Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Failed Neck Surgery Syndrome: Outcome of a Prospective Case Series

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 495-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corey W. Hunter ◽  
Jonathan Carlson ◽  
Ajax Yang ◽  
Timothy Deer
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Neck Surgery ◽  
Prospective Case Series

scholarly journals Successful application of burst spinal cord stimulation for refractory upper limb pain: a case series

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 030006052110040
Author(s):  
Kuen Su Lee ◽  
Yoo Kyung Jang ◽  
Gene Hyun Park ◽  
In Jae Jun ◽  
Jae Chul Koh
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Upper Limb ◽  
Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
Therapeutic Potential ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Limb Amputation ◽  
Intractable Pain ◽  
Limb Pain ◽  
Cord Injury ◽  
Upper Limb Pain

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used to treat sustained pain that is intractable despite various types of treatment. However, conventional tonic waveform SCS has not shown promising outcomes for spinal cord injury (SCI) or postamputation pain. The pain signal mechanisms of burst waveforms are different to those of conventional tonic waveforms, but few reports have presented the therapeutic potential of burst waveforms for the abovementioned indications. This current case report describes two patients with refractory upper limb pain after SCI and upper limb amputation that were treated with burst waveform SCS. While the patients could not obtain sufficient therapeutic effect with conventional tonic waveforms, the burst waveforms provided better pain reduction with less discomfort. However, further studies are necessary to better clarify the mechanisms and efficacy of burst waveform SCS in patients with intractable pain.

Paddle lead cervical spinal cord stimulation for failed neck surgery syndrome

2013 ◽  
Vol 115 (10) ◽  
pp. 2254-2256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srinivas Chivukula ◽  
Nestor D. Tomycz ◽  
John J. Moossy
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
Cervical Spinal Cord ◽  
Neck Surgery

A Retrospective Case Series of High-Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation (HF10-SCS) in Neurogenic Bladder Incontinence

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Schieferdecker ◽  
Clemens Neudorfer ◽  
Faycal El Majdoub ◽  
Mohammad Maarouf
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Neurogenic Bladder ◽  
Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Retrospective Case Series

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

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document