Long term follow-up of patients with complex regional pain syndrome treated with spinal cord stimulation

2010 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 195
Author(s):  
C. Perruchoud ◽  
B. Rutschmann ◽  
A. Foletti ◽  
E. Buchser
Neurosurgery ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 566-580 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishna Kumar ◽  
Syed Rizvi ◽  
Sharon Bishop Bnurs

Abstract BACKGROUND: Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) I is a debilitating neuropathic pain disorder characterized by burning pain and allodynia. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is effective in the treatment of CRPS I in the medium term but its long-term efficacy and ability to improve functional status remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of SCS to improve pain, functional status, and quality of life in the long term. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 25 patients over a mean follow-up period of 88 months. The parameters for evaluation were visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) and Short Form 36 (SF-36), and drug consumption. Evaluations were conducted at point of entry, 3 months, 12 months, and last follow-up at 88 months (mean). RESULTS: At baseline, the mean scores were VAS 8.4, ODI 70%, BDI 28, EQ-5D 0.30, and SF-36 24. In general, maximum improvement was recorded at follow-up at 3 months (VAS 4.8, ODI 45%, BDI 15, EQ-5D 0.57, and SF-36 45). At last follow-up, scores were 5.6, 50%, 19, 0.57, and 40, respectively. Despite some regression, at last follow-up benefits were maintained and found to be statistically significant (P < .001) compared with baseline. Medication usage declined. SCS did not prevent disease spread to other limbs. Best results were achieved in stage I CRPS I, patients under 40 years of age, and those receiving SCS within 1 year of disease onset. CONCLUSION: SCS improves pain, quality of life, and functional status over the long term and consequently merits early consideration in the treatment continuum.


2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 523-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
José W. Geurts ◽  
Helwin Smits ◽  
Marius A. Kemler ◽  
Florian Brunner ◽  
Alfons G. H. Kessels ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 380-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony F. DiMarco ◽  
Krzysztof E. Kowalski ◽  
Dana R. Hromyak ◽  
Robert T. Geertman

Heart ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 93 (5) ◽  
pp. 591-597 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Angelo Sgueglia ◽  
A. Sestito ◽  
A. Spinelli ◽  
B. Cioni ◽  
F. Infusino ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Dennis Møgeltoft Poulsen ◽  
Jens Christian Hedemann Sørensen ◽  
Morten Rune Blichfeldt-Eckhardt ◽  
Helga Angela Gulisano ◽  
Anne Lene Høst Knudsen ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Piedade G. S ◽  
Gillner S. ◽  
Slotty P. J. ◽  
Vesper J

Abstract Background After the surge of burst stimulation, different waveforms were developed to optimize results in spinal cord stimulation. Studies have shown higher responder rates for multiwave therapy, but since the launch of such multiwave systems, little is known about the patients’ preference regarding waveforms in the long-term follow-up. No study connected particular waveforms to specific pain etiologies or required stimulation parameters so far. Method Thirty-four patients with refractory chronic neuropathic pain were treated with spinal cord stimulation systems providing multiwave therapy between September 2018 and October 2019. Patients with a follow-up of at least 6 months were selected; 10 subjects were excluded due to revision surgery, infection, and loss to follow-up. Data regarding pain intensity and preferred waveform for the trial, the implantation, 3-month and 6-month follow-up were recorded. Results During the trial phase, 10 patients (43.5%) achieved significant pain relief using tonic stimulation, 5 using burst (21.7%), 3 using microburst (13.0%), and 4 using a combination of tonic and microburst (17.4%). One single patient preferred Contour stimulation during the trial. After 3 months, 6 patients preferred microburst (25%), 6 preferred tonic (25%), 5 used a combination of tonic and microburst (20.8%), and 5 patients used burst (20.8%). After 6 months, similar results were obtained. Contour and Whisper were used in complex cases failing to other waveforms. Conclusions Tonic stimulation, isolated or in combination, remains an important component in spinal cord stimulation, being used by almost half of the patients. Over time, the usage of microburst increased considerably. Whisper and Contour, although battery-consuming, are good salvage options in complex cases.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document