Peripheral Stimulation for Treatment of Trigeminal Postherpetic Neuralgia and Trigeminal Posttraumatic Neuropathic Pain: A Pilot Study

Neurosurgery ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark D. Johnson ◽  
Kim J. Burchiel
Keyword(s):  
Pain Relief ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Postherpetic Neuralgia ◽  
Medication Use ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Facial Trauma ◽  
Herpetic Infection ◽  
Peripheral Stimulation ◽  
Stimulation Of

Abstract OBJECTIVE: Trigeminal neuropathic pain (TNP) after facial trauma or herpes zoster infection is often refractory to treatment. Peripheral nerve stimulation has been used to treat occipital neuralgia; however, efficacy in controlling facial TNP or postherpetic neuralgia is unknown. A retrospective case series of patients who underwent subcutaneous placement of stimulating electrodes for treatment of V1 or V2 TNP secondary to herpetic infection or facial trauma is presented. METHODS: Ten patients received implanted subcutaneous pulse generators and quadripolar electrodes for peripheral stimulation of the trigeminal nerve supraorbital or infraorbital branches. Long-term treatment results were determined by retrospective review of medical records (1998–2003) and by independent observers interviewing patients using a standard questionnaire. Surgical complication rate, preoperative symptom duration, degree of pain relief, preoperative and postoperative work status, postoperative changes in medication usage, and overall degree of therapy satisfaction were assessed. Mean follow-up was 26.6 ± 4.7 months. RESULTS: Peripheral nerve stimulation provided at least 50% pain relief in 70% of patients with TNP or postherpetic neuralgia. Medication use declined in 70% of patients, and 80% indicated that they were mostly or completely satisfied with treatment overall. There were no treatment failures (< 50% pain relief and a lack of decrease in medication use) in the posttraumatic group, and two failures (50%) occurred in the postherpetic group. The complication rate requiring reoperation was 30%. CONCLUSION: Peripheral nerve stimulation of the supraorbital or infraorbital branches of the trigeminal nerve is an effective method for relief of TNP after facial trauma or herpetic infection. A prospective trial using this novel approach to treat these disorders is thus warranted.

scholarly journals Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Treatment of Painful Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Case Report

2021 ◽  
pp. 201-204
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Knee Pain ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Pain Modulation ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Osteoarthritis Of The Knee ◽  
Osteoarthritic Knee

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritic knee (OAk) pain is common, yet the standard of care often yields unsatisfactory pain relief. There remains a role for novel treatment options. Percutaneous motor peripheral nerve stimulation (mPNS) of the knee is a novel minimally invasive procedure that stimulates motor end points leading to muscle contraction associated with the painful joint. Pain relief is hypothesized to be achieved through central pain modulation. CASE REPORT: We report the case of a patient who experienced refractory osteoarthritic knee pain after 9 months of conservative care. Following 7 weeks of mPNS treatment, the patient achieved improvement in OAk pain relief and activities of daily living as measured by notable improvements in the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score at 8- and 12-weeks postimplant. The Patient Global Impression of Change at the end of stimulation was much improved. CONCLUSION: Motor PNS may offer a safe and effective treatment alternative for chronic refractory pain related to OAk. KEY WORDS: Osteoarthritis, knee, pain, peripheral nerve stimulation

scholarly journals One Year Follow-up of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Percutaneous Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Chronic Neuropathic Pain Following Amputation

Neurosurgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua M Rosenow ◽  
Christopher Gilmore ◽  
Brian M Ilfeld ◽  
Sean Li ◽  
Mehul J Desai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Pain Interference ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo

Abstract INTRODUCTION Over 85% of patients experience residual limb (RLP) and/or phantom limb (PLP) pain following amputation. Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is a non-opioid approach to relieve postamputation neuropathic pain. A recent multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study using a novel percutaneous PNS system demonstrated clinically and statistically significant improvements in pain and pain interference with PNS compared to placebo (Gilmore et al, 2019). This work presents prospective 1-yr follow-up to assess durability of pain relief and functional improvements. METHODS Over 85% of patients experience residual limb (RLP) and/or phantom limb (PLP) pain following amputation. Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is a non-opioid approach to relieve post-amputation neuropathic pain. A recent multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study using a novel percutaneous PNS system demonstrated clinically and statistically significant improvements in pain and pain interference with PNS compared to placebo (Gilmore et al, 2019). This work presents prospective one-year follow-up to assess durability of pain relief and functional improvements. RESULTS A significantly greater proportion of subjects who completed the 12-mo visit reported = 50% pain relief on the BPI-SF (5/8, 63%; average pain relief = 73% among responders) compared to the placebo group at the time of crossover (0/14, 0%, P = .003; average pain relief = 23%). A majority of subjects also reported = 50% reductions in pain interference at 12 mo (5/8, 63%). Two of 13 (15%) subjects in the placebo group reported sustained improvements in pain interference (P = .06). Average reduction in pain interference among responders in the PNS group was 87%. CONCLUSION This work suggests that PNS delivered over 60 d may provide clinically significant and enduring pain relief, enabling improved function and potentially reducing the need for a permanently implanted system.

