Eric Buchser

Spinal cord stimulation versus conventional medical management for neuropathic pain: A multicentre randomised controlled trial in patients with failed back surgery syndrome

Abstract Patients with neuropathic pain secondary to failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) typically experience persistent pain, disability, and reduced quality of life. We hypothesised that spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective therapy in addition to conventional medical management (CMM) in this patient population. We randomised 100 FBSS patients with predominant leg pain of neuropathic radicular origin to receive spinal cord stimulation plus conventional medical management (SCS group) or conventional medical management alone (CMM group) for at least 6 months. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving 50% or more pain relief in the legs. Secondary outcomes were improvement in back and leg pain, health‐related quality of life, functional capacity, use of pain medication and non‐drug pain treatment, level of patient satisfaction, and incidence of complications and adverse effects. Crossover after the 6‐months visit was permitted, and all patients were followed up to 1 year. In the intention‐to‐treat analysis at 6 months, 24 SCS patients (48%) and 4 CMM patients (9%) (p < 0.001) achieved the primary outcome. Compared with the CMM group, the SCS group experienced improved leg and back pain relief, quality of life, and functional capacity, as well as greater treatment satisfaction (p ⩽ 0.05 for all comparisons). Between 6 and 12 months, 5 SCS patients crossed to CMM, and 32 CMM patients crossed to SCS. At 12 months, 27 SCS patients (32%) had experienced device‐related complications. In selected patients with FBSS, SCS provides better pain relief and improves health‐related quality of life and functional capacity compared with CMM alone.

Randomized Clinical Trial of an Implantable Drug Delivery System Compared With Comprehensive Medical Management for Refractory Cancer Pain: Impact on Pain, Drug-Related Toxicity, and Survival

PURPOSE Implantable intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDSs) have been used to manage refractory cancer pain, but there are no randomized clinical trial (RCT) data comparing them with comprehensive medical management (CMM). PATIENTS AND METHODS We enrolled 202 patients on an RCT of CMM versus IDDS plus CMM. Entry criteria included unrelieved pain (visual analog scale [VAS] pain scores >/= 5 on a 0 to 10 scale). Clinical success was defined as >/= 20% reduction in VAS scores, or equal scores with >/= 20% reduction in toxicity. The main outcome measure was pain control combined with change of toxicity, as measured by the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, 4 weeks after randomization. RESULTS Sixty of 71 IDDS patients (84.5%) achieved clinical success compared with 51 of 72 CMM patients (70.8%, P =.05). IDDS patients more often achieved >/= 20% reduction in both pain VAS and toxicity (57.7% [41 of 71] v 37.5% [27 of 72], P =.02). The mean CMM VAS score fell from 7.81 to 4.76 (39% reduction); for the IDDS group, the scores fell from 7.57 to 3.67 (52% reduction, P =.055). The mean CMM toxicity scores fell from 6.36 to 5.27 (17% reduction); for the IDDS group, the toxicity scores fell from 7.22 to 3.59 (50% reduction, P =.004). The IDDS group had significant reductions in fatigue and depressed level of consciousness (P <.05). IDDS patients had improved survival, with 53.9% alive at 6 months compared with 37.2% of the CMM group (P =.06). CONCLUSION IDDSs improved clinical success in pain control, reduced pain, significantly relieved common drug toxicities, and improved survival in patients with refractory cancer pain.

The effects of spinal cord stimulation in neuropathic pain are sustained: a 24-month follow-up of the prospective randomized controlled multicenter trial of the effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation

OBJECTIVEAfter randomizing 100 failed back surgery syndrome patients to receive spinal cord stimulation (SCS) plus conventional medical management (CMM) or CMM alone, the results of the 6-month Prospective Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial of the Effectiveness of Spinal Cord Stimulation (i.e., PROCESS) showed that SCS offered superior pain relief, health-related quality of life, and functional capacity. Because the rate of crossover favoring SCS beyond 6 months would bias a long-term randomized group comparison, we present all outcomes in patients who continued SCS from randomization to 24 months and, for illustrative purposes, the primary outcome (>50% leg pain relief) per randomization and final treatment. METHODSPatients provided data on pain, quality of life, function, pain medication use, treatment satisfaction, and employment status. Investigators documented adverse events. Data analysis included inferential comparisons and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTSThe 42 patients continuing SCS (of 52 randomized to SCS) reported significantly improved leg pain relief (P < 0.0001), quality of life (P ≤ 0.01), and functional capacity (P = 0.0002); and 13 patients (31%) required a device-related surgical revision. At 24 months, of 46 of 52 patients randomized to SCS and 41 of 48 randomized to CMM who were available, the primary outcome was achieved by 17 (37%) randomized to SCS versus 1 (2%) to CMM (P = 0.003) and by 34 (47%) of 72 patients who received SCS as final treatment versus 1 (7%) of 15 for CMM (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONAt 24 months of SCS treatment, selected failed back surgery syndrome patients reported sustained pain relief, clinically important improvements in functional capacity and health-related quality of life, and satisfaction with treatment.

