Search

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common spinal disease of aging with a growing patient population, paralleling population growth. Minimally invasive treatments are evolving, and the use of these techniques needs guidance to provide the optimal patient safety and efficacy outcomes.The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified an educational need for guidance on the prudent use of the innovative minimally invasive surgical therapies for the treatment of symptomatic LSS. The executive board nominated experts spanning anesthesiology, physiatry, orthopedic surgery, and neurosurgery based on expertise, publications, research, diversity and field of practice. Evidence was reviewed, graded using the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria for evidence and recommendation strength and grade, and expert opinion was added to make consensus points for best practice.The world literature in English was searched using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Scopus, and meeting abstracts to identify and compile the evidence (per section) for LSS-related pain. Search words were selected based upon the section represented. Identified peer-reviewed literature was critiqued using USPSTF criteria and consensus points are presented.The algorithm for patient selection in the management of symptomatic spinal stenosis is evolving. Careful consideration of patient selection and anatomic architecture variance is critical for improved outcomes and patient safety.ASPN created a guidance for best practice for minimally invasive surgical treatment of symptomatic spinal stenosis.

No abstract available.

Erika A Petersen,1,* Timothy R Deer,2,* Stana Bojanic,3 Lauren R Sankary,4 Natalie H Strand,5 Adnan Al Kaisy,6 Frank Huygen,7 Dawood Sayed,8 Monique Steegers,9Paul Verrills,10 Michael E Schatman11,12 1Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA; 2Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USA; 3Department of Neurosurgery, John Radcliffe University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK; 4Neuroethics Program, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA; 5Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA; 6The Pain Management and Neuromodulation Centre, Guy’s & St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; 7Department of Anesthesiology, Center of Pain Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 8Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA; 9Departments of Anesthesiology and Pain and Palliative Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; 10Pain Medicine, Metro Pain Clinic, Melbourne, Australia; 11Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care, and Pain Medicine, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA; 12Department of Population Health – Division of Medical Ethics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Erika A Petersen, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Science, 4301 West Markham Slot #507, Little Rock, AR, 72205, USA, Tel +15016865270, Email eapetersen@uams.eduAbstract: The COVID-19 pandemic caught many areas of medicine in a state of unpreparedness for conducting research and completing ongoing projects during a global crisis, including the field of pain medicine. Waves of infection led to a disjointed ability to provide care and conduct clinical research. The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Research Group has created guidance for pragmatic and ethical considerations for research during future emergency or disaster situations. This analysis uses governmental guidance, scientific best practices, and expert opinion to address procedure-based or device-based clinical trials during such times. Current literature offers limited recommendations on this important issue, and the findings of this group fill a void for protocols to improve patient safety and efficacy, especially as we anticipate the impact of future disasters and spreading global infectious diseases. We recommend local adaptations to best practices and innovations to enable continued research while respecting the stressors to the research subjects, investigator teams, health-care systems, and to local infrastructure.Keywords: research, pain, emergency, pandemic, protocols

BACKGROUND: Treatment response to spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is focused on the magnitude of effects on pain intensity. However, chronic pain is a multidimensional condition that may affect individuals in different ways and as such it seems reductionist to evaluate treatment response based solely on a unidimensional measure such as pain intensity. AIM: The aim of this article is to add to a framework started by IMMPACT for assessing the wider health impact of treatment with SCS for people with chronic pain, a "holistic treatment response". DISCUSSION: Several aspects need consideration in the assessment of a holistic treatment response. SCS device data and how it relates to patient outcomes, is essential to improve the understanding of the different types of SCS, improve patient selection, long-term clinical outcomes, and reproducibility of findings. The outcomes to include in the evaluation of a holistic treatment response need to consider clinical relevance for patients and clinicians. Assessment of theholistic response combines two key concepts of patient assessment: (1) patients level of baseline (pre-treatment) unmet need across a range of health domains; (2) demonstration of patient-relevant improvements in these health domains with treatment. The minimal clinical important difference (MCID) is an established approach to reflect changes after a clinical intervention that are meaningful for the patient and can be used to identify treatment response to each individual domain. A holistic treatment response needs to account for MCIDs in all domains of importance for which the patient presents dysfunctional scores pre-treatment. The number of domains included in a holistic treatment response may vary and should be considered on an individual basis. Physiologic confirmation of therapy delivery and utilisation should be included as part of the evaluation of a holistic treatment response and is essential to advance the field of SCS and increase transparency and reproducibility of the findings.

