Search

Introduction Intractable complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS)-related chronic foot pain, is a common therapeutic challenge for interventional pain management physicians and patients alike. Dorsal root ganglia (DRG) stimulation is a very target specific dorsal column stimulation technique with very promising clinical outcomes. Patients with CRPS foot pain and previous back surgery can benefit from DRG stimulation but also run a significant risk of epidural trauma from the DRG sheath advancement. Most sensory innervation to the foot is from L5 and S1 dermatomes. Although there is dual modulation from L5 and S1 DRG, significant "cross talk" exists between these structures such that a DRG lead solely at S1 could provide pain relief for the entire foot. In this case series, we examined the outcomes obtained from placement of solely S1 DRG stimulating electrodes in patients with CRPS-related chronic foot pain, and examine whether this may provide a reduced risk of dural injury. Furthermore, we describe the technical aspects of a S1 DRG placement and discuss relevant anatomical issues pertaining to this approach. Materials and methods Five patients (four female, one male) with chronic foot pain participated. The oldest was 71 and the youngest 49. Three patients were diagnosed with foot CRPS-1, and two patients with foot CRPS-2. All patients had back surgery in the past and all underwent a trial and subsequent S1 DRG implantation. The patients were evaluated with a numeric rating score (NRS) for pain and function before the procedure and one, two, three, and six months after the procedure. The first patient underwent an L5 and S1 trial and developed CSF leak and postdural puncture headache. Two months later, the patient was re-trialed and implanted with a single S1 electrode. The other four patients were trialed and implanted with single S1 DRG electrodes. Results All five patients had severe pain (8-10 NRS) and significant loss of function and quality of life (2-4 NRS) before the procedure. All five patients had excellent (0-3 NRS) pain relief and functional restoration (8-10 NRS) with a single S1 electrode trial, and all five proceeded with permanent implantation. The pain relief from the S1 DRG stimulation extended to the entire foot without any sparing. All patients were able to discontinue or significantly reduce their oral pain medications. The one-, two-, three-, and six-month follow-up showed preservation of therapeutic efficacy. Conclusions A single S1 DRG electrode placement in patients diagnosed with CRPS of the foot and who had previous back surgery is therapeutically effective and can minimize the risk of dural trauma and CSF leak.

Introduction Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) devices are cost effective and improve function as well as quality of life. Despite the demonstrated benefits of SCS, some patients have the device explanted. We are interested in exploring the patient characteristics of those explanted. Methods This is a retrospective chart review of neurostimulation patients who underwent explantation at 18 centers across the United States within the previous five years. Results Data from 352 patients were collected and compiled. Failed Back Surgery syndrome was the most common diagnosis (38.9%; n = 136/350) and over half of the patients reported numerical rating scale (NRS) scores ≥8 prior to implant (64.3%; n = 207/322). All patients reported changes in NRS scores across time, with an initial decrease after implant followed by a pre-explant increase (F (2, 961) = 121.7, p

Objective This longitudinal, clinical outcome study was a multicenter, prospective, observational, registry with a 24-month assessment of patients implanted with spinal cord stimulation (SCS) systems for the management of chronic pain of the trunk and/or limbs. Methods On informed consent and institutional review board approval, 614 patients from 39 sites were enrolled within 30 days following permanent SCS system implantation. Medication usage, patient-reported pain relief (PRP), categorical ratings of pain relief, pain disability index scores (PDI), quality of life (QoL), and patient satisfaction were assessed at enrollment, 3-, 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-month postimplant. Device-related adverse events (AEs) were recorded and reported. Results Across all visits, statistically significant improvements were reported on all outcome measures. Mean PRP was 58.5% (± 26.4) at 3 months, 56.8% (± 29.2) at 6 months, 57.7% (± 28.9) at 12 months, 55.6% (± 29.8) at 18 months, and 56.3% (± 30.3) at 24 months. More than 65% of patients at any visit reported a PRP ≥ 50%. Mean PDI scores reduced from 46.9 points at baseline to 32.7, 31.8, 31.5, 32.1, 32.1 points at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months (p ≤ 0.0001), respectively. Greater than 76% of patients at any visit were satisfied with their therapy. The majority of patients categorized pain relief as excellent or good on a 5-item scale and reported overall QoL as greatly improved or improved on a 5-item scale. An average of 88% of patients stopped, decreased, or did not change dose of narcotics/opioids. The most common AE was diminished or loss of pain relief in 11.4% of enrolled patients. Conclusions Most patients experienced substantial pain relief and a significant improvement in all outcome measures. These results further support the safety, efficacy, and sustainability of SCS in clinical practice.

Objectives: Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT) disease is one of the most common hereditary neuropathies affecting one in 2500 people in the United States. CMT disease is associated with moderate to severe chronic extremity pain. We present the case of a young man with chronic intractable lower extremity pain associated with CMT disease treated with spinal cord stimulation (SCS). Materials and Methods: This was an Institutional Review Board-approved case study involving a 37-year-old man diagnosed with CMT disease with pain of more than 20 years. He was implanted with an SCS device and patient pain and quality of life was assessed one and six months later using the SF-McGill Pain Questionnaire, Visual Analog Scale, Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, Pain Disability Index, and SF-36. Baseline measures were obtained retrospectively. Qualitative data were collected from the medical record. Results: SCS was effective in decreasing pain, improving quality of life and reducing medication consumption at both one and six months post-implant. In addition, the patient was satisfied with SCS treatment. Conclusion: SCS produced favorable results in a patient with CMT and should be considered a treatment option for pain resulting from this condition.