Comparison of Tonic vs. Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation During Trial Period.
Burst stimulation
neuromodulation trial
one-year follow-up
spinal cord stimulation
Journal
Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society
ISSN: 1525-1403
Titre abrégé: Neuromodulation
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9804159
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
22
12
2017
revised:
27
06
2018
accepted:
16
07
2018
pubmed:
18
10
2018
medline:
30
4
2019
entrez:
18
10
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-known treatment in patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). Burst stimulation is a recently developed stimulation modality that seems to be superior to tonic stimulation. This observational multicenter study compared tonic and burst stimulation during a trial period in patients with FBSS or radiculopathy. All the patients enrolled underwent two weeks of tonic stimulation followed by another two weeks of BurstDR stimulation, without randomization. The primary outcome was the reduction of pain in the legs and back. Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) and the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) were assessed before and after the trial. Patients were reevaluated after 12 months. We recruited 23 patients, 57% of whom had FBSS and 43% had radiculopathies. Five patients failed both the tonic and burst stimulation trials. While tonic stimulation reduced leg pain (p < 0.05), the burst mode added an extra pain reduction (ΔNRS 1.2 ± 1.5) (p < 0.01). No significant reduction in back pain was found (p 0.29). Pain on movement was reduced only by BurstDR (p < 0.01). Both stimulation modalities increased EQ-5D and reduced PCS from the baseline (p < 0.0001). At the end of the SCS trial phase, 26% patients chose tonic SCS, while 74% preferred burst. On 12-month follow-up examination, the benefits recorded at the end of the trial were maintained. Burst stimulation confers a greater reduction in leg pain intensity at rest and on movement. Reducing axial pain is still a challenge. Further studies are needed in order to provide each patient with the most appropriate stimulation paradigm.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-known treatment in patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). Burst stimulation is a recently developed stimulation modality that seems to be superior to tonic stimulation.
METHODS
METHODS
This observational multicenter study compared tonic and burst stimulation during a trial period in patients with FBSS or radiculopathy. All the patients enrolled underwent two weeks of tonic stimulation followed by another two weeks of BurstDR stimulation, without randomization. The primary outcome was the reduction of pain in the legs and back. Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) and the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) were assessed before and after the trial. Patients were reevaluated after 12 months.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We recruited 23 patients, 57% of whom had FBSS and 43% had radiculopathies. Five patients failed both the tonic and burst stimulation trials. While tonic stimulation reduced leg pain (p < 0.05), the burst mode added an extra pain reduction (ΔNRS 1.2 ± 1.5) (p < 0.01). No significant reduction in back pain was found (p 0.29). Pain on movement was reduced only by BurstDR (p < 0.01). Both stimulation modalities increased EQ-5D and reduced PCS from the baseline (p < 0.0001). At the end of the SCS trial phase, 26% patients chose tonic SCS, while 74% preferred burst. On 12-month follow-up examination, the benefits recorded at the end of the trial were maintained.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Burst stimulation confers a greater reduction in leg pain intensity at rest and on movement. Reducing axial pain is still a challenge. Further studies are needed in order to provide each patient with the most appropriate stimulation paradigm.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30328646
doi: 10.1111/ner.12867
pii: S1094-7159(21)01907-3
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
327-332Informations de copyright
© 2018 International Neuromodulation Society.