Background Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) is an effective treatment for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) and post-surgical neuropathic pain. However, some patients have surgical and anatomical conditions that are contraindications to traditional DRGS technique. A novel transgrade approach to DRGS placement has been described and demonstrated effective for post spine surgery patients. We present three patients, each with a different reason in which DRGS would not be accessible via the traditional anterograde approach, who all had successful DRGS transgrade placement. Materials and methods The case series includes three patients with either CRPS or post-surgical neuropathic pain who had an anatomical or post-surgical condition that historically would have rendered DRGS contraindicated. Two patients had previously failed dorsal column stimulation. All three patients had successful placement with the transgrade approach-entry into the contralateral epidural space at the level of the targeted foramen from a cephalad angle. Each patient gave their verbal and written consent to be included in the case series. Results Following treatment with a transgrade approach, all three patients had significant pain relief and improvement in function without complication. Conclusion Barriers to anterograde foraminal access including previous implantation, previous instrumentation, and epidural adhesions may prevent DRGS placement in certain indicated patients. This can be especially challenging in patients who have failed other neuromodulation options like dorsal column stimulation. Our case series demonstrated that the transgrade technique can be successfully used in these cases to increase access to DRGS.

Michael E Schatman,1– 3 Erika A Petersen,4 Dawood Sayed5 1Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA; 2Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA; 3School of Social Work, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA; 4Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA; 5Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USACorrespondence: Michael E Schatman Tel +1 425-647-4880Email Michael.Schatman@tufts.edu

Objectives Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a disorder in which pain and discomfort are out of proportion to the amount of tissue damage. While prevalence is 20.57 per 100,000 adults, it has not been studied in the U.S. pediatric population. Conservative treatment options include pharmacologic, behavioral, and psychological treatment. If these fail, invasive therapies such as sympathetic blocks and neuromodulation may be performed. The ACCURATE study demonstrated efficacy of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation for the treatment of refractory CRPS, but did not include pediatric patients and there are no reported cases of its use in the pediatric population. We review the use of neuromodulation for CRPS in pediatric patients and present a novel case using DRG stimulation in an adolescent patient. Materials and methods A literature search was performed for any studies of neuromodulation as treatment of pediatric CRPS. The literature is reviewed and the case of a 17-year-old female with CRPS treated with DRG stimulation is presented. Results A 15-year-old female developed CRPS type I of the left ankle after a sports injury. She was unable to wear a shoe or venture outside the home due to pain, swelling, and allodynia. Conservative therapies, including medications, physical therapy, and lumbosacral sympathetic plexus blocks, failed. At age 17, she underwent DRG stimulator lead placement targeting the left L4 and L5 nerve roots. Her therapy provided 100% relief of pain within four days of placement and was sustained at 30-month follow-up. Conclusions DRG stimulation has been shown to significantly alter the symptomatology in patients with CRPS. This case suggests that DRG stimulation may be as effective for the treatment of refractory CRPS in pediatric patients as in adults.

Chronic low back pain is a worldwide leading cause of pain and disability. Degenerative disc disease has been the presumptive etiology in the majority of cases of chronic low back pain (CLBP). More recent study and treatments have discovered that the vertebral endplates play a large role in CLBP in a term defined as vertebrogenic back pain. As the vertebral endplates are highly innervated via the basivertebral nerve (BVN), this has resulted in a reliable target in treating patients suffering from vertebrogenic low back pain (VLBP). The application of BVN ablation for patients suffering from VLBP is still in its early stages of adoption and integration into spine care pathways. BVN ablation is grounded in a solid foundation of both pre-clinical and clinical evidence. With the emergence of this therapeutic option, the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified the need for formal evidence-based guidelines for the proper identification and selection of patients for BVN ablation in patients with VLBP. ASPN formed a multidisciplinary work group tasked to examine the available literature and form best practice guidelines on this subject. Based on the United States Preventative Task Force (USPSTF) criteria for grading evidence, gives BVN ablation Level A grade evidence with high certainty that the net benefit is substantial in appropriately selected individuals.

Objectives The evolution of neuromodulation devices in order to enter magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners has been one of understanding limitations, engineering modifications, and the development of a consensus within the community in which the FDA could safely administer labeling for the devices. In the initial decades of neuromodulation, it has been contraindicated for MRI use with implanted devices. In this review, we take a comprehensive approach to address all the major products currently on the market in order to provide physicians with the ability to determine when an MRI can be performed for each type of device implant. Materials and methods We have prepared a narrative review of MRI guidelines for currently marketed implanted neuromodulation devices including spinal cord stimulators, intrathecal drug delivery systems, peripheral nerve stimulators, deep brain stimulators, vagal nerve stimulators, and sacral nerve stimulators. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed, MEDLINE/OVID, SCOPUS, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles, as well as manufacturer-provided information. Results Guidelines and recommendations for each device and their respective guidelines for use in and around MR environments are presented. Conclusions This is the first comprehensive guideline with regards to various devices in the market and MRI compatibility from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience.