scholarly journals Percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation for the treatment of chronic neuropathic postamputation pain: a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 637-645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Gilmore ◽  
Brian Ilfeld ◽  
Joshua Rosenow ◽  
Sean Li ◽  
Mehul Desai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Pain Interference ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Chronic Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Postamputation Pain

Background and objectivesChronic neuropathic pain is a common challenging condition following amputation. Recent research demonstrated the feasibility of percutaneously implanting fine-wire coiled peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) leads in proximity to the sciatic and femoral nerves for postamputation pain. A multicenter, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled study collected data on the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous PNS for chronic neuropathic pain following amputation.MethodsTwenty-eight lower extremity amputees with postamputation pain were enrolled. Subjects underwent ultrasound-guided implantation of percutaneous PNS leads and were randomized to receive PNS or placebo for 4 weeks. The placebo group then crossed over and all subjects received PNS for four additional weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint evaluated the proportion of subjects reporting ≥50% pain reduction during weeks 1–4.ResultsA significantly greater proportion of subjects receiving PNS (n=7/12, 58%, p=0.037) demonstrated ≥50% reductions in average postamputation pain during weeks 1–4 compared with subjects receiving placebo (n=2/14, 14%). Two subjects were excluded from efficacy analysis due to eligibility changes. Significantly greater proportions of PNS subjects also reported ≥50% reductions in pain (n=8/12, 67%, p=0.014) and pain interference (n=8/10, 80%, p=0.003) after 8 weeks of therapy compared with subjects receiving placebo (pain: n=2/14, 14%; pain interference: n=2/13, 15%). Prospective follow-up is ongoing; four of five PNS subjects who have completed 12-month follow-up to date reported ≥50% pain relief.ConclusionsThis work demonstrates that percutaneous PNS therapy may provide enduring clinically significant pain relief and improve disability in patients with chronic neuropathic postamputation pain.Trial registration numberNCT01996254.

scholarly journals Novel technique for trialing peripheral nerve stimulation: ultrasonography-guided StimuCath trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. E5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chandan G. Reddy ◽  
Oliver E. Flouty ◽  
Marshall T. Holland ◽  
Leigh A. Rettenmaier ◽  
Mario Zanaty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neuropathic Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Relative Effectiveness ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Insurance Companies ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulator ◽  
Vas Score

OBJECTIVE Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) has been used for the treatment of neuropathic pain for many decades. Despite the specific indications for PNS, clinicians often have difficulty screening for candidates likely to have a good or fair outcome. Given the expense of a permanent implant, most insurance companies will not pay for the implant without a successful PNS trial. And since PNS has only recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, many insurance companies will not pay for a conventional trial of PNS. The objective of this study is to describe a short low-cost method for trialing and screening patients for peripheral nerve stimulator implantation. Additionally, this study demonstrates the long-term efficacy of PNS in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain and the relative effectiveness of this novel screening method. METHODS The records of all patients who had undergone trialing and implantation of a PNS system for chronic refractory pain at the authors' institution over a 1-year period (August 1, 2012–July 31, 2013) were examined in this retrospective case series. The search revealed 17 patients, 13 who had undergone a novel in-office ultrasonography-guided StimuCath screening technique and 4 who had undergone a traditional week-long screening procedure. All 17 patients experienced a successful PNS trial and proceeded to permanent PNS system implantation. Patients were followed up for a mean duration of 3.0 years. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores were used to assess pain relief in the short-term (< 6 weeks), at 1 year, and at the last follow-up. Final outcome was also characterized as good, fair, poor, or bad. RESULTS Of these 17 patients, 10 were still using their stimulator at the last follow-up, with 8 of them obtaining good relief (classified as ≥ 50% pain relief, with an average 81% reduction in the VAS score) and 2 patients attaining fair relief (< 50% relief but still using stimulation therapy). Among the remaining 7 patients, the stimulator had been explanted in 4 and there had been no relief in 3. Excluding explanted cases, follow-up ranged from 14 to 46 months, with an average of 36 months. Patients with good or fair relief had experienced pain prior to implantation for an average of 5.1 years (range 1.8–15.2 years). A longer duration of pain trended toward a poorer outcome (bad outcome 7.6 years vs good outcome 4.1 years, p = 0.03). Seven (54%) of the 13 patients with the shorter trial experienced a good or fair outcome with an average 79% reduction in the VAS score; however, all 4 of the bad outcome cases came from this group. Three (75%) of the 4 patients with the longer trial experienced a good or fair outcome at the last follow-up, with an average 54% reduction in the VAS score. There was no difference between the trialing methods and the proportion of favorable (good or fair) outcomes (p = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS Short, ultrasonography-guided StimuCath trials were feasible in screening patients for permanent implantation of PNS, with efficacy similar to the traditional week-long screening noted at the 3-year follow-up.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document