONS (61.5%), SONS (11.5%), or combined ONS plus SONS (27.1%) trial implantation and definitive implantation from 2007 to 2017. Changes in pain perception over time were monitored using the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 60.4% women and 39.6% men, with a mean age of 46.9 ± 11.5 years and pain duration of 14 ± 14.1 years. Of the 96 patients, 65 (67.7%) were treatment responders to a trial (≥30% amelioration in the average or maximum VAS score for pain and/or number of headache days) that had lasted 22.5 ± 8.8 days. The reduction in their average VAS score for pain was to 37% ± 24.4% of baseline compared with 99.1% ± 24.1% of baseline for those without a response (P < 0.01). Of the 56 patients who had undergone implantation and had long-term follow-up data available for ≤10 years, 32 (57.1%) reported a ≥50% reduction in their average VAS score for pain. Four patients (6.5%) had requested hardware explantation. Stage II complications included 1 infection (1.6%) and 6 electrode dislocations (9.7%). The study limitations included the retrospective nature, lack of controls receiving placebo intervention, and randomization.

CONCLUSIONS

After careful patient selection according to a positive response to a trial of ONS and/or SONS, clinically meaningful long-term benefit was achieved in 57.1% of our patients with various chronic headache conditions.

Outcomes of Occipital Nerve Stimulation for Craniofacial Pain Syndromes

OBJECTIVES

Occipital nerve regional stimulation (ONS) is reported to improve pain in several studies. We examined long-term pain and functional outcomes of ONS in an open-label prospective study.

METHODS

Patients with medically refractory and disabling craniofacial pain were prospectively selected for ONS. Primary outcome was a change in mean daily pain intensity on the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included changes in NPRS, Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6), Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Pain Disability Index (PDI), Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale - Revised (CESD-R), and Short Form-36 version 2 (SF36) at last follow-up.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients (mean age 49.7 ± 8.4) diagnosed with occipital neuralgia (6), hemicrania continua (2), persistent idiopathic facial pain (2), post-traumatic facial pain (1), cluster headache (1), and chronic migraine (1) were enrolled. Mean NPRS improved by 2.1 ± 2.1 at 6 months and 2.1 ± 1.9 at last follow-up (23.5 ± 18.1 months). HIT-6 decreased by 8.7 ± 8.8, MIDAS decreased by 61.3 ± 71.6, and PDI decreased by 17.9 ± 18. SF36 physical functioning, bodily pain, and social functioning improved by 16.4 ± 19.6, 18.0 ± 31.6, and 26.1 ± 37.3, respectively. Moderate to severe headache days (defined as ≥50% of baseline mean NPRS) were reduced by 8.9 ± 10.2 days per month with ONS.

CONCLUSION

ONS reduced the long-term NPRS and moderate-severe monthly headache days by 30% and improved functional outcomes and quality of life. A prospective registry for ONS would be helpful in accumulating a larger cohort with longer follow-up in order to improve the use of ONS.

Programming Parameters and Techniques in Trigeminal Ganglion Stimulation for Intractable Facial Pain

OBJECTIVES

Atypical facial pain syndromes are challenging disorders to manage and often incur limited benefit with surgery for classical trigeminal neuralgia presentations, such as microvascular decompression or ablative procedures. Neurostimulation of the trigeminal ganglion and peripheral nerves can be effective at treating atypical presentations of trigeminal facial pain affecting the V1-3 dermatomes, and the surgical techniques are well described. The stimulation parameters, however, have thus far received limited description; we therefore sought to describe programming strategies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review, examining patients that underwent trigeminal ganglion stimulation (TGS) and nerve branch stimulation for atypical facial pain and trigeminal neuropathic pain, and describe the programming strategies in detail.

RESULTS

We describe the use of high-frequency stimulation (1000 Hz), with alteration in pulse width (60-220 msec) and amplitude (0.5-3 V) to achieve effective treatment of refractory trigeminal facial pain. These parameters differ from existing published parameters for trigeminal nerve branch stimulation. We also describe the programming of specific contacts on each lead to target specific aspects of the individual patients' facial pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of effective programming strategies is critical to the success of neurostimulation surgical treatments; however, the critical details in programming strategies typically receive limited description. We report on the use of several successful programming strategies for TGS, to assist pain providers in successfully applying these surgical techniques in these difficult to manage atypical facial pain syndromes.

Craniofacial Peripheral Nerve Stimulation: Analysis of a Single Institution Series

OBJECTIVE

Objective real-world experience with peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is limited. Furthermore, the lack of robust outcome metrics, long-term follow-up and data comparing responders and nonresponders limit the refinement of selection criteria to better identify patients likely to benefit from PNS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 22 patients with craniofacial pain treated with PNS, and responders were classified as having ≥50% postoperative improvement in the numeric rating scale (NRS). In a subset of patients (n = 11), detailed prospective outcomes metrics were obtained preoperatively and postoperatively, including NRS, Beck Depression Index (BDI), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ).

RESULTS

About 59.1% (13 of 22) of subjects were classified as responders at a mean follow-up of 37.5 ± 5.27 months. Diagnoses included migraine (n = 6), occipital neuralgia (n = 9), trigeminal neuropathic pain (TNP; n = 6), and central poststroke pain (n = 1). Within the TNP subgroup, responders were more likely to have undergone two or more trigeminal neuralgia procedures prior to PNS (p < 0.05). In the 11 patients with comprehensive preoperative and postoperative outcome data, we noted significant improvement in NRS (p = 0.0005), BDI (p = 0.04), PCS (p = 0.01), as well as components of PCS (helplessness and magnification, p = 0.02) and MPQ (affective, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study adds to the PNS literature by providing long-term data and multiple outcome metrics in a subset of patients. We suggest that BDI, PCS, and MPQ may provide more insight into meaningful response over time. Evaluating functional and quality of life outcomes in patients with craniofacial pain may be more informative than assessing benefit solely based on pain intensity and responder rates.

Neuromodulation in headache and craniofacial neuralgia: guidelines from the Spanish Society of Neurology and the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery

INTRODUCTION

Numerous invasive and non-invasive neuromodulation devices have been developed and applied to patients with headache and neuralgia in recent years. However, no updated review addresses their safety and efficacy, and no healthcare institution has issued specific recommendations on their use for these 2 conditions.

METHODS

Neurologists from the Spanish Society of Neurology's (SEN) Headache Study Group and neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, selected by the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery (SENEC), performed a comprehensive review of articles on the MEDLINE database addressing the use of the technique in patients with headache and neuralgia.

RESULTS

We present an updated review and establish the first set of consensus recommendations of the SEN and SENC on the use of neuromodulation to treat headache and neuralgia, analysing the current levels of evidence on its effectiveness for each specific condition.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence supports the indication of neuromodulation techniques for patients with refractory headache and neuralgia (especially migraine, cluster headache, and trigeminal neuralgia) selected by neurologists and headache specialists, after pharmacological treatment options are exhausted. Furthermore, we recommend that invasive neuromodulation be debated by multidisciplinary committees, and that the procedure be performed by teams of neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, with acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality.