Background The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to a significant disruption in the care of pain from chronic and subacute conditions. The impact of this cessation of pain treatment may have unintended consequences of increased pain, reduced function, increased reliance on opioid medications, and potential increased morbidity, due to the systemic impact of untreated disease burden. This may include decreased mobility, reduction in overall health status, and increase of opioid use with the associated risks. Methods The article is the study of the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) COVID-19 task force to evaluate the policies set forth by federal, state, and local agencies to reduce or eliminate elective procedures for those patients with pain from spine, nerve, and joint disease. The impact of these decisions, which were needed to reduce the spread of the pandemic, led to a delay in care for many patients. We hence review an emergence plan to reinitiate this pain-related care. The goal is to outline a path to work with federal, state, and local authorities to combat the spread of the pandemic and minimize the deleterious impact of pain and suffering on our chronic pain patients. Results The article sets forth a strategy for the interventional pain centers to reemerge from the current pandemic and to set a course for future events. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic represents an overwhelming challenge to interventional pain physicians and their patients. In addition to urgent actions needed for disease mitigation, the ASPN recommends a staged return to pain management professionals' workflow.

This study reports the needs-based development, effectiveness and feasibility of a novel, comprehensive spinal cord stimulation (SCS) digital curriculum designed for pain medicine trainees. The curriculum aims to address the documented systematic variability in SCS education and empower physicians with SCS expertise, which has been linked to utilization patterns and patient outcomes. Following a needs assessment, the authors developed a three-part SCS e-learning video curriculum with baseline and postcourse knowledge tests. Best practices were used for educational video production and test-question development. The study period was from 1 February 2020 to 31 December 2020. A total of 202 US-based pain fellows across two cohorts (early-fellowship and late-fellowship) completed the baseline knowledge assessment, while 122, 96 and 88 participants completed all available post-tests for Part I (Fundamentals), Part II (Cadaver Lab) and Part III (Decision Making, The Literature and Critical Applications), respectively. Both cohorts significantly increased knowledge scores from baseline to immediate post-test in all curriculum parts (p

The deep brain stimulation (DBS) Think Tank X was held on August 17–19, 2022 in Orlando FL. The session organizers and moderators were all women with the theme women in neuromodulation. Dr. Helen Mayberg from Mt. Sinai, NY was the keynote speaker. She discussed milestones and her experiences in developing depression DBS. The DBS Think Tank was founded in 2012 and provides an open platform where clinicians, engineers and researchers (from industry and academia) can freely discuss current and emerging DBS technologies as well as the logistical and ethical issues facing the field. The consensus among the DBS Think Tank X speakers was that DBS has continued to expand in scope however several indications have reached the “trough of disillusionment.” DBS for depression was considered as “re-emerging” and approaching a slope of enlightenment. DBS for depression will soon re-enter clinical trials. The group estimated that globally more than 244,000 DBS devices have been implanted for neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders. This year’s meeting was focused on advances in the following areas: neuromodulation in Europe, Asia, and Australia; cutting-edge technologies, closed loop DBS, DBS tele-health, neuroethics, lesion therapy, interventional psychiatry, and adaptive DBS.

Introduction: Stereotactic neurosurgical techniques are increasingly used to deliver biologics, such as cells and viruses, although standardized procedures are necessary to ensure consistency and reproducibility. Objective: We provide an instructional guide to help plan for complex image-guided trajectories; this may be of particular benefit to surgeons new to biologic trials and companies planning such trials. Methods: We show how nuclei can be segmented and multiple trajectories with multiple injection points can be created through a single or multiple burr hole(s) based on preoperative images. Screenshots similar to those shown in this article can be used for planning purposes and for quality control in clinical trials. Results: This method enables the precise definition of 3-D target structures, such as the putamen, and efficient planning trajectories for biologic injections. The technique is generalizable and largely independent of procedural format, and thus can be integrated with frame-based or frameless platforms to streamline reproducible therapeutic delivery. Conclusions: We describe an easy-to-use and generalizable protocol for intracerebral trajectory planning for stereotactic delivery of biologics. Although we highlight intracerebral stem cell delivery to the putamen using a frame-based stereotactic delivery system, similar strategies may be employed for different brain nuclei using different platforms. We anticipate this will inform future advanced and fully automated neurosurgical procedures to help unify the field and decrease inherent variability seen with manual trajectory planning.

