Thomas L. Yearwood

Novel 10-kHz High-frequency Therapy (HF10 Therapy) Is Superior to Traditional Low-frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Back and Leg PainThe SENZA-RCT Randomized Controlled Trial

Background:Current treatments for chronic pain have limited effectiveness and commonly known side effects. Given the prevalence and burden of intractable pain, additional therapeutic approaches are desired. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) delivered at 10 kHz (as in HF10 therapy) may provide pain relief without the paresthesias typical of traditional low-frequency SCS. The objective of this randomized, parallel-arm, noninferiority study was to compare long-term safety and efficacy of SCS therapies in patients with back and leg pain. Methods:A total of 198 subjects with both back and leg pain were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a treatment group across 10 comprehensive pain treatment centers. Of these, 171 passed a temporary trial and were implanted with an SCS system. Responders (the primary outcome) were defined as having 50% or greater back pain reduction with no stimulation-related neurological deficit. Results:At 3 months, 84.5% of implanted HF10 therapy subjects were responders for back pain and 83.1% for leg pain, and 43.8% of traditional SCS subjects were responders for back pain and 55.5% for leg pain (P < 0.001 for both back and leg pain comparisons). The relative ratio for responders was 1.9 (95% CI, 1.4 to 2.5) for back pain and 1.5 (95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9) for leg pain. The superiority of HF10 therapy over traditional SCS for leg and back pain was sustained through 12 months (P < 0.001). HF10 therapy subjects did not experience paresthesias. Conclusion:HF10 therapy promises to substantially impact the management of back and leg pain with broad applicability to patients, physicians, and payers.

Novel Spinal Cord Stimulation Parameters in Patients with Predominant Back Pain

To examine the feasibility of novel high‐frequency spinal cord stimulation therapy in a cohort of patients with chronic predominant back pain during a four day, percutaneous trial.

Comparison of 10-kHz High-Frequency and Traditional Low-Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Back and Leg Pain: 24-Month Results From a Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Pivotal Trial

BACKGROUND: Pain relief with spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has focused historically on paresthesias overlapping chronically painful areas. A higher level evidence supports the use of SCS in treating leg pain than supports back pain, as it is difficult to achieve adequate paresthesia coverage, and then pain relief, in the low back region. In comparison, 10-kHz high-frequency (HF10 therapy) SCS therapy does not rely on intraoperative paresthesia mapping and remains paresthesia-free during therapy. OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term results of HF10 therapy and traditional low-frequency SCS. METHODS: A pragmatic randomized, controlled, pivotal trial with 24-month follow-up was conducted across 11 comprehensive pain treatment centers. Subjects had Visual Analog Scale scores of ≥5.0/10.0 cm for both back and leg pain, and were assigned randomly (1:1) to receive HF10 therapy or low-frequency SCS. The primary end point was a responder rate, defined as ≥50% back pain reduction from baseline at 3 months with a secondary end point at 12 months (previously reported). In this article, 24-month secondary results are presented. Non-inferiority was first assessed, and if demonstrated the results were tested for superiority. RESULTS: In the study, 198 subjects were randomized (101 HF10 therapy, 97 traditional SCS). One hundred seventy-one subjects (90 HF10 therapy, 81 traditional SCS) successfully completed a short-term trial and were implanted. Subjects averaged 54.9 ± 12.9 years old, 13.6 ± 11.3 years since diagnosis, 86.6% had back surgery, 88.3% were taking opioid analgesics. At 3 months, 84.5% of implanted HF10 therapy subjects were responders for back pain and 83.1% for leg pain, and 43.8% of traditional SCS subjects were responders for back pain and 55.5% for leg pain (P < .001 for both back and leg pain comparisons, non-inferiority and superiority). At 24 months, more subjects were responders to HF10 therapy than traditional SCS (back pain: 76.5% vs 49.3%; 27.2% difference, 95% CI, 10.1%-41.8%; P < .001 for non-inferiority and superiority; leg pain: 72.9% vs 49.3%; 23.6% difference, 95% CI, 5.9%-38.6%; P < .001 for non-inferiority and P = .003 for superiority). Also at 24 months, back pain decreased to a greater degree with HF10 therapy (66.9% ± 31.8%) than traditional SCS (41.1% ± 36.8%, P < .001 for non-inferiority and superiority). Leg pain also decreased to a greater degree with HF10 therapy (65.1% ± 36.0%) than traditional SCS (46.0% ± 40.4%, P < .001 for non-inferiority and P = .002 for superiority). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates long-term superiority of HF10 therapy compared with traditional SCS in treating both back and leg pain. The advantages of HF10 therapy are anticipated to impact the management of chronic pain patients substantially. ABBREVIATIONS: IPG, implantable pulse generator MCID, minimal clinically important difference PI, permanent implant ODI, Oswestry Disability Index SCS, spinal cord stimulation VAS, Visual Analog Scale