Electrical stimulation of cranial nerves in cognition and disease

The cranial nerves are the pathways through which environmental information (sensation) is directly communicated to the brain, leading to perception, and giving rise to higher cognition. Because cranial nerves determine and modulate brain function, invasive and non-invasive cranial nerve electrical stimulation methods have applications in the clinical, behavioral, and cognitive domains. Among other neuromodulation approaches such as peripheral, transcranial and deep brain stimulation, cranial nerve stimulation is unique in allowing axon pathway-specific engagement of brain circuits, including thalamo-cortical networks. In this review we amalgamate relevant knowledge of 1) cranial nerve anatomy and biophysics; 2) evidence of the modulatory effects of cranial nerves on cognition; 3) clinical and behavioral outcomes of cranial nerve stimulation; and 4) biomarkers of nerve target engagement including physiology, electroencephalography, neuroimaging, and behavioral metrics. Existing non-invasive stimulation methods cannot feasibly activate the axons of only individual cranial nerves. Even with invasive stimulation methods, selective targeting of one nerve fiber type requires nuance since each nerve is composed of functionally distinct axon-types that differentially branch and can anastomose onto other nerves. None-the-less, precisely controlling stimulation parameters can aid in affecting distinct sets of axons, thus supporting specific actions on cognition and behavior. To this end, a rubric for reproducible dose-response stimulation parameters is defined here. Given that afferent cranial nerve axons project directly to the brain, targeting structures (e.g. thalamus, cortex) that are critical nodes in higher order brain networks, potent effects on cognition are plausible. We propose an intervention design framework based on driving cranial nerve pathways in targeted brain circuits, which are in turn linked to specific higher cognitive processes. State-of-the-art current flow models that are used to explain and design cranial-nerve-activating stimulation technology require multi-scale detail that includes: gross anatomy; skull foramina and superficial tissue layers; and precise nerve morphology. Detailed simulations also predict that some non-invasive electrical or magnetic stimulation approaches that do not intend to modulate cranial nerves per se, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), may also modulate activity of specific cranial nerves. Much prior cranial nerve stimulation work was conceptually limited to the production of sensory perception, with individual titration of intensity based on the level of perception and tolerability. However, disregarding sensory emulation allows consideration of temporal stimulation patterns (axon recruitment) that modulate the tone of cortical networks independent of sensory cortices, without necessarily titrating perception. For example, leveraging the role of the thalamus as a gatekeeper for information to the cerebral cortex, preventing or enhancing the passage of specific information depending on the behavioral state. We show that properly parameterized computational models at multiple scales are needed to rationally optimize neuromodulation that target sets of cranial nerves, determining which and how specific brain circuitries are modulated, which can in turn influence cognition in a designed manner.

Peripheral trigeminal branch stimulation for refractory facial pain: A single-center experience

OBJECTIVE

Facial pain refractory to medical treatments may benefit from neurosurgical interventions. Only a few studies have reported on the efficacy of peripheral trigeminal stimulation and more specifically supraorbital nerve (SON) and infraorbital nerve (ION) stimulation for the treatment of facial pain.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In the present study, we identified all patients at our institution who underwent SON and/or ION stimulation for treatment of facial pain due to post-herpetic, traumatic or idiopathic etiology. Relevant pre and post-operative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

We identified 15 patients who underwent SON and/or ION stimulation. Among them, 12 (80 %) endorsed >50 % pain relief during the trial stimulation period. After a median follow-up of 5.8 months with permanent implantation, 1 patient (8.3 %) was diagnosed with lead erosion and IPG migration, two patients had lead infections (16.7 %) and one (8.3 %) had wound dehiscence. No lead migrations were identified during the long-term follow-up. The VAS score showed a statistically significant reduction from a median pre-operative score of 7 to a post-operative score of 1.8 (p = 0.011), which corresponded to a 74.3 % average pain reduction.

CONCLUSION

SON and/or ION stimulation can be an effective treatment for intractable facial pain due to post-herpetic, traumatic or idiopathic etiology; however the complication rate is relatively high. Future prospective studies with longer follow-up periods are warranted.

Placement and Anchoring of Trigeminal Neurostimulation Electrodes: Technical Report

BACKGROUND

Peripheral neurostimulation (PNS) for medically refractory trigeminal and craniofacial pain is an emerging alternative to traditional surgical approaches. Technical problems with craniofacial PNS have included electrode migration and erosion, limiting the utility and cost-effectiveness of this procedure.

OBJECTIVE

To review our institutional surgical technique for trigeminal PNS implantation, focusing on a novel technique for electrode anchoring.

METHODS

Consecutive cases of permanent craniofacial PNS placement by a single surgeon over 36 months were reviewed for surgical technique and technical outcomes. Electrodes were placed percutaneously with open anchoring to the pericranium at a separate parietal incision.

