One-Year Outcomes of Spinal Cord Stimulation of the Dorsal Root Ganglion in the Treatment of Chronic Neuropathic Pain

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liong Liem ◽  
Marc Russo ◽  
Frank J.P.M. Huygen ◽  
Jean-Pierre Van Buyten ◽  
Iris Smet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Dorsal Root Ganglion ◽  
Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
Dorsal Root ◽  
Chronic Neuropathic Pain ◽  
One Year ◽  
Stimulation Of

scholarly journals Comparison of FDA-Approved Electrical Neuromodulation Techniques for Focal Neuropathic Pain: A Narrative Review of DRG, HF10, and Burst Neuromodulation

2021 ◽  
pp. E407-E423
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Dorsal Root Ganglion ◽  
Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Dorsal Root ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Dorsal Column ◽  
Small Sample

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) is a more effective treatment for focal neuropathic pain (FNP) compared with tonic, paresthesia-based dorsal column spinal cord stimulation (SCS). However, new advancements in waveforms for dorsal column SCS have not been thoroughly studied or compared with DRGS for the treatment of FNP. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review was to examine the evidence for these novel technologies; to highlight the lack of high-quality evidence for the use of neuromodulation to treat FNP syndromes other than complex regional pain syndrome I or II of the lower extremity; to emphasize the absence of comparison studies between DRGS, burst SCS, and high-frequency SCS; and to underscore that consideration of all neuromodulation systems is more patient-centric than a one-size-fits-all approach. STUDY DESIGN: This is a review article summarizing case reports, case series, retrospective studies, prospective studies, and review articles. SETTING: The University of Miami, Florida. METHODS: A literature search was conducted from February to March 2020 using the PubMed and EMBASE databases and keywords related to DRGS, burst SCS, HF10 (high-frequency of 10 kHz), and FNP syndromes. All English-based literature from 2010 reporting clinical data in human patients were included. RESULTS: Data for the treatment of FNP using burst SCS and HF10 SCS are limited (n = 11 for burst SCS and n = 11 for HF10 SCS). The majority of these studies were small, single-center, nonrandomized, noncontrolled, retrospective case series and case reports with short follow-up duration. To date, there are only 2 randomized controlled trials for burst and HF10 for the treatment of FNP. LIMITATIONS: No studies were available comparing DRGS to HF10 or burst for the treatment of FNP. Data for the treatment of FNP using HF10 and burst stimulation were limited to a small sample size reported in mostly case reports and case series. CONCLUSIONS: FNP is a complex disease, and familiarity with all available systems allows the greatest chance of success. KEY WORDS: Dorsal root ganglion, high frequency, burst, spinal cord stimulation, neuromodulation, focal neuropathic pain

Spinal Cord Stimulation of the Dorsal Root Ganglion for Groin Pain-A Retrospective Review

Pain Practice ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 293-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Schu ◽  
Ashish Gulve ◽  
Sam ElDabe ◽  
Ganesan Baranidharan ◽  
Katharina Wolf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Dorsal Root Ganglion ◽  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
Dorsal Root ◽  
Groin Pain ◽  
Stimulation Of

A Prospective Analysis of Neuromonitoring for Confirmation of Lead Placement in Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 654-660 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven M Falowski ◽  
Andreas Dianna
Keyword(s):  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Dorsal Root Ganglion ◽  
Dorsal Root ◽  
Evoked Potential ◽  
Somatosensory Evoked Potential ◽  
Prospective Analysis ◽  
Awake Patient ◽  
Chronic Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Lead Placement

Abstract BACKGROUND Dorsal root ganglion stimulation is a neuromodulation therapy used for chronic neuropathic pain. Typically, patients are awakened intraoperatively to confirm adequate placement. OBJECTIVE To determine whether neuromonitoring can confirm placement in an asleep patient. METHODS This is a prospective analysis of 12 leads placed in 6 patients. Lead confirmation was confirmed by awake intraoperative testing, as well as asleep testing utilizing neuromonitoring. Patients were used as their own control. Sensory and motor thresholds for each patient with awake and asleep neuromonitoring testing were recorded. Intraoperative impedance and postoperative programming were also recorded. RESULTS In each patient, paresthesias were generated prior to motor contractions in the awake patient. For each patient, somatosensory evoked potential responses were present after lowering below the dropout threshold of electromyogram responses with neuromonitoring. There were varying degrees of separation in the thresholds that did not appear to be consistent across level or diagnosis. Smaller degrees of separation between thresholds during awake testing also held true in the asleep patient. This was further confirmed with postoperative programming. Impedances did not alter the separation in thresholds or amount of stimulation required for responses. One patient was combative during awake testing, and therefore motor thresholds were not obtained. This same patient was determined to have a ventral placement, confirmed with awake and asleep neuromonitoring testing. CONCLUSION This series demonstrates that the proposed neuromonitoring protocol can be used in an asleep patient to assure proper positioning of the dorsal root ganglion electrode in the dorsal foramen by generating somatosensory evoked potential responses in the absence of electromyogram responses.

First experience with chronic epidural spinal cord stimulation in Khanty-Mansi autonomous okrug — clinical observations

2021 ◽  
Vol LIII (2) ◽  
pp. 94-100
Author(s):  
Olga A. Bondarenko ◽  
Gaspar V. Gavrilov ◽  
Vadim A. Padurets ◽  
Roman V. Kasich
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Chronic Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Neuropathic Pain Syndrome ◽  
Epidural Stimulation ◽  
Cord Injury ◽  
Epidural Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
And Migration

Purpose of the work. The article is devoted to the first experience of epidural stimulation in the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug at the budgetary institution Surgut Clinical Trauma Hospital. Clinical examples are presented for two main indications for the application of this technique (disease of the operated spine, a consequence of spinal cord injury in combination with chronic neuropathic pain syndrome). Research methods. An assessment of the intensity of pain syndrome was given according to a visual analogue scale, the Pain Detect questionnaire; indicators of anxiety, depression on the HADS scale; quality of life according to the Oswestry questionnaire for a follow-up period of 6-12 months in patients with chronic epidural stimulation. Results. A positive assessment of the action during test neurostimulation was 63.3% (38 patients). Of the established permanent systems, a good result was achieved and persisted for 12 months or more in 96% (24 patients). It was necessary to change the stimulation parameters in 13% (3 patients). Revision of permanent systems was performed in 20% (5 patients), due to the progression of the degenerative-dystrophic process of the spine, damage and migration of system elements. Conclusions. Chronic epidural spinal cord stimulation has established itself as a personalized, highly effective, minimally invasive and safe method of treating chronic neuropathic pain syndromes. Multicomponent corrective action is of scientific interest and requires further study.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document