Suppr超能文献

爆发式脊髓刺激微剂量治疗在治疗慢性腰腿痛方面与标准爆发式脊髓刺激同样有效:一项随机对照试验的结果

Burst SCS Microdosing Is as Efficacious as Standard Burst SCS in Treating Chronic Back and Leg Pain: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial.

作者信息

Vesper Jan, Slotty Philipp, Schu Stefan, Poeggel-Kraemer Katja, Littges Heike, Van Looy Pieter, Agnesi Filippo, Venkatesan Lalit, Van Havenbergh Tony

机构信息

Department of Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.

Klinikum Duisburg, Duisburg, Germany.

出版信息

Neuromodulation. 2019 Feb;22(2):190-193. doi: 10.1111/ner.12883. Epub 2018 Nov 19.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The burst waveform, a recent innovation in spinal cord stimulation (SCS), can achieve better outcomes than conventional tonic SCS, both for de novo implants and as a salvage therapy. Burst stimulation delivers more energy per second than tonic stimulation, which is a consideration for battery consumption. The clinical effectiveness of an energy-conserving strategy was investigated.

METHODS

Subjects were experienced users of BurstDR SCS for back and leg pain. Three 2-week stimulation paradigms were presented in blinded random order: standard (continuously delivered) BurstDR, microdosing A: 5 sec of BurstDR alternating with 5 sec of no stimulation, and microdosing B: 5 sec of BurstDR alternating with 10 sec of no stimulation. The primary outcome for each paradigm was change in pain ratings, and secondary outcomes included changes in scores for quality of life, satisfaction, and preference.

RESULTS

Twenty-five subjects assessed all three stimulation paradigms. There were no significant differences in pain (visual analog scale) or quality of life (EQ-5D) when comparing standard burst outcomes with those of microdosing A and, separately, microdosing B. Microdosing paradigms were graded with slightly higher level of satisfaction and were generally preferred above standard burst stimulation.

DISCUSSION

These results suggest that the use of energy-efficient burst microdosing stimulation paradigms with alternating stimulation-on and stimulation-off periods can provide clinically equivalent results to standard burst stimulation. This is important for extending SCS battery life. Further research is needed to comprehensively characterize the clinical utility of this approach and the neurophysiological mechanisms for the maintenance of pain relief during stimulation-off periods.

摘要

引言

脉冲波形是脊髓刺激(SCS)领域的一项最新创新技术,无论是对于初次植入还是挽救性治疗,其效果均优于传统的持续性SCS。与持续性刺激相比,脉冲刺激每秒传递的能量更多,这是电池消耗方面需要考虑的因素。本研究调查了一种节能策略的临床有效性。

方法

研究对象为使用BurstDR SCS治疗背部和腿部疼痛的经验丰富的患者。以盲法随机顺序呈现三种为期2周的刺激模式:标准(持续传递)BurstDR模式、微剂量A模式(5秒BurstDR刺激与5秒无刺激交替)和微剂量B模式(5秒BurstDR刺激与10秒无刺激交替)。每种模式的主要结局指标为疼痛评分的变化,次要结局指标包括生活质量、满意度和偏好评分的变化。

结果

25名受试者评估了所有三种刺激模式。将标准脉冲模式的结果分别与微剂量A模式和微剂量B模式的结果进行比较时,疼痛(视觉模拟量表)或生活质量(EQ-5D)方面均无显著差异。微剂量模式的满意度评分略高,总体上比标准脉冲刺激更受青睐。

讨论

这些结果表明,采用节能的脉冲微剂量刺激模式,即刺激开启和关闭期交替,可以产生与标准脉冲刺激在临床上等效的结果。这对于延长SCS电池寿命很重要。需要进一步研究以全面描述这种方法的临床效用以及刺激关闭期维持疼痛缓解的神经生理机制。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验