From the Department of Pain Management, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH.
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2018 May;43(4):391-406. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000744.
To assess the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for each indication, one must critically assess each specific clinical outcome to identify outcomes that benefit from SCS therapy. To date, a comprehensive review of clinically relevant outcome-specific evidence regarding SCS has not been published. We aimed to assess all randomized controlled trials from the world literature for the purpose of evaluating the clinical outcome-specific efficacy of SCS for the following outcomes: perceived pain relief or change pain score, quality of life, functional status, psychological impact, analgesic medication utilization, patient satisfaction, and health care cost and utilization. Interventions were SCS, without limitation to the type of controls or the type of SCS in the active arms. For each study analyzed, a quality assessment was performed using a validated scale that assesses reporting, external validity, bias, confounding, and power. Each outcome was assessed specific to its indication, and the primary measure of each abovementioned outcome was a summary of the level of evidence. Twenty-one randomized controlled trials were analyzed (7 for trunk and limb pain, inclusive of failed back surgery syndrome; 8 for refractory angina pectoris; 1 for cardiac X syndrome; 3 for critical limb ischemia; 2 for complex regional pain syndrome; and 2 for painful diabetic neuropathy). Evidence assessments for each outcome for each indication were depicted in tabular format. Outcome-specific evidence scores were established for each of the abovementioned indications, providing both physicians and patients with a summary of evidence to assist in choosing the optimal evidence-based intervention. The evidence presented herein has broad applicability as it encompasses a breadth of patient populations, variations of SCS therapy, and comparable controls that, together, reflect comprehensive clinical decision making.
为了评估脊髓刺激(SCS)对每种适应症的疗效,必须批判性地评估每个特定的临床结果,以确定受益于 SCS 治疗的结果。迄今为止,尚未发表关于 SCS 的具有临床相关性的特定结果的综合评价。我们旨在评估来自世界文献的所有随机对照试验,以评估 SCS 对以下结果的特定临床结果疗效:感知疼痛缓解或疼痛评分变化、生活质量、功能状态、心理影响、镇痛药使用、患者满意度以及医疗保健成本和利用。干预措施为 SCS,不受对照类型或活动臂中 SCS 类型的限制。对于分析的每项研究,使用经过验证的量表进行质量评估,该量表评估报告、外部有效性、偏倚、混杂和功效。对每种结果进行了具体的适应症评估,并且上述每个结果的主要衡量标准都是证据水平的总结。分析了 21 项随机对照试验(7 项用于躯干和肢体疼痛,包括失败的背部手术综合征;8 项用于难治性心绞痛;1 项用于心脏 X 综合征;3 项用于严重肢体缺血;2 项用于复杂区域疼痛综合征;2 项用于糖尿病性神经痛)。以表格形式呈现了每种适应症的每种结果的特定证据评估。为每个上述适应症建立了特定的结果证据评分,为医生和患者提供了证据总结,以帮助选择最佳的基于证据的干预措施。本文提供的证据具有广泛的适用性,因为它涵盖了广泛的患者人群、SCS 治疗的变化以及可比的对照,这些共同反映了全面的临床决策。