Fantastic Four: Age, Spinal Cord Stimulator Waveform, Pain Localization and History of Spine Surgery Influence the Odds of Successful Spinal Cord Stimulator Trial
- PMID: 32013285
Fantastic Four: Age, Spinal Cord Stimulator Waveform, Pain Localization and History of Spine Surgery Influence the Odds of Successful Spinal Cord Stimulator Trial
Abstract
Background: There is a dearth in our understanding of the factors that are predictive of successful spinal cord stimulator (SCS) trials and eventual conversion to permanent implants. Knowledge of these factors is important for appropriate patient selection and treatment optimization.
Objectives: Although previous studies have explored factors predictive of trial success, few have examined the role of waveform in trial outcomes. This study sought to establish the relationship of neuraxial waveform and related measures to trial outcomes.
Study design: This study used a retrospective chart review design.
Methods: Data were retrospectively collected on 174 patients undergoing SCS trials upon institutional review board approval of the study protocol. Indications for SCS were: complex regional pain syndrome, failed back surgery syndrome with radicular symptoms, peripheral neuropathy, and axial low back pain. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses were used to assess the association of demographic and clinical variables with SCS trial outcomes.
Results: The study population comprised 56% women, had a median age of 55 (interquartile range [IQR], 44-64), and 32 of 174 (18%) patients failed SCS trials. Individuals with successful trials (>= 50% pain relief) were significantly younger and had a median age of 54 years (IQR, 42-60) compared to those who failed SCS trials (median age 66 years; IQR, 50-76; P = .005). Adjusting for age, gender, number of leads, pain category, and diagnoses: surgical history (odds ratio [OR] = 4.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-15.8) and paresthesia-based tonic-stimulation (OR = 10.3; 95% CI, 1.7-62.0), but not burst or high frequency, were significantly associated with successful trials. Of note, the number of leads (whether dual or single), pain duration, characteristics, and category (nociceptive vs neuropathic) were not significant factors. An interaction between surgical spine history and lower extremity pain was significantly associated with a positive trial (P = .005).
Limitations: This study was limited by its retrospective nature and focus on a patient population at a single major academic medical center.
Conclusions: Paresthesia-based tonic stimulation, age, and surgical history have significant effects on SCS trials. Prospective and randomized controlled studies may provide deeper insights regarding impact on costs and overall outcomes.IRB Approval #: 2018P002216.
Key words: Pain duration, pain location, spinal cord stimulator trial, stimulator waveform, surgical history.
Similar articles
-
Waves of Pain Relief: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials in Spinal Cord Stimulation Waveforms for the Treatment of Chronic Neuropathic Low Back and Leg Pain.World Neurosurg. 2019 Nov;131:264-274.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.07.167. Epub 2019 Jul 30. World Neurosurg. 2019. PMID: 31369885
-
Spinal Cord Stimulation: Comparing Traditional Low-frequency Tonic Waveforms to Novel High Frequency and Burst Stimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain.Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2019 Mar 14;23(4):25. doi: 10.1007/s11916-019-0763-3. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2019. PMID: 30868285 Review.
-
High-Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation at 10 kHz for the Treatment of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A Case Series of Patients With or Without Previous Spinal Cord Stimulator Implantation.Pain Pract. 2019 Mar;19(3):289-294. doi: 10.1111/papr.12739. Epub 2019 Jan 7. Pain Pract. 2019. PMID: 30365222
-
The Long-term Outcome of Usual and Unusual Indications for Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Prospective Study.Pain Physician. 2025 Jan;28(1):E61-E71. Pain Physician. 2025. PMID: 39903023
-
Discontinuation of Chronic Opiate Therapy After Successful Spinal Cord Stimulation Is Highly Dependent Upon the Daily Opioid Dose.Pain Pract. 2019 Nov;19(8):794-799. doi: 10.1111/papr.12807. Epub 2019 Aug 13. Pain Pract. 2019. PMID: 31199551
Cited by
-
Development and Feasibility Study of a Triage Tool for Early Referral to Spinal Cord Stimulation for Patients With Chronic Low Back and Leg Pain.Eur J Pain. 2025 Feb;29(2):e4780. doi: 10.1002/ejp.4780. Eur J Pain. 2025. PMID: 39757549 Free PMC article.
-
Evidence-based consensus guidelines on patient selection and trial stimulation for spinal cord stimulation therapy for chronic non-cancer pain.Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2023 Jun;48(6):273-287. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2022-104097. Epub 2023 Mar 30. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2023. PMID: 37001888 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The PATIENT Approach: A New Bundle for the Management of Chronic Pain.J Pers Med. 2023 Oct 29;13(11):1551. doi: 10.3390/jpm13111551. J Pers Med. 2023. PMID: 38003866 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Updates on the Role of Spinal Cord Stimulation in the Management of Non-Surgical Chronic Lower Back Pain.Cureus. 2021 Oct 20;13(10):e18928. doi: 10.7759/cureus.18928. eCollection 2021 Oct. Cureus. 2021. PMID: 34812312 Free PMC article. Review.
-
User Engagement and Assessment of Treatment Effectiveness in Patients Using a Novel Digital mHealth App During Spinal Cord Stimulation Screening Trials.JMIR Hum Factors. 2022 Mar 23;9(1):e35134. doi: 10.2196/35134. JMIR Hum Factors. 2022. PMID: 35167484 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical