Spinal cord stimulation in complex regional pain syndrome: cervical and lumbar devices are comparably effective
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used since 1967 for the treatment of patients with chronic pain. However, long-term effects of this treatment have not been reported. The present study investigated the long-term effects of cervical and lumbar SCS in patients with complex regional pain syndrome...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA 2004-03, Vol.92 (3), p.348-353 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 353 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 348 |
| container_title | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA |
| container_volume | 92 |
| creator | Forouzanfar, T Kemler, M.A. Weber, W.E.J. Kessels, A.G.H. van Kleef, M |
| description | Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used since 1967 for the treatment of patients with chronic pain. However, long-term effects of this treatment have not been reported. The present study investigated the long-term effects of cervical and lumbar SCS in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type I.
Thirty-six patients with a definitive implant were included in this study. A pain diary was obtained from all patients before treatment and 6 months and 1 and 2 years after implantation. All patients were asked to complete a seven-point Global Perceived Effect (GPE) scale and the Euroqol-5D (EQ-5D) at each post-implant assessment point.
The pain intensity was reduced at 6 months, 1 and 2 years after implantation (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1093/bja/aeh072 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_80163771</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/bja/aeh072</oup_id><els_id>S0007091217361482</els_id><sourcerecordid>588075091</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c489t-619f7de78e8a2ca5dea46e235ecd8203a2bef3edb9d1777ada006135c8e23f843</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90V2L1DAUBuAgijuu3vgDpAh6IdRNmrZJvZPxY4X1A0ZBvAmnyalmbJuatMPOv_foDA6IeBV4eXJCzsvYfcGfCt7Ii3YLF4DfuCpusJUolchrpcRNtuKcq5w3ojhjd1Laci5U0VS32RmhspCyXLGwmfwIfWZDdFma_bD0MPswZn6kbJh6vM4ifqWE0ASUpv3oYhjwWWYx7rylHEaX9cvQQswcUoQpg4i_70OEtt9n2HVoZ7_Du-xWB33Ce8fznH169fLj-jK_ev_6zfr5VW5L3cx5LZpOOVQaNRQWKodQ1ljICq3TBZdQtNhJdG3jhFIKHHBeC1lZTajTpTxnjw9zpxh-LJhmM_hkse9hxLAko7moJW2J4MO_4DYskX6bjGiU0lqVNaEnB2RjSCliZ6boB4h7I7j51YGhDsyhA8IPjhOXdkB3oselE3h0BJBofV2E0fp0clUlhNT85MIy_f_B_OB8mvH6j4T43dRKqspcfv5i1urd5u2HF7XZkC8PHqmAncdokvU4WnQ-UkvGBf-vZ34CCp6_XQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>197788746</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Spinal cord stimulation in complex regional pain syndrome: cervical and lumbar devices are comparably effective</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Forouzanfar, T ; Kemler, M.A. ; Weber, W.E.J. ; Kessels, A.G.H. ; van Kleef, M</creator><creatorcontrib>Forouzanfar, T ; Kemler, M.A. ; Weber, W.E.J. ; Kessels, A.G.H. ; van Kleef, M</creatorcontrib><description>Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used since 1967 for the treatment of patients with chronic pain. However, long-term effects of this treatment have not been reported. The present study investigated the long-term effects of cervical and lumbar SCS in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type I.
Thirty-six patients with a definitive implant were included in this study. A pain diary was obtained from all patients before treatment and 6 months and 1 and 2 years after implantation. All patients were asked to complete a seven-point Global Perceived Effect (GPE) scale and the Euroqol-5D (EQ-5D) at each post-implant assessment point.
The pain intensity was reduced at 6 months, 1 and 2 years after implantation (P<0.05). However, the repeated measures ANOVA showed a statistically significant, linear increase in the visual analogue scale score (P=0.03). According to the GPE, at least 42% of the cervical SCS patients and 47% of the lumbar SCS patients reported at least ‘much improvement’. The health status of the patients, as measured on the EQ-5D, was improved after treatment (P<0.05). This improvement was noted both from the social and from the patients’ perspective. Complications and adverse effects occurred in 64% of the patients and consisted mainly of technical defects. There were no differences between cervical and lumbar groups with regard to outcome measures.
SCS reduced the pain intensity and improves health status in the majority of the CRPS I patients in this study. There was no difference in pain relief and complications between cervical and lumbar SCS.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-0912</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-6771</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/bja/aeh072</identifier><identifier>PMID: 14742334</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BJANAD</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Anesthesia ; Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy ; Biological and medical sciences ; cervical ; Cervical Vertebrae ; complex regional pain syndrome ; Complex Regional Pain Syndromes - therapy ; complications ; complications, complex regional pain syndrome ; Electric Stimulation Therapy - adverse effects ; Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods ; electrical stimulation ; Electrodes, Implanted ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; lumbar ; Lumbar Vertebrae ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Pain Measurement ; Prospective Studies ; Spinal Cord ; spinal cord, electrical stimulation, cervical ; spinal cord, electrical stimulation, lumbar ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 2004-03, Vol.92 (3), p.348-353</ispartof><rights>2004 British Journal of Anaesthesia</rights><rights>The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2004</rights><rights>2004 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright British Medical Association Mar 2004</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c489t-619f7de78e8a2ca5dea46e235ecd8203a2bef3edb9d1777ada006135c8e23f843</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c489t-619f7de78e8a2ca5dea46e235ecd8203a2bef3edb9d1777ada006135c8e23f843</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=15511380$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14742334$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Forouzanfar, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kemler, M.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weber, W.E.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kessels, A.G.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Kleef, M</creatorcontrib><title>Spinal cord stimulation in complex regional pain syndrome: cervical and lumbar devices are comparably effective</title><title>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</title><addtitle>Br. J. Anaesth</addtitle><addtitle>Br. J. Anaesth</addtitle><description>Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used since 1967 for the treatment of patients with chronic pain. However, long-term effects of this treatment have not been reported. The present study investigated the long-term effects of cervical and lumbar SCS in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type I.
Thirty-six patients with a definitive implant were included in this study. A pain diary was obtained from all patients before treatment and 6 months and 1 and 2 years after implantation. All patients were asked to complete a seven-point Global Perceived Effect (GPE) scale and the Euroqol-5D (EQ-5D) at each post-implant assessment point.
The pain intensity was reduced at 6 months, 1 and 2 years after implantation (P<0.05). However, the repeated measures ANOVA showed a statistically significant, linear increase in the visual analogue scale score (P=0.03). According to the GPE, at least 42% of the cervical SCS patients and 47% of the lumbar SCS patients reported at least ‘much improvement’. The health status of the patients, as measured on the EQ-5D, was improved after treatment (P<0.05). This improvement was noted both from the social and from the patients’ perspective. Complications and adverse effects occurred in 64% of the patients and consisted mainly of technical defects. There were no differences between cervical and lumbar groups with regard to outcome measures.
SCS reduced the pain intensity and improves health status in the majority of the CRPS I patients in this study. There was no difference in pain relief and complications between cervical and lumbar SCS.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anesthesia</subject><subject>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>cervical</subject><subject>Cervical Vertebrae</subject><subject>complex regional pain syndrome</subject><subject>Complex Regional Pain Syndromes - therapy</subject><subject>complications</subject><subject>complications, complex regional pain syndrome</subject><subject>Electric Stimulation Therapy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods</subject><subject>electrical stimulation</subject><subject>Electrodes, Implanted</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>lumbar</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Pain Measurement</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Spinal Cord</subject><subject>spinal cord, electrical stimulation, cervical</subject><subject>spinal cord, electrical stimulation, lumbar</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0007-0912</issn><issn>1471-6771</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp90V2L1DAUBuAgijuu3vgDpAh6IdRNmrZJvZPxY4X1A0ZBvAmnyalmbJuatMPOv_foDA6IeBV4eXJCzsvYfcGfCt7Ii3YLF4DfuCpusJUolchrpcRNtuKcq5w3ojhjd1Laci5U0VS32RmhspCyXLGwmfwIfWZDdFma_bD0MPswZn6kbJh6vM4ifqWE0ASUpv3oYhjwWWYx7rylHEaX9cvQQswcUoQpg4i_70OEtt9n2HVoZ7_Du-xWB33Ce8fznH169fLj-jK_ev_6zfr5VW5L3cx5LZpOOVQaNRQWKodQ1ljICq3TBZdQtNhJdG3jhFIKHHBeC1lZTajTpTxnjw9zpxh-LJhmM_hkse9hxLAko7moJW2J4MO_4DYskX6bjGiU0lqVNaEnB2RjSCliZ6boB4h7I7j51YGhDsyhA8IPjhOXdkB3oselE3h0BJBofV2E0fp0clUlhNT85MIy_f_B_OB8mvH6j4T43dRKqspcfv5i1urd5u2HF7XZkC8PHqmAncdokvU4WnQ-UkvGBf-vZ34CCp6_XQ</recordid><startdate>20040301</startdate><enddate>20040301</enddate><creator>Forouzanfar, T</creator><creator>Kemler, M.A.</creator><creator>Weber, W.E.J.</creator><creator>Kessels, A.G.H.