Spinal cord stimulation revisited

Ricardo Segal, Brett R. Stacey, Thomas E. Rudy, Susan Baser, Jennifer Markham

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

49 Scopus citations

Abstract

The proportion of patients with intractable pain successfully managed with spinal cord stimulation (SCS) remains disputed. We analyze 27 consecutive patients with intractable pain treated with SCS using identical hardware (Itrel® II System; Medtronic Neurological, Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) by a single neurosurgeon(RS) 1992 through 1995. A rigid selection protocol was used: 1. A satisfactory diagnosis of the pathologic process resulting in pain was made. 2. A corrective surgical procedure was judged not feasible by surgeons experienced in the particular pathology, e.g., vascular, peripheral nerve, spine. 3. Lack of satisfactory response to noninterventional pain management modalities by an interdisciplinary pain clinic. 4. Independent psychological evaluation, including a structured interview was performed by a psychologist specialized in chronic pain management. In the last eight cases, a battery of self-report tests designed to assess psychosocial and behavioral consequences of the chronic pain problem were administered as well. All cases were of nonmalignant pain, except for one patient. Thirteen cases were diagnosed with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), one older patient with lumbosacral radiculopathy who refused decompression, one with cervical radiculopathy and Klippel-Feil syndrome, six with reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD), two with peripheral vascular ischemic disease, one with post-thoracotomy pain syndrome, one with leg pain following resection of angiolipoma, one with traumatic superficial peroneal neuropathy, and one with Pancoast's tumor. Fifteen patients were female and twelve were male. All were Caucasian. Their ages ranged from 27 to 84 years (mean: 48). The average follow-up was 21 months (range: 48-6). All patients underwent a three day trial screening with Pisces-Quad/Resume® epidural leads connected to a temporary external stimulator. An Itrel® II System pulse-generator was internalized in each of the 24 patients who had a successful trial (three cervical and twenty-one thoracic-lumbar). There was no morbidity. Pain reduction was sustained in 22 out of the 24 patients who continue to use the stimulator. The same number would choose to receive an electrical stimulator again. Normalization or improvement in Quantitative Sudomotor Axon Reflex Test (Q-SART) and Thermography was documented in the patients with RSD. We conclude that a rigid selection protocol can maximize the proportion of patients with intractable pain who are successfully treated with SCS. Strict neurosurgical technique eliminates infection risk. Hardware selection minimizes incidence of malfunction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)391-396
Number of pages6
JournalNeurological Research
Volume20
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1998

Keywords

  • Electrical stimulation
  • Failed back surgery syndrome
  • Intractable chronic pain
  • Peripheral vascular disease
  • Reflex sympathetic dystrophy
  • Spinal cord stimulation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Spinal cord stimulation revisited'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Segal, R., Stacey, B. R., Rudy, T. E., Baser, S., & Markham, J. (1998). Spinal cord stimulation revisited. Neurological Research, 20(5), 391-396. https://doi.org/10.1080/01616412.1998.11740536