Real World Clinical Utility of Neurophysiological Measurement Utilizing Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation in a Chronic Pain Population: The ECAP Study Protocol.
chronic pain
closed-loop
evoked compound action potentials
spinal cord stimulation
Journal
Journal of pain research
ISSN: 1178-7090
Titre abrégé: J Pain Res
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101540514
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
10
03
2023
accepted:
12
07
2023
medline:
27
7
2023
pubmed:
27
7
2023
entrez:
27
7
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an established chronic pain treatment, but the effectiveness of traditional, open-loop paradigms has been plagued by variable sustainability in a real-world setting. A new approach, utilizing evoked compound action potential (ECAP) controlled closed-loop (CL) SCS, continuously monitors spinal cord activation and automatically adjusts the stimulation amplitude of every pulse, maintaining stimulation at the prescribed ECAP level through this continual feedback mechanism. Recent studies demonstrated the long-term safety and efficacy of ECAP-controlled CL-SCS. Here, we report the design of a prospective, multicenter, single-arm feasibility study to characterize clinical outcomes in a real-world chronic pain population utilizing ECAP-controlled CL-SCS. Objective neurophysiological measurements such as device performance and patient therapy compliance, will be analyzed against baseline biopsychosocial assessments, to explore the clinical utility of these objective physiologic biomarkers in patient phenotyping. This study will enroll up to 300 subjects with chronic, intractable trunk and/or limb pain in up to 25 United States investigation sites. Subjects meeting eligibility criteria will undergo a trial procedure and a permanent implant following a successful trial. Neurophysiological measurements (measured in-clinic and continuously during home use) and clinical outcomes including pain, quality-of-life, psychological, emotional, and functional assessments will be collected at baseline, trial end, and up to 24-months post-implantation. Associations between objective neurophysiological data, clinical evaluation and patient-reported outcomes may have important clinical and scientific implications. They may provide novel insights about the chronic pain pathophysiology, its modulation during CL-SCS, and identification of pain phenotypes and/or mechanisms associated with treatment response during SCS trials and long-term therapy. Data from the ECAP study could lead to improvements in diagnosis, assessment, patient identification and management of chronic pain. It could also provide the foundation for development of a new SCS treatment approach customized by the patient's pain phenotype, unique neurophysiology, and disease severity.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an established chronic pain treatment, but the effectiveness of traditional, open-loop paradigms has been plagued by variable sustainability in a real-world setting. A new approach, utilizing evoked compound action potential (ECAP) controlled closed-loop (CL) SCS, continuously monitors spinal cord activation and automatically adjusts the stimulation amplitude of every pulse, maintaining stimulation at the prescribed ECAP level through this continual feedback mechanism. Recent studies demonstrated the long-term safety and efficacy of ECAP-controlled CL-SCS. Here, we report the design of a prospective, multicenter, single-arm feasibility study to characterize clinical outcomes in a real-world chronic pain population utilizing ECAP-controlled CL-SCS. Objective neurophysiological measurements such as device performance and patient therapy compliance, will be analyzed against baseline biopsychosocial assessments, to explore the clinical utility of these objective physiologic biomarkers in patient phenotyping.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
This study will enroll up to 300 subjects with chronic, intractable trunk and/or limb pain in up to 25 United States investigation sites. Subjects meeting eligibility criteria will undergo a trial procedure and a permanent implant following a successful trial. Neurophysiological measurements (measured in-clinic and continuously during home use) and clinical outcomes including pain, quality-of-life, psychological, emotional, and functional assessments will be collected at baseline, trial end, and up to 24-months post-implantation.
Discussion
UNASSIGNED
Associations between objective neurophysiological data, clinical evaluation and patient-reported outcomes may have important clinical and scientific implications. They may provide novel insights about the chronic pain pathophysiology, its modulation during CL-SCS, and identification of pain phenotypes and/or mechanisms associated with treatment response during SCS trials and long-term therapy. Data from the ECAP study could lead to improvements in diagnosis, assessment, patient identification and management of chronic pain. It could also provide the foundation for development of a new SCS treatment approach customized by the patient's pain phenotype, unique neurophysiology, and disease severity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37497371
doi: 10.2147/JPR.S411927
pii: 411927
pmc: PMC10368120
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
2497-2507Informations de copyright
© 2023 Leitner et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
AL, EH and NS are employees of Saluda Medical. PS has received consultancy fees from Medtronic, Saluda Medical, Nalu, and Biotronic and has stock options from Saluda Medical and Nalu. He also reports grants from National Spine. RL is an uncompensated consultant for Biotronik, Nalu, Saluda Medical, and Mainstay Medical and has stock options from Nalu and Saluda Medical obtained before 2019, not exercisable through the duration of his term as International Neuromodulation Society President and Editor-in-Chief of the journal, Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface. JP serves as a consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, Saluda Medical, Flowonix, SpineThera, Vertos, Vertiflex, SPR Therapeutics, Tersera, Aurora, Spark, Ethos, Biotronik, Mainstay, WISE, Boston Scientific, and Thermaquil; has received grant and research support from: Abbott, Flowonix, Saluda Medical, Aurora, Painteq, Ethos, Muse, Boston Scientific, SPR Therapeutics, Mainstay, Vertos, AIS, and Thermaquil; and is a shareholder of Vertos, SPR Therapeutics, Painteq, Aurora, Spark, Celeri Health, Neural Integrative Solutions, Pacific Research Institute, Thermaquil, and Anesthetic Gas Reclamation. He also reports DRG neuromonitoring patent issued to Neural Integrative Solutions. JK is on the advisory board for Saluda Medical, Boston Scientific, Nevro, Abbott and Medtronic. DD reports consultant fees from Saluda. SL is a consultant for Abbott, Avanos, Averitas Pharm, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Nalu Medical, Nevro, PainTeq, PRIA Health, Saluda Medical, SPR Therapeutics, Vertos Medical, has equity in Nalu Medical and National Spine and Pain Centers. He has received department research funding from Avanos, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Ethos Lab, Neuralace, SGX Medical, Nalu Medical, PainTeq, Saluda Medical and SPR Therapeutics. He also reports speaker bureau with Scilex Parma. JW is a consultant for SI Bone, Saluda Medical, Abbott, Medtronic and Biotronik. KA is an investigator and a consultant for Boston Scientific, Nevro, Medtronic, Nalu, Presidio and Biotronik. LP is a consultant for Medtronic, Saluda Medical and Nalu. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.
Références
Pain Pract. 2021 Jul;21(6):680-691
pubmed: 33768664
Qual Life Res. 2018 Jul;27(7):1885-1891
pubmed: 29569016
Pain Ther. 2021 Jun;10(1):539-550
pubmed: 33624253
Pain. 2007 Nov;132(1-2):179-88
pubmed: 17845835
Pain. 2020 Dec;161(12):2820-2829
pubmed: 32618875
Clin J Pain. 2023 Jul 5;:
pubmed: 37440335
Neuromodulation. 2017 Aug;20(6):525-533
pubmed: 28568898
J Pain Res. 2021 Aug 29;14:2677-2685
pubmed: 34512007
Pain. 2014 Nov;155(11):2426-31
pubmed: 25180016
Pain. 2001 Nov;94(2):149-158
pubmed: 11690728
Neurosurgery. 1997 Sep;41(3):654-9; discussion 659-60
pubmed: 9310984
Lancet. 2021 May 29;397(10289):2082-2097
pubmed: 34062143
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Dec 2;12:CD013756
pubmed: 34854473
Lancet. 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1204-1222
pubmed: 33069326
Qual Life Res. 2009 Sep;18(7):873-80
pubmed: 19543809
Pain. 2021 Jul 1;162(7):1935-1956
pubmed: 33470748
Lancet Neurol. 2020 Feb;19(2):123-134
pubmed: 31870766
Pain. 2020 Jan;161(1):24-35
pubmed: 31453983
JAMA Neurol. 2022 Mar 1;79(3):251-260
pubmed: 34998276
N Engl J Med. 2000 Aug 31;343(9):618-24
pubmed: 10965008
Neuromodulation. 2019 Apr;22(3):317-326
pubmed: 30828946
J Pain Res. 2021 Sep 07;14:2767-2776
pubmed: 34522135
Diabetes Care. 2014 Nov;37(11):3016-24
pubmed: 25216508
Lancet. 2021 May 29;397(10289):2111-2124
pubmed: 34062145
Anesthesiology. 2015 Oct;123(4):851-60
pubmed: 26218762
JAMA Neurol. 2021 Jun 1;78(6):687-698
pubmed: 33818600
Pain. 2005 Mar;114(1-2):29-36
pubmed: 15733628
Healthc Technol Lett. 2020 Jun 23;7(3):76-80
pubmed: 32754341
Bioelectron Med. 2019 Jun 28;5:
pubmed: 31435499
Neurosurgery. 2020 Sep 15;87(4):E485-E495
pubmed: 32023344
Pain. 2020 Sep 1;161(9):1976-1982
pubmed: 32694387
Pain. 2012 Mar;153(3):593-601
pubmed: 22188868
Neuromodulation. 2020 Jan;23(1):82-95
pubmed: 31215718