Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2018 Jan;21(1):67-76.
doi: 10.1111/ner.12746. Epub 2017 Dec 8.

Effects of Rate on Analgesia in Kilohertz Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation: Results of the PROCO Randomized Controlled Trial

Simon J Thomson  1 , Moein Tavakkolizadeh  2 , Sarah Love-Jones  3 , Nikunj K Patel  4 , Jianwen Wendy Gu  5 , Amarpreet Bains  6 , Que Doan  5 , Michael Moffitt  5
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Effects of Rate on Analgesia in Kilohertz Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation: Results of the PROCO Randomized Controlled Trial

Simon J Thomson et al. Neuromodulation. 2018 Jan.

Abstract

Objective: The PROCO RCT is a multicenter, double-blind, crossover, randomized controlled trial (RCT) that investigated the effects of rate on analgesia in kilohertz frequency (1-10 kHz) spinal cord stimulation (SCS).

Materials and methods: Patients were implanted with SCS systems and underwent an eight-week search to identify the best location ("sweet spot") of stimulation at 10 kHz within the searched region (T8-T11). An electronic diary (e-diary) prompted patients for pain scores three times per day. Patients who responded to 10 kHz per e-diary numeric rating scale (ED-NRS) pain scores proceeded to double-blind rate randomization. Patients received 1, 4, 7, and 10 kHz SCS at the same sweet spot found for 10 kHz in randomized order (four weeks at each frequency). For each frequency, pulse width and amplitude were titrated to optimize therapy.

Results: All frequencies provided equivalent pain relief as measured by ED-NRS (p ≤ 0.002). However, mean charge per second differed across frequencies, with 1 kHz SCS requiring 60-70% less charge than higher frequencies (p ≤ 0.0002).

Conclusions: The PROCO RCT provides Level I evidence for equivalent pain relief from 1 to 10 kHz with appropriate titration of pulse width and amplitude. 1 kHz required significantly less charge than higher frequencies.

Keywords: Chronic pain; PROCO; double-blind; high frequency; high frequency SCS; kilohertz SCS; randomized controlled trial; sub-perception SCS.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study design. Patients followed standard of care (green) until rate randomization when they experienced four different frequencies. After rate randomization, the best rate was selected for three month follow‐up.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Patient flowchart.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Pain relief and charge required across frequencies. Error bars denote standard error. a. Back pain. b. Leg pain. c. Overall pain. d. Mean charge per second. ***p ≤ 0.001, ***** p ≤ 0.00001.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Quality of life metrics across frequencies. Error bars denote SEM. a. ODI summary score. b. EQ‐5D‐5L summary score. c. PSQI total score. d. PGIC.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Pain relief three months after completion of rate randomization and rate selected for three month follow‐up. a. Back pain. b. Leg pain. c. Overall pain. d. Distribution of rates selected for three month follow‐up.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Comparison of variance in ED‐NRS during titration and three month follow‐up. Each symbol represents one patient's variance during titration (ED‐NRS Vartitration) divided by variance during the three month follow‐up (ED‐NRS Var3 month follow‐up). The patients are ordered in increasing ratio of ED‐NRS Vartitration to ED‐NRS Var3 month follow‐up. Seventeen of 20 patients had larger variance in ED‐NRS during titration, indicating that ED‐NRS was more stable on the optimal setting used during three month follow‐up.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Comparison of responder rate during trial using in‐clinic assessment and ED‐NRS. While the responder rate based on in‐clinic verbal report was 97% (33/34), the responder rate for the same patients based on ED‐NRS was 62% (21/34).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Kapural L, Yu C, Doust MW et al. Novel 10‐kHz high‐frequency therapy (HF10 Therapy) is superior to traditional low‐frequency spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of chronic back and leg pain: the SENZA‐RCT randomized controlled trial. Anesthesiology 2015;123:851–860. - PubMed
    1. Deer T, Slavin KV, Amirdelfan K et al. Success using neuromodulation with BURST (SUNBURST) study: results from a prospective, randomized controlled trial using a novel burst waveform. Neuromodulation 2018;21:56–66. - PubMed
    1. Melzack R, Wall PD. Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science 1965;150:970–979. - PubMed
    1. Zhang TC, Janik JJ, Peters RV et al. Spinal sensory projection neuron responses to spinal cord stimulation are mediated by circuits beyond gate control. J Neurophysiol 2015;114:284–300. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lempka SF, McIntyre CC, Kilgore KL et al. Computational analysis of kilohertz frequency spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain management. Anesthesiology 2015;122:1362–1376. - PubMed

Publication types