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
. 2021 Jun 25;9(7):731.
doi: 10.3390/biomedicines9070731.

Centromedian-Parafascicular and Somatosensory Thalamic Deep Brain Stimulation for Treatment of Chronic Neuropathic Pain: A Contemporary Series of 40 Patients

Affiliations

Centromedian-Parafascicular and Somatosensory Thalamic Deep Brain Stimulation for Treatment of Chronic Neuropathic Pain: A Contemporary Series of 40 Patients

Mahmoud Abdallat et al. Biomedicines. .

Abstract

Introduction: The treatment of neuropathic and central pain still remains a major challenge. Thalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) involving various target structures is a therapeutic option which has received increased re-interest. Beneficial results have been reported in several more recent smaller studies, however, there is a lack of prospective studies on larger series providing long term outcomes. Methods: Forty patients with refractory neuropathic and central pain syndromes underwent stereotactic bifocal implantation of DBS electrodes in the centromedian-parafascicular (CM-Pf) and the ventroposterolateral (VPL) or ventroposteromedial (VPM) nucleus contralateral to the side of pain. Electrodes were externalized for test stimulation for several days. Outcome was assessed with five specific VAS pain scores (maximum, minimum, average pain, pain at presentation, allodynia). Results: The mean age at surgery was 53.5 years, and the mean duration of pain was 8.2 years. During test stimulation significant reductions of all five pain scores was achieved with either CM-Pf or VPL/VPM stimulation. Pacemakers were implanted in 33/40 patients for chronic stimulation for whom a mean follow-up of 62.8 months (range 3-180 months) was available. Of these, 18 patients had a follow-up beyond four years. Hardware related complications requiring secondary surgeries occurred in 11/33 patients. The VAS maximum pain score was improved by ≥50% in 8/18, and by ≥30% in 11/18 on long term follow-up beyond four years, and the VAS average pain score by ≥50% in 10/18, and by ≥30% in 16/18. On a group level, changes in pain scores remained statistically significant over time, however, there was no difference when comparing the efficacy of CM-Pf versus VPL/VPM stimulation. The best results were achieved in patients with facial pain, poststroke/central pain (except thalamic pain), or brachial plexus injury, while patients with thalamic lesions had the least benefit. Conclusion: Thalamic DBS is a useful treatment option in selected patients with severe and medically refractory pain.

Keywords: centromedian–parafascicular complex; deep brain stimulation; functional neurosurgery; pain; ventroposterolateral thalamus.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart illustrating the numbers of patients available at the different follow-up periods. The reasons for patient attrition are shown on the left side of the flow chart. CM–Pf = centromedian–parafascicular nucleus, VPL = ventroposterolateral nucleus (thalami); VPM = ventroposteromedial nucleus (thalami).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Development of specific VAS pain scores during chronic thalamic stimulation in 33 patients with various neuropathic pain syndromes. The number of patients available at the different time points is shown in brackets. Follow-up examinations were obtained at FU I: 3–12 months postoperatively, FU II: 12–23 months, FUP III: 24–47 months, and FU IV: 48-and longer. Box and whisker plots of test results over time. Boxes represent the first, second (mean), and third quartile of scores. Whiskers outline the maximum and minimum. The level of significance for the different follow-up periods as compared to preoperatively is indicated by * (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Development of specific VAS pain scores during chronic thalamic stimulation in a group of six patients with facial pain syndromes. The number of patients available at the different time points is shown in brackets. Follow-up examinations were obtained at FU I: 3–12 months postoperatively, FU II: 12–23 months, FUP III: 24–47 months, and FU IV: 48-and longer. Box and whisker plots of test results over time. Boxes represent the first, second (mean), and third quartile of scores. Whiskers outline the maximum and minimum. The level of significance for the different follow-up periods as compared to preoperatively is indicated by * (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Development of specific VAS pain scores during chronic thalamic stimulation in a group of eight patients with CRPS. The number of patients available at the different time points is shown in brackets. Follow-up examinations were obtained at FU I: 3–12 months postoperatively, FU II: 12–23 months, FUP III: 24–47 months, and FU IV: 48-and longer. Box and whisker plots of test results over time. Boxes represent the first, second (mean), and third quartile of scores. Whiskers outline the maximum and minimum. The level of significance for the different follow-up periods as compared to preoperatively is indicated by * (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Development of specific VAS pain scores during thalamic stimulation in a group of seven patients with poststroke/central pain (except thalamus). The number of patients available at the different time points is shown in brackets. Follow-up examinations were obtained at FU I: 3–12 months postoperatively, FU II: 12–23 months, FUP III: 24–47 months, and FU IV: 48-and longer. Box and whisker plots of test results over time. Boxes represent the first, second (mean), and third quartile of scores. Whiskers outline the maximum and minimum. The level of significance for the different follow-up periods as compared to preoperatively is indicated by * (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Changes in medication during chronic thalamic deep brain stimulation. The diagram shows the number of patients taking different medications at the defined follow-up periods. The number of patients available at these follow-up periods are in brackets.

References

    1. Burchiel K.J., Raslan A.M. Contemporary concepts of pain surgery. J. Neurosurg. 2019;130:1039–1049. doi: 10.3171/2019.1.JNS181620. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rzesnitzek L., Hariz M., Krauss J.K. The Origins of Human Functional Stereotaxis: A Reappraisal. Ster. Funct. Neurosurg. 2019;97:1–6. doi: 10.1159/000496157. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sukul V.V., Slavin K.V. Deep Brain and Motor Cortex Stimulation. Curr. Pain Headache Rep. 2014;18:1–5. doi: 10.1007/s11916-014-0427-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cruccu G., Garcia-Larrea L., Hansson P., Keindl M., Lefaucheur J.-P., Paulus W., Taylor R., Tronnier V., Truini A., Attal N. EAN guidelines on central neurostimulation therapy in chronic pain conditions. Eur. J. Neurol. 2016;23:1489–1499. doi: 10.1111/ene.13103. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Deer T.R., Falowski S., Arle J.E., Vesper J., Pilitsis J., Slavin K.V., Hancu M., Grider J.S., Mogilner A. A Systematic Literature Review of Brain Neurostimulation Therapies for the Treatment of Pain. Pain Med. 2020;21:1415–1420. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnz371. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources