scholarly journals High-Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation at 10 kHz for the Treatment of Chronic Neuropathic Pain After a II–III Degree Burn

Pain Medicine ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 1826-1828
Author(s):  
Karl Steinbach ◽  
Horst Bettstetter ◽  
Carolina Link
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chiaki Yamada ◽  
Aiko Maeda ◽  
Katsuyuki Matsushita ◽  
Shoko Nakayama ◽  
Kazuhiro Shirozu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) frequently complain of intractable pain that is resistant to conservative treatments. Here, we report the successful application of 1-kHz high-frequency spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in a patient with refractory neuropathic pain secondary to SCI. Case presentation A 69-year-old male diagnosed with SCI (C4 American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale A) presented with severe at-level bilateral upper extremity neuropathic pain. Temporary improvement in his symptoms with a nerve block implied peripheral component involvement. The patient received SCS, and though the tip of the leads could not reach the cervical vertebrae, a 1-kHz frequency stimulus relieved the intractable pain. Conclusions SCI-related symptoms may include peripheral components; SCS may have a considerable effect on intractable pain. Even when the SCS electrode lead cannot be positioned in the target area, 1-kHz high-frequency SCS may still produce positive effects.


2021 ◽  
Vol LIII (2) ◽  
pp. 94-100
Author(s):  
Olga A. Bondarenko ◽  
Gaspar V. Gavrilov ◽  
Vadim A. Padurets ◽  
Roman V. Kasich

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivano Dones ◽  
Vincenzo Levi

The origin and the neural pathways involved in chronic neuropathic pain are still not extensively understood. For this reason, despite the wide variety of pain medications available on the market, neuropathic pain is challenging to treat. The present therapeutic alternative considered as the gold standard for many kinds of chronic neuropathic pain is epidural spinal cord stimulation (SCS). Despite its proved efficacy, the favourable cost-effectiveness when compared to the long-term use of poorly effective drugs and the expanding array of indications and technical improvements, SCS is still worldwide largely neglected by general practitioners, neurologists, neurosurgeons and pain therapists, often bringing to a large delay in considering as a therapeutic option for patients affected by neuropathic chronic pain. The present state of the art of SCS in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain is here overviewed and speculations on whether to use a trial period or direct implant, to choose between percutaneous leads or paddle electrodes and on the pros and cons of the different patterns of stimulation presently available on the market (tonic stim, high-frequency stim and burst stim) are described.


2007 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 863-868 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen R. Schlaier ◽  
Peter Eichhammer ◽  
Berthold Langguth ◽  
Christian Doenitz ◽  
Harald Binder ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. E407-E423

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