Search

Introduction: Neuromodulation represents one of the more advanced tools in the armamentarium of pain physicians. To optimize neuromodulation patient selection and management, an institutional interdisciplinary neuromodulation committee was created at each of two academic medical centers (University of California Davis [UCD] and Stanford University). The committee aims to collaboratively optimize neuromodulation candidates, to assess and minimize medical and psychologic risks, and to select the best device given a patient's pain condition. In this study, we present the methods and outcome data of the Neuromodulation Committee at the two institutions., Materials and Methods: After institutional review board approval, we included all adult patients who were evaluated by the Neuromodulation Committee between 2017 and 2020 at two academic pain clinics. Patients with insufficient data were excluded from the study. A retrospective chart review was completed on 385 UCD and Stanford University patient committee reviews. Data collected from the chart review included demographics (age, sex), committee meeting results (proceed with trial/implant or decline), trial success, and implant rate., Results: Of the 385 patients screened, the committees recommended proceeding with an implantable device (peripheral and neuraxial) in 337 patients (87.5%). Of the 278 patients recommended for neuraxial neuromodulation, 131 underwent trials with percutaneous leads (47.1%). Trials were successful (causing a ≥50% reduction in self-reported pain or improved function) in 108 patients (82.4%). The institutions completed 87 implants of 131 trials, representing a trial-to-permanent ratio of 66.4%., Conclusions: The Neuromodulation Committee aims to identify optimal patients for neuromodulation, address procedural challenges, decrease adverse events, provide educational context for trainees, and improve patient-related outcomes. Patients who were recommended for neuromodulation and subsequently underwent intervention had high trial success rates for dorsal root ganglion stimulation and spinal cord stimulation. The findings indicate that such an approach can lead to neuromodulation success, especially at academic centers, by combining the expertise of both medical and psychologic professionals., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Scott G. Pritzlaff has had a financial agreement or affiliation with the following commercial interests in the form of consultant: Bioness, SPR Therapeutics, Nalu Medical, EBT Medical; royalties: Oxford University Press, Wolters Kluwer; and research grants; Medtronic, Nevro Corp, and Abbott. Michael Jung, Naileshni Singh, Juliann Cho, Matthew Skoblar, and Manoj Jagtiani reported no conflicts of interest. Michael S. Leong has had a financial agreement or affiliation with the following commercial interests in the form of consultant: Sorrento Therapeutics, and research: Wex Pharmaceuticals. Ravi Prasad has had a financial agreement or affiliation with the following commercial interests in the form of consultant: Menda Health and Nitto Inc. Vafi Salmasi has had a financial agreement or affiliation with the following commercial interests in the form of consultant: Biotronik, Vertos Medical, and AppliedVR., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Conventionally, peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) for treatment of chronic pain has involved a two-stage process: a short-term (e.g., 7 days) trial and, if significant pain relief is achieved, a permanent PNS system is implanted. A percutaneous PNS treatment is now available where a coiled lead may be implanted for up to 60 days with the goal of producing sustained relief. In the present review, published prospective trials using percutaneous PNS treatment were identified and synthesized. The collected evidence indicates that percutaneous PNS treatment for up to 60 days provides durable clinically significant improvements in pain and pain interference. Similar efficacy across diverse targets and etiologies supports the broad applicability for use within the chronic pain population using this nonopioid technology.

Abstracts, and Scopus to identify and compile the evidence for diabetic neuropathy pain treatments (per section as listed in the manuscript) for the treatment of pain. Manuscripts from 2000-present were included in the search process. Results: After a comprehensive review and analysis of the available evidence, the ASPN SWEET guideline was able to rate the literature and provide therapy grades for most available treatments for PDN utilizing the United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria. Conclusion: The ASPN SWEET Guideline represents the most comprehensive review of the available treatments for PDN and their appropriate and safe utilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acute pain can have many etiologies that include surgical procedures, trauma (motor vehicle accident), musculoskeletal injuries (rib fracture) and, burns among others. Valuable components of a multimodal approach to acute pain management include both opioid and non-opioid medications, procedure specific regional anesthesia techniques (peripheral nerve blocks and neuraxial approaches), and interventional approaches (eg, peripheral nerve stimulation and cryo-neurolysis). Overall, successful acute perioperative pain management requires a multimodal, multidisciplinary approach that involves a coordinated effort between the surgical team, the anesthesia team, nursing, and pharmacy staff using Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]