Erika A Petersen,1 Michael E Schatman,2– 4 Dawood Sayed,5 Timothy Deer6 1Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA; 2Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA, USA; 3Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA; 4School of Social Work, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA; 5Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA; 6Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USACorrespondence: Michael E Schatman Tel +1 425-647-4880Email Michael.Schatman@tufts.edu

ObjectiveFor many medical professionals dealing with patients with persistent pain following spine surgery, the term Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) as a diagnostic label is inadequate, misleading, and potentially troublesome. It misrepresents causation. Alternative terms have been suggested, but none has replaced FBSS. The International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) published a revised classification of chronic pain, as part of the new International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), which has been accepted by the World Health Organization (WHO). This includes the term Chronic pain after spinal surgery (CPSS), which is suggested as a replacement for FBSS.MethodsThis article provides arguments and rationale for a replacement definition. In order to propose a broadly applicable yet more precise and clinically informative term, an international group of experts was established.Results14 candidate replacement terms were considered and ranked. The application of agreed criteria reduced this to a shortlist of four. A preferred option—Persistent spinal pain syndrome—was selected by a structured workshop and Delphi process. We provide rationale for using Persistent spinal pain syndrome and a schema for its incorporation into ICD-11. We propose the adoption of this term would strengthen the new ICD-11 classification.ConclusionsThis project is important to those in the fields of pain management, spine surgery, and neuromodulation, as well as patients labeled with FBSS. Through a shift in perspective, it could facilitate the application of the new ICD-11 classification and allow clearer discussion among medical professionals, industry, funding organizations, academia, and the legal profession.

Background The traditional model of promotion and tenure in the health professions relies heavily on formal scholarship through teaching, research, and service. Institutions consider how much weight to give activities in each of these areas and determine a threshold for advancement. With the emergence of social media, scholars can engage wider audiences in creative ways and have a broader impact. Conventional metrics like the h-index do not account for social media impact. Social media engagement is poorly represented in most curricula vitae (CV) and therefore is undervalued in promotion and tenure reviews. Objective The objective was to develop crowdsourced guidelines for documenting social media scholarship. These guidelines aimed to provide a structure for documenting a scholar’s general impact on social media, as well as methods of documenting individual social media contributions exemplifying innovation, education, mentorship, advocacy, and dissemination. Methods To create unifying guidelines, we created a crowdsourced process that capitalized on the strengths of social media and generated a case example of successful use of the medium for academic collaboration. The primary author created a draft of the guidelines and then sought input from users on Twitter via a publicly accessible Google Document. There was no limitation on who could provide input and the work was done in a democratic, collaborative fashion. Contributors edited the draft over a period of 1 week (September 12-18, 2020). The primary and secondary authors then revised the draft to make it more concise. The guidelines and manuscript were then distributed to the contributors for edits and adopted by the group. All contributors were given the opportunity to serve as coauthors on the publication and were told upfront that authorship would depend on whether they were able to document the ways in which they met the 4 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors authorship criteria. Results We developed 2 sets of guidelines: Guidelines for Listing All Social Media Scholarship Under Public Scholarship (in Research/Scholarship Section of CV) and Guidelines for Listing Social Media Scholarship Under Research, Teaching, and Service Sections of CV. Institutions can choose which set fits their existing CV format. Conclusions With more uniformity, scholars can better represent the full scope and impact of their work. These guidelines are not intended to dictate how individual institutions should weigh social media contributions within promotion and tenure cases. Instead, by providing an initial set of guidelines, we hope to provide scholars and their institutions with a common format and language to document social media scholarship.

BACKGROUND The traditional model of promotion and tenure in the health professions relies heavily on formal scholarship through teaching, research, and service. Institutions consider how much weight to give activities in each of these areas and determine a threshold for advancement. With the emergence of social media, scholars can engage wider audiences in creative ways and have a broader impact. Conventional metrics like the h-index do not account for social media impact. Social media engagement is poorly represented in most curricula vitae (CV) and therefore is undervalued in promotion and tenure reviews. OBJECTIVE The objective was to develop crowdsourced guidelines for documenting social media scholarship. These guidelines aimed to provide a structure for documenting a scholar’s general impact on social media, as well as methods of documenting individual social media contributions exemplifying innovation, education, mentorship, advocacy, and dissemination. METHODS To create unifying guidelines, we created a crowdsourced process that capitalized on the strengths of social media and generated a case example of successful use of the medium for academic collaboration. The primary author created a draft of the guidelines and then sought input from users on Twitter via a publicly accessible Google Document. There was no limitation on who could provide input and the work was done in a democratic, collaborative fashion. Contributors edited the draft over a period of 1 week (September 12-18, 2020). The primary and secondary authors then revised the draft to make it more concise. The guidelines and manuscript were then distributed to the contributors for edits and adopted by the group. All contributors were given the opportunity to serve as coauthors on the publication and were told upfront that authorship would depend on whether they were able to document the ways in which they met the 4 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors authorship criteria. RESULTS We developed 2 sets of guidelines: Guidelines for Listing All Social Media Scholarship Under Public Scholarship (in Research/Scholarship Section of CV) and Guidelines for Listing Social Media Scholarship Under Research, Teaching, and Service Sections of CV. Institutions can choose which set fits their existing CV format. CONCLUSIONS With more uniformity, scholars can better represent the full scope and impact of their work. These guidelines are not intended to dictate how individual institutions should weigh social media contributions within promotion and tenure cases. Instead, by providing an initial set of guidelines, we hope to provide scholars and their institutions with a common format and language to document social media scholarship.

ObjectiveRefractory psychiatric disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and there is a great need for new treatments. In the last decade, investigators piloted novel deep brain stimulation (DBS)-based therapies for depression and obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD). Results from recent pivotal trials of these therapies, however, did not demonstrate the degree of efficacy expected from previous smaller trials. To discuss next steps, neurosurgeons, neurologists, psychiatrists and representatives from industry convened a workshop sponsored by the American Society for Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery in Chicago, Illinois, in June of 2016.DesignHere we summarise the proceedings of the workshop. Participants discussed a number of issues of importance to the community. First, we discussed how to interpret results from the recent pivotal trials of DBS for OCD and depression. We then reviewed what can be learnt from lesions and closed-loop neurostimulation. Subsequently, representatives from the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and industry discussed their views on neuromodulation for psychiatric disorders. In particular, these third parties discussed their criteria for moving forward with new trials. Finally, we discussed the best way of confirming safety and efficacy of these therapies, including registries and clinical trial design. We close by discussing next steps in the journey to new neuromodulatory therapies for these devastating illnesses.ConclusionInterest and motivation remain strong for deep brain stimulation for psychiatric disease. Progress will require coordinated efforts by all stakeholders.

INTRODUCTION: The Neuromodulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC) is dedicated to improving the safety and efficacy of neuromodulation and thus improving the lives of patients undergoing neuromodulation therapies. With continued innovations in neuromodulation comes the need for evolving reviews of best practices. Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation has significantly improved the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), among other conditions. Through funding and organizational leadership by the International Neuromodulation Society (INS), the NACC reconvened to develop the best practices consensus document for the selection, implantation and use of DRG stimulation for the treatment of chronic pain syndromes. METHODS: The NACC performed a comprehensive literature search of articles about DRG published from 1995 through June, 2017. A total of 2538 article abstracts were then reviewed, and selected articles graded for strength of evidence based on scoring criteria established by the US Preventive Services Task Force. Graded evidence was considered along with clinical experience to create the best practices consensus and recommendations. RESULTS: The NACC achieved consensus based on peer-reviewed literature and experience to create consensus points to improve patient selection, guide surgical methods, improve post-operative care, and make recommendations for management of patients treated with DRG stimulation. CONCLUSION: The NACC recommendations are intended to improve patient care in the use of this evolving therapy for chronic pain. Clinicians who choose to follow these recommendations may improve outcomes.

IntroductionManagement has been identified as a critical component of organisational resilience when responding to adverse events and crises, as managers must ensure an effective operational response and provide direction and guidance to teams. While there are many management approaches, strategies and interventions that have been applied and studied in healthcare, the impact of them in relation to resilience in healthcare has not been explored, particularly at the organisational level. Understanding the impact of management approaches, strategies and interventions on resilience has the potential to inform healthcare organisations on how to better use management to prepare and respond to organisational adverse events. The objective of this mixed-methods systematic review is to understand the relationship between management and organisational resilience in healthcare, including management approaches and strategies that promote resilience in healthcare.Methods and analysisA search through MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PubMed and EMBASE will be conducted between 1 August 2021 and 31 December 21. This review will consider empirical quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies published in English from 2010 to the present that meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Selected studies will be assessed in detail and extracted data will be reviewed by two independent reviewers. Results of the search will be reported in full in the final systematic review and presented in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis flow diagram. This review will follow a convergent integrated approach to data synthesis and integration.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic literature review includes no collection of primary data; hence ethical approval will not be sought. The outcomes from this review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, as conference presentation, and as condensed summary for managers in healthcare and policy-makers.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020223362.

