Back to Search Start Over

An implantable restorative-neurostimulator for refractory mechanical chronic low back pain: a randomized sham-controlled clinical trial.

Authors :
Gilligan, Christopher
Volschenk, Willem
Russo, Marc
Green, Matthew
Gilmore, Christopher
Mehta, Vivek
Deckers, Kristiaan
De Smedt, Kris
Latif, Usman
Georgius, Peter
Gentile, Jonathan
Mitchell, Bruce
Langhorst, Meredith
Huygen, Frank
Baranidharan, Ganesan
Patel, Vikas
Mironer, Eugene
Ross, Edgar
Carayannopoulos, Alexios
Hayek, Salim
Source :
PAIN. Oct2021, Vol. 162 Issue 10, p2486-2498. 13p.
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

<bold>Abstract: </bold>Chronic low back pain can be caused by impaired control and degeneration of the multifidus muscles and consequent functional instability of the lumbar spine. Available treatment options have limited effectiveness and prognosis is unfavorable. We conducted an international randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial at 26 multidisciplinary centers to determine safety and efficacy of an implantable, restorative neurostimulator designed to restore multifidus neuromuscular control and facilitate relief of symptoms (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02577354). Two hundred four eligible participants with refractory mechanical (musculoskeletal) chronic LBP and a positive prone instability test indicating impaired multifidus control were implanted and randomized to therapeutic (N = 102) or low-level sham (N = 102) stimulation of the medial branch of the dorsal ramus nerve (multifidus nerve supply) for 30 minutes twice daily. The primary endpoint was the comparison of responder proportions (≥30% relief on the LBP visual analogue scale without analgesics increase) at 120 days. After the primary endpoint assessment, participants in the sham-control group switched to therapeutic stimulation and the combined cohort was assessed through 1 year for long-term outcomes and adverse events. The primary endpoint was inconclusive in terms of treatment superiority (57.1% vs 46.6%; difference: 10.4%; 95% confidence interval, -3.3% to 24.1%, P = 0.138). Prespecified secondary outcomes and analyses were consistent with a modest but clinically meaningful treatment benefit at 120 days. Improvements from baseline, which continued to accrue in all outcome measures after conclusion of the double-blind phase, were clinically important at 1 year. The incidence of serious procedure- or device-related adverse events (3.9%) compared favorably with other neuromodulation therapies for chronic pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
03043959
Volume :
162
Issue :
10
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
PAIN
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
153134435
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002258