Clinical Outcomes of 1 kHz Subperception Spinal Cord Stimulation in Implanted Patients With Failed Paresthesia-Based Stimulation: Results of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Background Pain relief via spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has historically revolved around producing paresthesia to replace pain, with success measured by the extent of paresthesia‐pain overlap. In a recent murine study, by Shechter et al., showed the superior efficacy of high frequency SCS (1 kHz an...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Neuromodulation (Malden, Mass.) Mass.), 2016-10, Vol.19 (7), p.731-737
Hauptverfasser: North, James M., Hong, Kyung-Soo Jason, Cho, Philip Young
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Pain relief via spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has historically revolved around producing paresthesia to replace pain, with success measured by the extent of paresthesia‐pain overlap. In a recent murine study, by Shechter et al., showed the superior efficacy of high frequency SCS (1 kHz and 10 kHz) at inhibiting the effects of mechanical hypersensitivity compared to sham or 50 Hz stimulation. In the same study, authors report there were no differences in efficacy between 1 kHz and 10 kHz delivered at subperception stimulation strength (80% of motor threshold). Therefore, we designed a randomized, 2 × 2 crossover study of low frequency supra‐perception SCS vs. subperception SCS at 1 kHz frequency in order to test whether subperception stimulation at 1 kHz was sufficient to provide effective pain relief in human subjects. Methods Twenty‐two subjects with SCS, and inadequate pain relief based on numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) scores (>5) were enrolled, and observed for total of seven weeks (three weeks of treatment, one week wash off, and another three weeks of treatment). Subjects were asked to rate their pain on NPRS as a primary efficacy variable, and complete the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) as secondary outcome measures. Results Out of 22 subjects that completed the study, 21 subjects (95%) reported improvements in average, best, and worst pain NPRS scores. All NPRS scores were significantly lower with subperception stimulation compared to paresthesia‐based stimulation (p 
ISSN:1094-7159
1525-1403
DOI:10.1111/ner.12441