</creator><creator>van Kleef, M</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20040301</creationdate><title>Spinal cord stimulation in complex regional pain syndrome: cervical and lumbar devices are comparably effective</title><author>Forouzanfar, T ; Kemler, M.A. ; Weber, W.E.J. ; Kessels, A.G.H. ; van Kleef, M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c489t-619f7de78e8a2ca5dea46e235ecd8203a2bef3edb9d1777ada006135c8e23f843</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anesthesia</topic><topic>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>cervical</topic><topic>Cervical Vertebrae</topic><topic>complex regional pain syndrome</topic><topic>Complex Regional Pain Syndromes - therapy</topic><topic>complications</topic><topic>complications, complex regional pain syndrome</topic><topic>Electric Stimulation Therapy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods</topic><topic>electrical stimulation</topic><topic>Electrodes, Implanted</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>lumbar</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Pain Measurement</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Spinal Cord</topic><topic>spinal cord, electrical stimulation, cervical</topic><topic>spinal cord, electrical stimulation, lumbar</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Forouzanfar, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kemler, M.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weber, W.E.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kessels, A.G.H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Kleef, M</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Forouzanfar, T</au><au>Kemler, M.A.</au><au>Weber, W.E.J.</au><au>Kessels, A.G.H.</au><au>van Kleef, M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Spinal cord stimulation in complex regional pain syndrome: cervical and lumbar devices are comparably effective</atitle><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle><stitle>Br. J. Anaesth</stitle><addtitle>Br. J. Anaesth</addtitle><date>2004-03-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>92</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>348</spage><epage>353</epage><pages>348-353</pages><issn>0007-0912</issn><eissn>1471-6771</eissn><coden>BJANAD</coden><abstract>Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used since 1967 for the treatment of patients with chronic pain. However, long-term effects of this treatment have not been reported. The present study investigated the long-term effects of cervical and lumbar SCS in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type I.
Thirty-six patients with a definitive implant were included in this study. A pain diary was obtained from all patients before treatment and 6 months and 1 and 2 years after implantation. All patients were asked to complete a seven-point Global Perceived Effect (GPE) scale and the Euroqol-5D (EQ-5D) at each post-implant assessment point.
The pain intensity was reduced at 6 months, 1 and 2 years after implantation (P<0.05). However, the repeated measures ANOVA showed a statistically significant, linear increase in the visual analogue scale score (P=0.03). According to the GPE, at least 42% of the cervical SCS patients and 47% of the lumbar SCS patients reported at least ‘much improvement’. The health status of the patients, as measured on the EQ-5D, was improved after treatment (P<0.05). This improvement was noted both from the social and from the patients’ perspective. Complications and adverse effects occurred in 64% of the patients and consisted mainly of technical defects. There were no differences between cervical and lumbar groups with regard to outcome measures.
SCS reduced the pain intensity and improves health status in the majority of the CRPS I patients in this study. There was no difference in pain relief and complications between cervical and lumbar SCS.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>14742334</pmid><doi>10.1093/bja/aeh072</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0007-0912 |
| ispartof | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 2004-03, Vol.92 (3), p.348-353 |
| issn | 0007-0912 1471-6771 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_80163771 |
| source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Adult Anesthesia Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy Biological and medical sciences cervical Cervical Vertebrae complex regional pain syndrome Complex Regional Pain Syndromes - therapy complications complications, complex regional pain syndrome Electric Stimulation Therapy - adverse effects Electric Stimulation Therapy - methods electrical stimulation Electrodes, Implanted Female Follow-Up Studies Humans lumbar Lumbar Vertebrae Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Pain Measurement Prospective Studies Spinal Cord spinal cord, electrical stimulation, cervical spinal cord, electrical stimulation, lumbar Treatment Outcome |
| title | Spinal cord stimulation in complex regional pain syndrome: cervical and lumbar devices are comparably effective |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T04%3A39%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Spinal%20cord%20stimulation%20in%20complex%20regional%20pain%20syndrome:%20cervical%20and%20lumbar%20devices%20are%20comparably%20effective&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20anaesthesia%20:%20BJA&rft.au=Forouzanfar,%20T&rft.date=2004-03-01&rft.volume=92&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=348&rft.epage=353&rft.pages=348-353&rft.issn=0007-0912&rft.eissn=1471-6771&rft.coden=BJANAD&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/bja/aeh072&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E588075091%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=197788746&rft_id=info:pmid/14742334&rft_oup_id=10.1093/bja/aeh072&rft_els_id=S0007091217361482&rfr_iscdi=true |