RESULTS

Sixteen systems (53 electrodes) were implanted in 14 patients. Median follow-up was 13 months (range, 5-29 months). Electrode placement was successful in all cases with no intraoperative complications. There was 1 lead migration (6.3% per patient; 1.8% per lead) and no cases of erosion. Two patients (14.3%) required explant for infection, 1 of whom was successfully reimplanted. Three patients (21.4%) underwent surgical revision other than for infection.

CONCLUSIONS

We present an improved method for craniofacial PNS surgery which introduces a separate incision for electrode anchoring at the parietal boss. This technique simplifies the procedure and greatly reduces rates of erosion and migration, improving patient comfort and satisfaction.

Prospective trial examining safety and efficacy of microcurrent stimulation for the treatment of sinus pain and congestion

Background

Inflammation and swelling of the sinus and nasal mucosa are commonly caused by viral infection, bacterial infection, or exposure to allergens and irritants. Sinonasal inflammation can cause symptoms of nasal congestion, facial pressure, and rhinogenic facial pain or “sinus pain”. A previous randomized controlled study demonstrated that acute treatment with non-invasive periorbital microcurrent stimulation resulted in a rapid and clinically meaningful reduction in self-report of sinus pain that significantly outperformed sham control treatment. Here, we assessed the acute durability of microcurrent pain relief and longitudinal effects of 4 weeks of daily microcurrent treatment in patients presenting with sinus pain.

Methods

Thirty subjects with moderate facial pain (numeric rating scale ≥5) attributed to self-reported sinonasal disease were enrolled in a single-arm, prospective interventional study. At enrollment, subjects were given a microcurrent treatment device and written instructions and self-administered the device to the bilateral periorbital regions for 5 mins. Subjects were instructed to treat themselves at home once daily and up to four times daily as needed for 4 weeks. Pain was measured both acutely and weekly during the 4 weeks of treatment using the numeric rating scale. Congestion and medication use data were collected weekly using the Congestion Quantifier 7 (CQ7) and medication diary, respectively.

Results

Thirty patients were enrolled and completed the study. Microcurrent therapy rapidly reduced post-treatment numeric rating scale for pain by − 1.2 at 10 mins (p = 0.0076), − 1.6 at 1 hr (p = 0.0007), − 1.9 at 2 hrs (p < 0.0001), − 2.1 at 4 hrs (p < 0.0001), and − 2.1 at 6 hrs (p < 0.0001). With daily microcurrent treatment, numeric rating scale for pain was reduced over 4 weeks by − 1.3 (− 20.1%) after 1 week (p = 0.0018), − 2.1 (− 32.1%) after 2 weeks (p < 0.0001), − 2.4 (− 36.6%) after 3 weeks (p < 0.0001) and − 2.9 (− 43.3%) after 4 weeks (p < 0.0001). For subjects who enrolled with moderate or worse congestion, mean congestion scores (CQ7) were reduced by − 4.2 (− 22.0%) after 1 week (p < 0.0001), − 5.8 (− 33.0%) after 2 weeks (p < 0.0001), − 7.2 (− 37.4%) after 3 weeks (p < 0.0001) and − 8.6 (− 44.3%) after 4 weeks (p < 0.0001) of microcurrent treatment.

Conclusion

Self-administered periorbital microcurrent treatment given at home was efficacious in significantly reducing moderate sinus pain for up to 6 hrs and significantly reducing moderate pain and congestion over 4 weeks of daily use. Microcurrent therapy was found to be safe with only minor side effects that resolved without intervention.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03888274. Registered 25 March 2019. Retroactively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03888274.

Prospective case series on the use of peripheral nerve stimulation for focal mononeuropathy treatment

Aim: This case series looks at outcomes in 39 patients implanted using the Bioness Stimrouter system on various isolated mononeuropathies. Patients & methods: A case series of 39 patients with a total of 42 implants were enrolled starting August 2017 at various pain management centers. Results: Of 39 patients studied, 78% of the participants noticed an improvement in their pain. There was a 71% reduction in pain scores with the average preprocedure score of 8 improving to 2 post-implant. Participants noted on average a 72% improvement in activity with the greatest observed in the brachial plexus (80%) and suprascapular nerve (80%) and smallest in the intercostal nerve (40%). Approximately 89% of those implanted with a peripheral nerve stimulator experienced a greater than 50% reduction in opioid consumption. Conclusion: Peripheral nerve stimulators are a new, minimally invasive neuromodulation modality that shows promising early results in our 39-patient case series.

Evolving Techniques and Indications in Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Pain

Peripheral nerve stimulation is the direct electrical stimulation of named nerves outside the central neuraxis to alleviate pain in the distribution of the targeted peripheral nerve. These treatments have shown efficacy in treating a variety of neuropathic, musculoskeletal, and visceral refractory pain pathologies; although not first line, these therapies are an important part of the treatment repertoire for chronic pain. With careful patient selection and judicious choice of stimulation technique, excellent results can be achieved for a variety of pain etiologies and distributions. This article reviews current and past practices of peripheral nerve stimulation and upcoming advancements in the field.

Nerve Stimulation for Pain

Nerve stimulation is a reversible technique that is used successfully for the treatment of traumatic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome, and craniofacial neuropathic pain. Nerve field stimulation targets painful regions rather than a single nerve and has expanded indications, including axial low back pain. Appropriate patient education and motivation are crucial prior to surgery. Ongoing research is necessary to provide high-level evidence for the use of nerve stimulation. Most electrodes are primarily designed for spinal cord stimulation, hence the need to develop nerve electrodes dedicated for nerve stimulation.

Is Electrical Nerve Stimulation the Answer for Management of Equine Headshaking?

Horses with trigeminal mediated headshaking (TMHS) have a decreased activation threshold of the trigeminal nerve and clinical signs are suspected to be a manifestation of trigeminal neuralgia. Electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) is used for management of neuralgia in humans and appears to work via gate control theory. Use of an equine specific percutaneous ENS program in over 130 TMHS horses has resulted in approximately 50% success return to previous work. Electroacupuncture may also be useful in the management TMHS. Optimization of ENS procedures for TMHS is likely to require a greater understanding of the etiopathogenesis of the aberrant neurophysiology.

Occipital Nerve Stimulation

Although the first publications on clinical use of peripheral nerve stimulation for the treatment of chronic pain came out in the mid-1960s, it took 10 years before this approach was used to stimulate the occipital nerves. The future for occipital nerve stimulation is likely to bring new indications, devices, stimulation paradigms, and a decrease in invasiveness. As experience increases, one may expect that occipital nerve stimulation will eventually gain regulatory approval for more indications, most likely for occipital neuralgia, migraines and cluster headaches. This process may require additional studies, at least for approval from the US Food and Drug Administration.

Occipital Neuralgia: a noninvasive therapeutic approach

Objective:

to evaluate the application of a noninvasive intervention consisting of a postural modification using personalized models and osteopathy in people with occipital neuralgia.

Method:

retrospective study of the intervention performed in adult population with occipital neuralgia, consisting of postural modification using personalized plantar orthoses and osteopathy, in a study period of four years. The observed variables were: persistence of headache, alignment of the axes, plantar support, center of gravity and center of mass; medical interview data, visual analogue scale, Win-Track gait analysis system and Kinovea software for video analysis (clinical assessment instruments used).

Results:

a total of 34 records of people with occipital neuralgia were studied. A fraction of 58.8% of the patients reported improvement after the intervention. The visual analogue scale data were provided for 64.7% of the records and significant differences (p <0.001) between the means before (8.4 ± 1.7) and after the intervention (2.6 ± 2.7) were found.

Conclusion:

postural modification using personalized orthoses and osteopathy substantially improves the symptomatology of patients with occipital neuralgia.

Double Blinded Randomized Trial of Subcutaneous Trigeminal Nerve Stimulation as Adjuvant Treatment for Major Unipolar Depressive Disorder

BACKGROUND

More than 30% of major depressive disorder patients fail to respond to adequate trials of medications and psychotherapy. While modern neuromodulation approaches (ie, vagal nerve stimulation, deep brain stimulation) are yet to prove their efficacy for such cases in large randomized controlled trials, trigeminal nerve stimulation (TNS) has emerged as an alternative with promising effects on mood disorders.

OBJECTIVE

To assess efficacy, safety, tolerability, and placebo effect duration of continuous subcutaneous TNS (sTNS) in treatment-resistant depression (TRD).

METHODS

The TREND study is a single-center, double-blind, randomized, controlled, phase II clinical trial. Twenty unipolar TRD patients will receive V1 sTNS as adjuvant to medical therapy and randomized to active vs sham stimulation throughout a 24-wk period. An additional 24-wk open-label phase will follow. Data concerning efficacy, placebo response, relapse, and side effects related to surgery or electrical stimulation will be recorded. We will use the HDRS-17, BDI-SR, IDS_SR30, and UKU scales.

EXPECTED OUTCOMES

The main outcome measure is improvement in depression scores using HAM-17 under continuous sTNS as adjuvant to antidepressants. Active stimulation is expected to significantly impact response and remission rates. Minor side effects are expected due to the surgical procedure and electrical stimulation. The open-label phase should further confirm efficacy and tolerability.

DISCUSSION

This study protocol is designed to define efficacy of a novel adjuvant therapy for TRD. We must strive to develop safe, reproducible, predictable, and well-tolerated neuromodulation approaches for TRD patients impaired to manage their lives and contribute with society.

Current Innovations in Peripheral Nerve Stimulation

Peripheral nerve stimulation has been used in the treatment of several chronic pain conditions including pain due to peripheral nerve dysfunctions, complex regional pain syndrome, and cranial neuralgias. It has been shown to be effective for chronic, intractable pain that is refractory to conventional therapies such as physical therapy, medications, transcutaneous electrical stimulations, and nerve blocks. Recently, a new generation of peripheral nerve stimulation devices has been developed; these allow external pulse generators to transmit impulses wirelessly to the implanted electrode, and their implantation is significantly less invasive. In this review, we discuss the history, pathophysiology, indications, implantation process, and outcomes of employing peripheral nerve stimulation to treat chronic pain conditions.

Upper Cervical Spinal Cord Stimulation as an Alternative Treatment in Trigeminal Neuropathy

OBJECTIVE

To describe the indications and outcomes of upper cervical cord stimulation in trigeminal neuropathy.

METHODS

A consecutive single-center series of patients was retrospectively reviewed. It included 12 patients with trigeminal neuropathy treated with upper cervical spinal cord stimulation. Clinical features, complications, and outcomes were reviewed.

RESULTS

All patients had a successful trial before the definitive implantation of a spinal cord stimulator at the level of the craniocervical junction. The mean follow-up period was 4.4 years (range, 0.3-21.1 years). The average coverage in the pain zone was 72% and the median baseline, trial, and postoperative numeric rating scale (NRS) was 7, 3, and 3, respectively. When compared with the baseline, the mean reduction achieved in the postoperative average numeric rating scale was 4 points, accounting for a 57.1% pain reduction. The long-term failure rate was 25%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite there being enough evidence to consider upper cervical spinal cord stimulation as an effective treatment for patients with neuropathic trigeminal pain, a randomized controlled trial is needed to fully assess its indications and outcomes and compare it with other therapeutic approaches.

Subcutaneous Trigeminal Nerve Field Stimulation for Refractory Facial Pain

Chronic or neuropathic trigeminal facial pain can be challenging to treat. Neurosurgical procedures should be applied when conservative treatment fails. Neuromodulation techniques for chronic facial pain include deep brain stimulation and motor cortex stimulation, which are complex to perform. Subcutaneous nerve field stimulation is certified for chronic back pain and is the least invasive form of neuromodulation. We applied this technique to treat chronic and neuropathic trigeminal pain as an individual therapy concept. First, trial stimulation is performed. Subcutaneous leads are placed in the painful trigeminal dermatome under local anesthesia. The leads are connected to an external neurostimulator that applies constant stimulation. Patients undergo a 12 day outpatient trial to assess the effect of the stimulation. Electrodes are removed after the trial. If the patient reports pain reduction of at least 50% in intensity and/or attack frequency, a reduction in medication or increase in quality of life, permanent implantation is scheduled. New electrodes are implanted under general anesthesia and are subcutaneously tunneled to an infraclavicular internal pulse generator. Patients are able to turn stimulation on and off and to increase or decrease the stimulation amplitude as needed. This technique represents a minimal invasive alternative to other more invasive means of neuromodulation for trigeminal pain such as motor cortex stimulation or deep brain stimulation.

Infection Rates of Electrical Leads Used for Percutaneous Neurostimulation of the Peripheral Nervous System

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous neurostimulation of the peripheral nervous system involves the insertion of a wire "lead" through an introducing needle to target a nerve/plexus or a motor point within a muscle. Electrical current may then be passed from an external generator through the skin via the lead for various therapeutic goals, including providing analgesia. With extended use of percutaneous leads sometimes greater than a month, infection is a concern. It was hypothesized that the infection rate of leads with a coiled design is lower than for leads with a noncoiled cylindrical design.

METHODS

The literature was retrospectively reviewed for clinical studies of percutaneous neurostimulation of the peripheral nervous system of greater than 2 days that included explicit information on adverse events. The primary endpoint was the number of infections per 1,000 indwelling days.

RESULTS

Forty-three studies were identified that met inclusion criteria involving coiled (n = 21) and noncoiled (n = 25) leads (3 studies involved both). The risk of infection with noncoiled leads was estimated to be 25 times greater than with coiled leads (95% confidence interval [CI] 2 to 407, P = 0.006). The infection rates were estimated to be 0.03 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.13) infections per 1,000 indwelling days for coiled leads and 0.83 (95% CI 0.16 to 4.33) infections per 1,000 indwelling days for noncoiled leads (P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous leads used for neurostimulation of the peripheral nervous system have a much lower risk of infection with a coiled design compared with noncoiled leads: approximately 1 infection for every 30,000 vs. 1,200 indwelling days, respectively.

Subcutaneous trigeminal nerve field stimulation for refractory trigeminal pain: a cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

Neurosurgical pain management of drug-resistant trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is highly challenging. Microvascular decompression is a first-line neurosurgical approach for classical TN with neurovascular conflict, but can show clinical relapse despite proper decompression. Second-line destructive techniques like radiofrequency thermocoagulation have become reluctantly used due to their potential for irreversible side effects. Subcutaneous peripheral nerve field stimulation (sPNFS) is a minimally invasive neuromodulatory technique which has been shown to be effective for chronic localised pain conditions. Reports on sPNFS for the treatment of trigeminal pain (sTNFS) are still sparse and primarily focused on pain intensity as outcome measure. Detailed data on the impact of sTNFS on attack frequency are currently not available.

METHODS

Patients were classified according to the International Headache Society classification (ICHD-3-beta). Three patients had classical TN without (n = 3) and another three TN with concomitant persistent facial pain (n = 3). Two patients suffered from post-herpetic trigeminal neuropathy (n = 2). All eight patients underwent a trial stimulation of at least 7 days with subcutaneous leads in the affected trigeminal area connected to an external neurostimulator. Of those, six patients received permanent implantation of a neurostimulator. During the follow-up (6-29 months, mean 15.2), VAS-scores, attack frequencies, oral drug intake, complications and side effects were documented.

RESULTS

Seven out of eight patients responded to sTNFS (i.e. ≥50 % pain reduction) during the test trial. The pain intensity (according to VAS) was reduced by 83 ± 16 % (mean ± SD) and the number of attacks decreased by 73 ± 26 % (mean ± SD). Five out of six patients were able to reduce or stop pain medication. One patient developed device infection. Two patients developed stimulation-related side effects which could be resolved by reprogramming.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment by sTNFS is a beneficial option for patients with refractory trigeminal pain. Prospective randomised trials are required to systematically evaluate efficacy rates and safety of this low-invasive neurosurgical technique.