scholarly journals Peripheral Nerve Stimulation of the Saphenous and Superior Lateral Genicular Nerves for Chronic Pain After Knee Surgery

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahish Chitneni ◽  
Amnon A. Berger ◽  
Vwaire Orhurhu ◽  
Alan D. Kaye ◽  
Jamal Hasoon
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Knee Surgery ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Stimulation Of

scholarly journals Mechanism of Peripheral Nerve Stimulation in Chronic Pain

Pain Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S6-S12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiffany Lin ◽  
Akshat Gargya ◽  
Harmandeep Singh ◽  
Eellan Sivanesan ◽  
Amitabh Gulati
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Gate Control Theory ◽  
Comprehensive Literature Review ◽  
Gate Control ◽  
Chronic Pain Conditions

Abstract Introduction With the advancement of technology, peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) has been increasingly used to treat various chronic pain conditions. Its origin is based on the gate control theory postulated by Wall and Melzack in 1965. However, the exact mechanism behind PNS’ analgesic effect is largely unknown. In this article, we performed a comprehensive literature review to overview the PNS mechanism of action. Design A comprehensive literature review on the mechanism of PNS in chronic pain. Methods Comprehensive review of the available literature on the mechanism of PNS in chronic pain. Data were derived from database searches of PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library and manual searches of bibliographies and known primary or review articles. Results Animal, human, and imaging studies have demonstrated the peripheral and central analgesic mechanisms of PNS by modulating the inflammatory pathways, the autonomic nervous system, the endogenous pain inhibition pathways, and involvement of the cortical and subcortical areas. Conclusions Peripheral nerve stimulation exhibits its neuromodulatory effect both peripherally and centrally. Further understanding of the mechanism of PNS can help guide stimulation approaches and parameters to optimize the use of PNS.

scholarly journals Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review of Effectiveness and Safety

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Standiford Helm ◽  
Nikita Shirsat ◽  
Aaron Calodney ◽  
Alaa Abd-Elsayed ◽  
David Kloth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation

scholarly journals Percutaneous 60-day peripheral nerve stimulation implant provides sustained relief of chronic pain following amputation: 12-month follow-up of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher A Gilmore ◽  
Brian M Ilfeld ◽  
Joshua M Rosenow ◽  
Sean Li ◽  
Mehul J Desai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Pain Interference ◽  
Phantom Limb ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

IntroductionPeripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) has historically been used to treat chronic pain, but generally requires implantation of a permanent system for sustained relief. A recent study found that a 60-day PNS treatment decreases post-amputation pain, and the current work investigates longer-term outcomes out to 12 months in the same cohort.MethodsAs previously reported, 28 traumatic lower extremity amputees with residual and/or phantom limb pain were randomized to receive 8 weeks of PNS (group 1) or 4 weeks of placebo followed by a crossover 4 weeks of PNS (group 2). Percutaneous leads were implanted under ultrasound guidance targeting the femoral and sciatic nerves. During follow-up, changes in average pain and pain interference were assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory–Short Form and comparing with baseline.ResultsSignificantly more participants in group 1 reported ≥50% reductions in average weekly pain at 12 months (67%, 6/9) compared with group 2 at the end of the placebo period (0%, 0/14, p=0.001). Similarly, 56% (5/9) of participants in group 1 reported ≥50% reductions in pain interference at 12 months, compared with 2/13 (15%, p=0.074) in group 2 at crossover. Reductions in depression were also statistically significantly greater at 12 months in group 1 compared with group 2 at crossover.ConclusionsThis work suggests that percutaneous PNS delivered over a 60-day period may provide significant carry-over effects including pain relief, potentially avoiding the need for a permanently implanted system while enabling improved function in patients with chronic pain.Trial registration numberNCT01996254.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document