Deer Timothy R, Grider Jay S, Lamer Tim J, Pope Jason E, Falowski Steven, Hunter Corey W, Provenzano David A, Slavin Konstantin V, Russo Marc, Carayannopoulos Alexios, Shah Jay M, Harned Michael E, Hagedorn Jonathan M, Bolash Robert B, Arle Jeff E, Kapural Leo, Amirdelfan Kasra, Jain Sameer, Liem Liong, Carlson Jonathan D, Malinowski Mark N, Bendel Markus, Yang Ajax, Aiyer Rohit, Valimahomed Ali, Antony Ajay, Craig Justin, Fishman Michael A, Al-Kaisy Adnan A, Christelis Nick, Rosenquist Richard W, Levy Robert M, Mekhail Nagy
The Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, West Virginia.
UK HealthCare Pain Services, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, Kentucky.
Pain Med. 2020 Nov 7;21(7):1421-1432. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnz353.
To conduct a systematic literature review of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for pain.
Grade the evidence for SCS.
An international, interdisciplinary work group conducted literature searches, reviewed abstracts, and selected studies for grading. Inclusion/exclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with intractable pain of greater than one year's duration. Full studies were graded by two independent reviewers. Excluded studies were retrospective, had small numbers of subjects, or existed only as abstracts. Studies were graded using the modified Interventional Pain Management Techniques-Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment, the Cochrane Collaborations Risk of Bias assessment, and the US Preventative Services Task Force level-of-evidence criteria.
SCS has Level 1 evidence (strong) for axial back/lumbar radiculopathy or neuralgia (five high-quality RCTs) and complex regional pain syndrome (one high-quality RCT).
High-level evidence supports SCS for treating chronic pain and complex regional pain syndrome. For patients with failed back surgery syndrome, SCS was more effective than reoperation or medical management. New stimulation waveforms and frequencies may provide a greater likelihood of pain relief compared with conventional SCS for patients with axial back pain, with or without radicular pain.
对脊髓刺激术(SCS)治疗疼痛进行系统的文献综述。
对SCS的证据进行分级。
一个国际跨学科工作组进行文献检索、摘要评审并选择研究进行分级。纳入/排除标准包括对病程超过一年的顽固性疼痛患者进行的随机对照试验(RCT)。完整的研究由两名独立评审员进行分级。排除的研究为回顾性研究、样本量小或仅以摘要形式存在的研究。使用改良的介入性疼痛管理技术-可靠性质量评估和偏倚风险评估、Cochrane协作网偏倚风险评估以及美国预防服务工作组证据水平标准对研究进行分级。
SCS对于轴性背痛/腰椎神经根病或神经痛(五项高质量RCT)和复杂性区域疼痛综合征(一项高质量RCT)有1级证据(强)。
高级别证据支持SCS用于治疗慢性疼痛和复杂性区域疼痛综合征。对于腰椎手术失败综合征患者,SCS比再次手术或药物治疗更有效。与传统SCS相比,新的刺激波形和频率可能为有或无神经根性疼痛的轴性背痛患者提供更大的疼痛缓解可能性。