Dorsal root ganglion stimulation yielded higher treatment success rate for complex regional pain syndrome and causalgia at 3 and 12 months: a randomized comparative trial

Abstract Animal and human studies indicate that electrical stimulation of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons may modulate neuropathic pain signals. ACCURATE, a pivotal, prospective, multicenter, randomized comparative effectiveness trial, was conducted in 152 subjects diagnosed with complex regional pain syndrome or causalgia in the lower extremities. Subjects received neurostimulation of the DRG or dorsal column (spinal cord stimulation, SCS). The primary end point was a composite of safety and efficacy at 3 months, and subjects were assessed through 12 months for long-term outcomes and adverse events. The predefined primary composite end point of treatment success was met for subjects with a permanent implant who reported 50% or greater decrease in visual analog scale score from preimplant baseline and who did not report any stimulation-related neurological deficits. No subjects reported stimulation-related neurological deficits. The percentage of subjects receiving ≥50% pain relief and treatment success was greater in the DRG arm (81.2%) than in the SCS arm (55.7%, P < 0.001) at 3 months. Device-related and serious adverse events were not different between the 2 groups. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation also demonstrated greater improvements in quality of life and psychological disposition. Finally, subjects using DRG stimulation reported less postural variation in paresthesia (P < 0.001) and reduced extraneous stimulation in nonpainful areas (P = 0.014), indicating DRG stimulation provided more targeted therapy to painful parts of the lower extremities. As the largest prospective, randomized comparative effectiveness trial to date, the results show that DRG stimulation provided a higher rate of treatment success with less postural variation in paresthesia intensity compared to SCS.

Predicted effects of pulse width programming in spinal cord stimulation: a mathematical modeling study

To understand the theoretical effects of pulse width (PW) programming in spinal cord stimulation (SCS), we implemented a mathematical model of electrical fields and neural activation in SCS to gain insight into the effects of PW programming. The computational model was composed of a finite element model for structure and electrical properties, coupled with a nonlinear double-cable axon model to predict nerve excitation for different myelinated fiber sizes. Mathematical modeling suggested that mediolateral lead position may affect chronaxie and rheobase values, as well as predict greater activation of medial dorsal column fibers with increased PW. These modeling results were validated by a companion clinical study. Thus, variable PW programming in SCS appears to have theoretical value, demonstrated by the ability to increase and even ‘steer’ spatial selectivity of dorsal column fiber recruitment. It is concluded that the computational SCS model is a valuable tool to understand basic mechanisms of nerve fiber excitation modulated by stimulation parameters such as PW and electric fields.

Success Using Neuromodulation With BURST (SUNBURST) Study: Results From a Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial Using a Novel Burst Waveform

The purpose of the multicenter, randomized, unblinded, crossover Success Using Neuromodulation with BURST (SUNBURST) study was to determine the safety and efficacy of a device delivering both traditional tonic stimulation and burst stimulation to patients with chronic pain of the trunk and/or limbs.

Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) with Anatomically Guided (3D) Neural Targeting Shows Superior Chronic Axial Low Back Pain Relief Compared to Traditional SCS—LUMINA Study

Background The aim of this study was to determine whether spinal cord stimulation (SCS) using 3D neural targeting provided sustained overall and low back pain relief in a broad routine clinical practice population. Study Design and Methods This was a multicenter, open-label observational study with an observational arm and retrospective analysis of a matched cohort. After IPG implantation, programming was done using a patient-specific, model-based algorithm to adjust for lead position (3D neural targeting) or previous generation software (traditional). Demographics, medical histories, SCS parameters, pain locations, pain intensities, disabilities, and safety data were collected for all patients. Results A total of 213 patients using 3D neural targeting were included, with a trial-to-implant ratio of 86%. Patients used seven different lead configurations, with 62% receiving 24 to 32 contacts, and a broad range of stimulation parameters utilizing a mean of 14.3 (±6.1) contacts. At 24 months postimplant, pain intensity decreased significantly from baseline (ΔNRS = 4.2, N = 169, P  < 0.0001) and even more in in the severe pain subgroup (ΔNRS = 5.3, N = 91, P  < 0.0001). Axial low back pain also decreased significantly from baseline to 24 months (ΔNRS = 4.1, N = 70, P  < 0.0001, on the overall cohort and ΔNRS = 5.6, N = 38, on the severe subgroup). Matched cohort comparison with 213 patients treated with traditional SCS at the same centers showed overall pain responder rates of 51% (traditional SCS) and 74% (neural targeting SCS) and axial low back pain responder rates of 41% and 71% in the traditional SCS and neural targeting SCS cohorts, respectively. Lastly, complications occurred in a total of 33 of the 213 patients, with a 1.6% lead replacement rate and a 1.6% explant rate. Conclusions Our results suggest that 3D neural targeting SCS and its associated hardware flexibility provide effective treatment for both chronic leg and chronic axial low back pain that is significantly superior to traditional SCS.

Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation Increases Peripheral Antineuroinflammatory Interleukin 10 Levels in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Patients With Predominant Back Pain

Burst spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been reported to reduce back pain and improve functional capacity in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS). However, its mechanism of action is not completely understood. Systemic circulating cytokines have been associated with the development of chronic back pain.

Changes of Metabolic Disorders Associated Peripheral Cytokine/Adipokine Traffic in Non‐Obese Chronic Back Patients Responsive to Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation

In our previous study, anti‐inflammatory IL‐10 serum levels were significantly elevated after burst spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in back pain patients and correlated with pain intensity. This current study extended cytokine analysis including metabolic‐associated adipokine/cytokine serum assessment in chronic back pain patients with co‐existing metabolic disorders such as diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular diseases.

Intrathecal Administration of Infumorph® vs Compounded Morphine for Treatment of Intractable Pain Using the Prometra® Programmable Pump

OBJECTIVES The intrathecal administration of morphine sulfate has become an established alternative to oral opiate therapy for the treatment of chronic pain. Currently, Infumorph(®) is the only morphine sulfate approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for continuous intraspinal administration with an infusion pump. However, in order to achieve and maintain adequate pain relief, patients may require concentrations outside of those commercially available products resulting in the use of compounded morphine. METHODS Accuracy, safety, and efficacy data related to Infumorph and compounded morphine use were collected during clinical trials of a new implantable pump. This report compares those results in a total of 154 subjects implanted with the Prometra programmable pump. RESULTS The mean drug delivery accuracy using only Infumorph in 31 subjects was 100.1% and was comparable with the accuracy reported for the 71 subjects who received only compounded morphine sulfate (97.4%). The percentage of subjects free from device-related serious adverse events (DRSAEs) was similar in both groups. Compounded morphine showed statistically significant improvements in pain and disability, where Infumorph only showed a statistical improvement in pain. Dosing was higher in the compounded group. Results are also presented for a crossover group that received both types of morphine. CONCLUSIONS ThePrometra system accurately delivers both Infumorph and compounded morphine with no significant differences in DRSAE rates. These results indicate that compounded morphine delivery effectively treats the chronic pain patient population. Higher doses appear to provide better pain relief; however, optimal pain relief will need to be balanced against the risk of granuloma formation.