首页 | 官方网站   微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
《Neuromodulation》2023,26(3):538-551
ObjectivesVarious approaches have been developed with a view to treating the back pain component in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS). Emerging evidence shows that peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) may be an efficacious therapeutic modality against axial low back pain. Hence, the aim of the review was to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of PNFS, when used alone or as an adjunct to spinal cord stimulation (SCS), for managing CLBP and PSPS.Materials and MethodsA comprehensive search for clinical studies on PNFS and PNFS + SCS used for the management of CLBP and/or PSPS was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE via Proquest, and Web of Science.ResultsA total of 15 studies were included, of which four were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), nine were observational studies, and two were case series. For patients receiving PNFS, a significant decrease in back pain intensity and analgesic consumption, together with a significant improvement in physical functioning, was observed upon implant of the permanent system. Meanwhile, the addition of PNFS to SCS in refractory cases was associated with a significant reduction in back and leg pain, respectively.ConclusionsThis review suggests that PNFS, when used alone or in combination with SCS, appears to be effective in managing back pain. However, high-quality evidence that supports the long-term analgesic efficacy and safety is still lacking. Hence, RCTs with a larger patient population and of a longer follow-up duration are warranted.  相似文献   

6.
Objective. The conventional technique used to stimulate the lumbar dermatomes is by stimulation of the dorsal columns of the spinal cord. Until recently, stimulation of nerve roots had not been successfully accomplished. We had performed selective nerve root cannulations for the placement of temporary catheters at cervical, thoracic, lumbar, and sacral levels in chronic pain patients using a caudad rather than craniad approach. We hypothesized that by stimulating the nerve roots we could improve paresthesia coverage in areas which cannot be covered effectively by spinal cord stimulation (SCS). To test this hypothesis, we have performed trials of nerve root stimulation (NRS) in patients who had failed SCS, or who were not candidates for SCS because their pain was otherwise inaccessible to stimulation. Methods. Five patients who had been unresponsive to conservative treatment, surgery, or SCS underwent 7-day trials with NRS. The diagnoses included: ilioinguinal neuralgia, discogenic low back pain, failed back syndrome, vulvodynia, and interstitial cystitis. We collected paresthesia maps, pain maps, pain visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and patient satisfaction ratings. Results. Paresthesia coverage was above 75% in all patients. VAS scores declined from a mean of 9 ± 1.0 to 2.4 ± 2.1 (p < 0.05, n= 5), all 5 patients requested permanent implantation, and 4 have been implanted so far. Conclusions. Lumbar and sacral NRS trials resulted in adequate paresthesia coverage and effective pain relief in all 5 patients. Further clinical trials to evaluate long-term success rates and safety are indicated. Detailed mapping studies are needed to evaluate the relationship between electrode placement and paresthesia patterns as well as the optimal stimulation parameters.  相似文献   

7.
8.
9.
Central cord pain is very difficult to relieve, even with the many kinds of medical and surgical treatments available. Following spinal cord infarctions, central cord pain can develop. The problems that may arise could include limb pain, pelvic pain, difficulties voiding, and difficulties defecating. We are reporting a case of central cord pain caused by a spinal cord infarction of the conus medullaris. Limb pain was reduced by spinal cord stimulation. Voiding and defecation difficulties and pelvic pain were reduced by sacral nerve stimulation. Thus, in a case involving both intractable limb and pelvic pain, a combination therapy of these two stimulations might be an effective treatment modality.  相似文献   

10.
11.
《Neuromodulation》2021,24(4):622-633
Background: While the majority of indications and approvals for dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) are for the refractory management of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), emerging evidence has suggested that DRGS may be favorably used for a plethora of other chronic pain phenomena. Consequently, we aimed to characterize the use and efficacy of DRGS for these non–CRPS-related chronic pain syndromes.Materials and Methods: A systematic review of clinical studies demonstrating the use of DRGS for non–CRPS-related chronic pain syndromes. The literature search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL plus across August and September 2020.Results: A total of 28 reports comprising 354 total patients were included in the analysis. Of the chronic pain syndromes presented, axial low back pain, chronic pelvic and groin pain, other peripheral neuropathies, and studies with multiple concomitant pain syndromes, a majority demonstrated >50% mean pain reduction at the time of last follow-up following DRGS. Physical function, quality of life (QOL), and lesser pain medication usage also were repeatedly reported to be significantly improved.Conclusions: DRGS continues to lack supportive evidence from well designed, high level studies and recommendations from consensus committee experts. However, we present repeated and consistent evidence from lower level studies showing success with the use of DRGS for various non-CRPS chronic pain syndromes in reducing pain along with increasing function and QOL from one week to three years. Due to such low-level, high bias evidence, we strongly encourage the continuation of high-level studies in order to provide a stronger foundation for the use of DRGS in non-CRPS chronic pain patients. However, it may be reasonable and appropriate to evaluate patients for DRGS candidacy on a case-by-case basis particularly if they manifest focal pain syndromes refractory to noninterventional measures and may not be ideal candidates for other forms of neuromodulation.  相似文献   