IMPORTANCE: Many patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy experience chronic pain and inadequate relief despite best available medical treatments. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation (SCS) improves outcomes for patients with refractory painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The prospective, multicenter, open-label SENZA-PDN randomized clinical trial compared conventional medical management (CMM) with 10-kHz SCS plus CMM. Participants with PDN for 1 year or more refractory to gabapentinoids and at least 1 other analgesic class, lower limb pain intensity of 5 cm or more on a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS), body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 45 or less, hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) of 10% or less, daily morphine equivalents of 120 mg or less, and medically appropriate for the procedure were recruited from clinic patient populations and digital advertising. Participants were enrolled from multiple sites across the US, including academic centers and community pain clinics, between August 2017 and August 2019 with 6-month follow-up and optional crossover at 6 months. Screening 430 patients resulted in 214 who were excluded or declined participation and 216 who were randomized. At 6-month follow-up, 187 patients were evaluated. INTERVENTIONS: Implanted medical device delivering 10-kHz SCS. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The prespecified primary end point was percentage of participants with 50% pain relief or more on VAS without worsening of baseline neurological deficits at 3 months. Secondary end points were tested hierarchically, as prespecified in the analysis plan. Measures included pain VAS, neurological examination, health-related quality of life (EuroQol Five-Dimension questionnaire), and HbA(1c) over 6 months. RESULTS: Of 216 randomized patients, 136 (63.0%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 60.8 (10.7) years. Additionally, the median (interquartile range) duration of diabetes and peripheral neuropathy were 10.9 (6.3-16.4) years and 5.6 (3.0-10.1) years, respectively. The primary end point assessed in the intention-to-treat population was met by 5 of 94 patients in the CMM group (5%) and 75 of 95 patients in the 10-kHz SCS plus CMM group (79%; difference, 73.6%; 95% CI, 64.2-83.0; P

Background: Various techniques are used across institutions for implantation of deep brain stimulation (DBS) leads. The most used techniques for each step include preoperative MRI fused to in-frame CT, intraoperative fluoroscopy, and postoperative CT, but postimplantation MRI also is used, as it was at our center. We present the quality assurance study performed at our institution after a change from postimplantation MRI performed across the hospital to postimplantation in room CT. Methods: Retrospective chart review of 123 patients who underwent bilateral DBS leads placement without same-day generator placement that was performed. The patients were divided by the type of postoperative imaging that was obtained. Patients were excluded if a unilateral lead placement was performed, if the case was a revision of an existing lead or deviated from the normal protocol. Operative room times and procedure times for each group were analyzed with Wilcoxon rank sums test (WRST) to determine any significant differences between groups. Results: Postoperative MRI was performed for 82 patients, while postoperative CT was performed for 41 patients. A WRST showed a significant reduction in both operative room time (209 min to 170 min, P < 0.0001) and procedure time (140 min to 126 min, P = 0.0019). Conclusion: In-room CT allowed for a significant reduction in operative room time. Lower operative room time has been associated with increased patient comfort, and decreased cost. CT did not alter the revision rate for procedures. The significant reduction in procedure time may be attributed to increased team familiarity with procedure over time.

Spinal cord stimulation is an effective strategy for managing chronic neuropathic pain that is refractory to other medical treatment. Proper patient selection and fastidious technique are essential to good outcomes. Electrodes can be placed through both percutaneous and laminotomy approaches. Care should be taken to minimize the risks of spinal electrode implantation: infection, neurologic injury, device migration, and device malfunction. Technological innovation and applications continue to improve rapidly, affording more options for treatment.