Physical activity monitoring based on accelerometry: validation and comparison with video observation

The objective of this feasibility study is to evaluate the use of the ‘Physilog’ device, an ambulatory physical-activity recorder based on acceleration measurement, for the monitoring of daily physical activities. Accelerations measured at the level of the chest and the thigh are recorded by Physilog over a period of 1 h in five normal subjects. A specially designed studio-like room allowing the performance of most usual activities of everyday life is used. A video film synchronised with the Physilog is obtained for each subject to check the accuracy of the data derived from Physilog. Based on the analysis of the average and the deviation of the acceleration signal, an algorithm is developed to classify the activities in four categories, i.e. lying, sitting, standing and locomotion. Compared with the video observations, the results from the algorithm show an overall misclassification of 10.7%, which is mainly due to confusion between dynamic activities and the standing posture. In contrast, the misclassification between postures is negligible. It is concluded that Physilog can be used in the clinical setting for the reliable measurement and long-term recording of most-usual physical activities.

Polyanalgesic consensus conference 2007: recommendations for the management of pain by intrathecal (intraspinal) drug delivery: report of an interdisciplinary expert panel.

Background.  Expert panels of physicians and nonphysicians in the field of intrathecal therapies convened in 2000 and 2003 to make recommendations for the rational use of intrathecal analgesics based on the preclinical and clinical literature known up to those times. An expert panel of physicians convened in 2007 to update previous recommendations and to form guidelines for the rational use of intrathecal opioid and nonopioid agents.

Spinal cord stimulation for chronic back and leg pain and failed back surgery syndrome: a systematic review and analysis of prognostic factors.

Study Design. Systematic review. Objectives. To assess efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with chronic leg and back pain and failed back surgery syndrome and to examine prognostic factors that predict spinal cord stimulation outcome. Summary of Background Data. A previous systematic review of spinal cord stimulation in patients with chronic back and leg pain and failed back surgery syndrome by Turner et al in 1995 identified 39 case studies and no controlled studies. Methods. A number of electronic databases were searched through January 2002. Citation searching of included papers was undertaken, and gray literature was sought through contact with clinical experts. No language restrictions were applied. All controlled and noncontrolled study designs were included. Study selection was carried out independently by two reviewers. Prognostic factors (age, sex, duration of pain, time post surgery, follow-up duration, publication year, data collection year, indication, data collection country, study setting, and quality score) responsible for pain relief outcome across case series were examined using univariate and multivariate metaregression. Results. One randomized controlled trial, one cohort study, and 72 case studies were included. The randomized controlled trial reported a significant benefit (P = 0.047) in the proportion of patients with failed back surgery syndrome reporting 50% or more pain relief with spinal cord stimulation (37.5%) compared with patients undergoing back reoperation (11.5%). There was evidence of substantial statistical heterogeneity (P < 0.0001) in the level of pain relief following spinal cord stimulation reported across case series studies. The four principal prognostic factors found to be predictive of increased level of pain relief with spinal cord stimulation were poor study quality score, short follow-up duration, multicenter (versus single center) studies, and the inclusion of patients with failed back surgery syndrome (versus chronic back and leg pain). Overall, 43% of patients with chronic back and leg pain/failed back surgery syndrome experienced one or more complications following a spinal cord stimulation implant, although no major adverse events were reported. Conclusions. Despite an increase in the number of studies over the last 10 years, the level of evidence for the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation in chronic back and leg pain/failed back surgery syndrome remains “moderate.” Prognostic factors found to be predictive of the level of pain relief following spinal cord stimulation were study quality, follow-up duration, study setting, and patient indication.

Spinal cord stimulation for complex regional pain syndrome: a systematic review of the clinical and cost-effectiveness literature and assessment of prognostic factors

Objective To review the clinical and cost‐effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in the management of patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) and identify the potential predictors of SCS outcome.

Evidence-Based Review of the Literature on Intrathecal Delivery of Pain Medication

Evidence-based medicine depends on the existence of controlled clinical trials that establish the safety and efficacy of specific therapeutic techniques. Many interventions in clinical practice have achieved widespread acceptance despite little evidence to support them in the scientific literature; the critical appraisal of these interventions based on accumulating experience is a goal of medicine. To clarify the current state of knowledge concerning the use of various drugs for intraspinal infusion in pain management, an expert panel conducted a thorough review of the published literature. The exhaustive review included 5 different groups of compounds, with morphine and bupivacaine yielding the most citations in the literature. The need for additional large published controlled studies was highlighted by this review, especially for promising agents that have been shown to be safe and efficacious in recent clinical studies.

Clinical guidelines for intraspinal infusion: Report of an expert panel

Consensus guidelines developed by an expert panel are helpful to clinicians when there is variation in practice and lack of a firm evidence base for an intervention, such as intraspinal therapy for pain. An internet-based survey of practitioners revealed remarkable variation in practice patterns surrounding intraspinal therapy. This prompted an interdisciplinary panel with extensive clinical experience in intraspinal infusion therapy to evaluate the results of the survey, the systematic reviews of the literature pertaining to this approach, and their own clinical experience with long-term spinal infusions. The panel proposed a scheme for the selection of drugs and doses for intraspinal therapy, and suggested guidelines for administration that would increase the likelihood of a successful outcome. These expert panel guidelines were designed to provide an initial structure for clinical decision making that is based on the best available evidence and the perspectives of experienced clinicians.

Quality of life, resource consumption and costs of spinal cord stimulation versus conventional medical management in neuropathic pain patients with failed back surgery syndrome (PROCESS trial)

Background: Chronic back and leg pain conditions result in patients’ loss of function, reduced quality of life and increased costs to the society.