12.
13.
Objective: Our goal was to determine the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation for patients with intractable post‐herniorrhaphy pain which conventional treatment failed to ameliorate. Procedure: The patients underwent an uneventful spinal cord stimulator (SCS) trial with percutaneous placement of two eight‐electrode epidural leads (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, MN, USA) to level T7‐T8‐T9. Results: Upon experiencing excellent pain relief over the next two days during the trial, the patients were implanted with permanent leads and rechargeable or non‐rechargeable generators two to four weeks later and reported sustained pain relief during following 12 months after implantation. Conclusion: We conclude that SCS offers an alternative treatment option for intractable post‐herniorrhaphy pain. This type of treatment should be considered for use in a select group of patients when all conventional treatments failed.  相似文献   

14.
15.
Two cases of chronic pelvic pain of unknown etiology with symptoms referable to the low abdominal wall are presented. These patients are often difficult to manage because of multiple causes and multiple pathways for pain transmission from the pelvis. In these cases, the patients’ complaints were refractory to medication management, as well as diagnostic and therapeutic nerve blockade. After careful evaluation, a successful trial of peripheral nerve stimulation was followed by permanent implantation of low abdominal subcutaneous leads and a pulse generator device. The patients reported excellent relief of their chronic pelvic pain. The use of neuromodulation via peripheral stimulation deserves further investigation as an alternative to spinal cord stimulation for chronic pelvic pain.  相似文献   

16.
17.
Objective. Development of a spinal cord stimulation (SCS) system in a mouse model of chronic neuropathic pain. Materials and Methods. Male C57BL/6 mice (N = 6) underwent a partial ligation of the sciatic nerve. Development of mechanical hyperalgesia was tested using the withdrawal response to tactile stimuli with the von Frey test. An SCS system was implanted on day 14. On day 16, the mice were stimulated for 30 min (f = 50 Hz; pulse width 0.2 msec and stimulation at 2/3 of motor threshold). Repeated measure analysis of variance (anova ) and paired Student's t‐test with Bonferroni correction were used to evaluate the development of mechanical hyperalgesia and the therapeutic effect of SCS. Results. Five out of six mice developed marked mechanical hyperalgesia in the nerve‐lesioned paw that persisted for the duration of the study (16 days). No changes contralateral to the injury were observed. In four out of five mice, a successful implantation of the electrodes followed by stimulation was achieved. Then, SCS resulted in a fast and robust increase of withdrawal threshold back to pre‐injury levels. After termination of the SCS, the withdrawal threshold of the ipsilateral paw slowly decreased. No effect of SCS on the contralateral paw was noted. Conclusion. The development of a mouse SCS system is described that is practical in use, is reproducible, and shows a comparative therapeutic effect in treatment of chronic neuropathic pain as reported in rat.  相似文献   

18.
19.
Objectives: Chronic post‐hernia pain is a common complication after inguinal herniorrhaphies. Peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) and spinal cord stimulation (SCS) are two new promising treatment modalities. Four patients with persistent neuropathic post‐hernia pain were recruited for this prospective study. Materials and Methods: Electrodes were inserted into the epidural space of the spinal canal and into the subcutaneous tissue in the inguinal region during a single surgical procedure. During a 14‐day trial, double‐blind stimulation was performed via an external stimulator: three days using the spinal electrode (SCS), three days using the inguinal electrode (PNFS), three days using both (SCS + PNFS), and five days off, with an alternating order from patient to patient. During the trial, pain intensity was assessed thrice daily by the visual analog scale. Additionally, pain intensity and quality of life (QOL) were assessed before and after surgical intervention by the Brief Pain Inventory, SF36 scale, and Pain Disability Index. Results: All patients had a marked pain reduction during the trial phase, and this reduction was more prominent when both electrodes were activated simultaneously (p < 0.001). At the late follow‐up, a significant pain reduction and improvement of QOL was observed in three patients. Conclusions: Both SCS and PNFS are effective in treating post‐hernia pain, but the magnitude of pain reduction was more prominent with concomitant stimulation. Combined PNFS and SCS should be considered for patients with a less than optimal response to either SCS or PNFS. More studies are necessary to address the cost‐effect issues of this new approach to treatment.  相似文献   

20.
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for the treatment of painful peripheral neuropathy (PN) has been met with mixed results. It has been suggested that early‐stage symptoms that are sympathetically maintained (SMP) are more likely to respond to SCS, while progressive sympathetically independent symptoms (SIP) will not. Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS), however, has successfully treated certain SIP presentations. With the advent of new selective nerve root stimulation (SNRS) strategies, the possibility of utilizing epidural, peripheral neurostimulation was investigated in a patient with endstage, diabetic, “dying back” peripheral SIP.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司    京ICP备09084417号-23

京公网安备 11010802026262号