Background Occipital neuralgia (ON) is a disorder characterized by sharp, electrical, paroxysmal pain, originating from the occiput and extending along the posterior scalp, in the distribution of the greater, lesser, and/or third occipital nerve. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) constitutes a promising therapy for medically refractory ON because it is reversible with minimal side effects and has shown continued efficacy with long-term follow-up. Objective To conduct a systematic literature review and provide treatment recommendations for the use of ONS for the treatment of patients with medically refractory ON. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed database and the Cochrane Library to locate articles published between 1966 and April 2014 using MeSH headings and keywords relevant to ONS as a means to treat ON. A second literature search was conducted using the PubMed database and the Cochrane Library to locate articles published between 1966 and June 2014 using MeSH headings and keywords relevant to interventions that predict response to ONS in ON. The strength of evidence of each article that underwent full text review and the resulting strength of recommendation were graded according to the guidelines development methodology of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons Joint Guidelines Committee. Results Nine studies met the criteria for inclusion in this guideline. All articles provided Class III Level evidence. Conclusion Based on the data derived from this systematic literature review, the following Level III recommendation can be made: the use of ONS is a treatment option for patients with medically refractory ON.

A variety of insults and mechanisms cause head and facial pain. Nociceptive pathways carrying the unpleasant physical and emotional perception of pain excite based on actual or impending tissue damage. Facial pain in particular possesses a large differential diagnosis that can be narrowed with historical facts pertinent to the patient. An understanding of the pathophysiology of facial pain will help the practitioner to the correct diagnosis and treatment for the patient. Causes of facial pain include acute insult, neurogenic, inflammatory, post-traumatic, and idiopathic.

Peripheral nerve stimulation and peripheral nerve field stimulation involve the delivery of electrical stimulation using implanted electrodes either over a target nerve or over the painful area with the goal of modulating neuropathic pain. The selection of appropriate candidates for this therapy hinges on skillful application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, psychological screening, and an invasive screening trial. Patients with significant improvement in pain severity and pain-related disability during the trial are considered candidates for implantation of a permanent system. As with other implanted devices for neuromodulation, risks of mechanical failures, infection, and neurologic complications exist.

Introduction The International Neuromodulation Society (INS) has identified a need for evaluation and analysis of the practice of neurostimulation of the brain and extracranial nerves of the head to treat chronic pain. Methods The INS board of directors chose an expert panel, the Neuromodulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC), to evaluate the peer-reviewed literature, current research, and clinical experience and to give guidance for the appropriate use of these methods. The literature searches involved key word searches in PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar dated 1970–2013, which were graded and evaluated by the authors. Results The NACC found that evidence supports extracranial stimulation for facial pain, migraine, and scalp pain but is limited for intracranial neuromodulation. High cervical spinal cord stimulation is an evolving option for facial pain. Intracranial neurostimulation may be an excellent option to treat diseases of the nervous system, such as tremor and Parkinson's disease, and in the future, potentially Alzheimer's disease and traumatic brain injury, but current use of intracranial stimulation for pain should be seen as investigational. Conclusions The NACC concludes that extracranial nerve stimulation should be considered in the algorithmic treatment of migraine and other disorders of the head. We should strive to perfect targets outside the cranium when treating pain, if at all possible.

Background/Aims: A frontal burr hole around the level of the coronal suture is the conventional entry point when performing subthalamic nucleus (STN) deep brain stimulation (DBS). However, alternative approaches may sometimes be necessary. Methods: We present a report of delayed hardware erosion through the scalp in the left frontal region after successful bilateral STN DBS for Parkinson’s disease. The left STN was retargeted via a parietal entry point. Results: Significant improvement in UPDRS motor score (59%) was obtained with bilateral stimulation 6 months after re-operation. The literature was examined for similar approaches and the rationale, risks and benefits of non-frontal entry points in functional neurosurgery were explored. Conclusion: Together with a brief review of STN anatomy, this report demonstrates that the parietal approach to the STN remains a viable option in addition to the more traditional frontal access.

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is commonly used in the treatment of movement disorders such as Parkinson disease (PD), dystonia, and other tremors.To examine systematic errors in image-guided DBS electrode placement and to explore a calibration strategy for stereotactic targeting.Pre- and postoperative stereotactic MR images were analyzed in 165 patients. The perpendicular error between planned target coordinates and electrode trajectory was calculated geometrically for all 312 DBS electrodes implanted. Improvement in motor unified PD rating scale III subscore was calculated for those patients with PD with at least 6 months of follow-up after bilateral subthalamic DBS.Mean (standard deviation) scalar error of all electrodes was 1.4(0.9) mm with a significant difference between left and right hemispheres. Targeting error was significantly higher for electrodes with coronal approach angle (ARC) ≥10° (P.001). Mean vector error was X: -0.6, Y: -0.7, and Z: -0.4 mm (medial, posterior, and superior directions, respectively). Targeting error was significantly improved by using a systematic calibration strategy based on ARC and target hemisphere (mean: 0.6 mm, P.001) for 47 electrodes implanted in 24 patients. Retrospective theoretical calibration for all 312 electrodes would have reduced the mean (standard deviation) scalar error from 1.4(0.9) mm to 0.9(0.5) mm (36% improvement). With calibration, 97% of all electrodes would be within 2 mm of the intended target as opposed to 81% before calibration. There was no significant correlation between the degree of error and clinical outcome from bilateral subthalamic nucleus DBS (R = 0.07).After calibration of a systematic targeting error an MR image-guided stereotactic approach would be expected to deliver 97% of all electrodes to within 2 mm of the intended target point with a single brain pass.

Stereotactic functional neurosurgical interventions depend on precise anatomic targeting before lesioning or deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrode placement.To examine the degree of subcortical brain shift observed when adopting an image-guided approach to stereotactic functional neurosurgery.Coordinates for the anterior and posterior commissural points (AC and PC) were recorded on thin-slice stereotactic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans performed before and immediately after DBS electrode implantation in 136 procedures. The changes in length of AC-PC and in stereotactic coordinates for AC and PC were calculated for each intervention. In patients with Parkinson disease undergoing bilateral subthalamic nucleus (STN) DBS with at least 6 months of follow-up, pre- and postoperative scores of the motor part of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS-III) were reviewed.Mean (SD) change in AC-PC length (DeltaAC-PC) was 0.6 (0.4) mm. There was no statistically significant difference in DeltaAC-PC between groups when examining anatomic target subgroups (P =.95), age subgroups (P = .63), sex (P = .59), and unilateral versus bilateral implantation (P =.15). The mean (SD) vector changes for the commissural points were: -0.1 (0.3) mm in X, -0.4 (0.6) mm in Y, and -0.1 (0.7) mm in Z for the AC; and -0.1 (0.3) mm in X, -0.2 (0.7) mm in Y, and 0.0 (0.7) mm in Z for the PC. There was a negligible correlation between the magnitude of brain shift and percentage improvement in UPDRS-III off-medication in patients undergoing STN DBS for PD (R0.01).Brain shift has long been considered an issue in stereotactic targeting during DBS procedures. However, with the image-guided approach and surgical technique used in this study, subcortical brain shift was extremely limited and did not appear to adversely affect clinical outcome.

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) is a commonly employed therapeutic procedure for patients with Parkinson's disease uncontrolled by medical therapies. This series describes the outcomes of 79 consecutive patients that underwent bilateral STN DBS at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery between November 2002 and November 2008 using an MRI-guided surgical technique without microelectrode recording. Patients underwent immediate postoperative stereotactic MR imaging. The mean (SD) error in electrode placement was 1.3 (0.6)emsp14;mm. There were no haemorrhagic complications. At a median follow-up period of 12emsp14;months, there was a mean improvement in the off-medication motor part of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS III) of 27.7 points (SD 13.8) equivalent to a mean improvement of 52% (p0.0001). In addition, there were significant improvements in dyskinesia duration, disability and pain, with a mean reduction in on-medication dyskinesia severity (sum of dyskinesia duration, disability and pain from UPDRS IV) from 3.15 (SD 2.33) pre-operatively, to 1.56 (SD 1.92) post-operatively (p=0.0001). Quality of life improved by a mean of 5.5 points (median 7.9 points, SD 17.3) on the Parkinson's disease Questionnaire 39 summary index. This series confirms that image-guided STN DBS without microelectrode recording can lead to substantial improvements in motor disability of well-selected PD patients with accompanying improvements in quality of life and most importantly, with very low morbidity.

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a therapy that has been used for more than half a century to treat chronic pain. The first use of these treatments occurred in the 1950s when neurosurgeons stimulated the septal region nuclei in patients with psychiatric diseases who also suffered from chronic pain. Over the next 20 years, the therapy evolved to include the sensory thalamic nuclei to treat pain of neuropathic origin. Stimulation of the periventricular grey matter (PVG) has generally been recommended for the treatment of nociceptive pain, whereas the sensory thalamus (ST) remains the preferred stimulation site for neuropathic pain. Currently several new targets are under investigation. Outcomes for both facial and extremity pain have been positive with appropriate patient and target selection. The use of DBS in the neuromodulation algorithm is increasingly helpful to those who have severe pain. Because of its invasiveness and the risks associated with DBS, it is restricted to a selected group of patients in whom conservative treatment of chronic pain syndromes has been ineffective.