Eissazade Negin, Rohani Mohammad, Fereshtehnejad Seyed-Mohammad, Sinaeefar Mohammad Javad, Tabatabaee Seyedehnarges
Cellular and Molecular Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Brain and Cognition Clinic, Institute for Cognitive Sciences Studies, Tehran, Iran.
Neurosurg Rev. 2025 May 21;48(1):428. doi: 10.1007/s10143-025-03578-y.
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and sacral nerve stimulation (SNS) are neuromodulation therapies increasingly used for treatment-resistant chronic pain and urinary or fecal incontinence. Despite their benefits, concerns remain regarding their potential interference with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), including permanent pacemakers (PPMs) and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), potentially leading to inappropriate pacing or shocks. This systematic review aimed to assess documented interactions between these devices to guide clinical decision-making and enhance patient safety. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted for studies published up to November 2024. Eligible studies included adult patients with both SCS or SNS and CIEDs. Due to methodological heterogeneity, findings were summarized descriptively, and meta-analysis was not performed. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools. A total of 30 studies involving 119 participants were included. Among 107 patients with SCS, two instances of interference (1.86%) were reported: one with unipolar and one with bipolar configurations. In both cases, the interference was successfully managed through adjustments of stimulation parameters. No interference or adverse cardiac events were reported in 12 patients with concurrent SNS and CIEDs. The risk of interactions between SCS/SNS and ICDs/PPMs appears to be low and manageable with appropriate device programming and monitoring. Nevertheless, the absence of standardized monitoring protocols and methodological heterogeneity limits the generalizability of findings. Future research should focus on developing standardized protocols for assessing device compatibility to ensure safe integration of neuromodulation and cardiac therapies. Clinical trial number Not applicable.
脊髓刺激(SCS)和骶神经刺激(SNS)是越来越多地用于治疗顽固性慢性疼痛以及尿失禁或大便失禁的神经调节疗法。尽管它们有诸多益处,但人们仍担心它们可能会干扰心脏植入式电子设备(CIED),包括永久性起搏器(PPM)和植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD),这可能会导致不适当的起搏或电击。本系统评价旨在评估这些设备之间已记录的相互作用,以指导临床决策并提高患者安全性。对截至2024年11月发表的研究,全面检索了PubMed、Embase、Scopus、Cochrane图书馆和科学网。符合条件的研究包括同时患有SCS或SNS以及CIED的成年患者。由于方法学上的异质性,研究结果采用描述性总结,未进行荟萃分析。使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所(JBI)的批判性评价工具评估纳入研究的质量。共纳入30项研究,涉及119名参与者。在107例SCS患者中,报告了2例干扰情况(1.86%):1例为单极配置,1例为双极配置。在这两种情况下,通过调整刺激参数成功解决了干扰问题。12例同时患有SNS和CIED的患者未报告干扰或不良心脏事件。SCS/SNS与ICD/PPM之间相互作用的风险似乎较低,通过适当的设备编程和监测可以控制。然而,缺乏标准化的监测方案和方法学异质性限制了研究结果的普遍性。未来的研究应侧重于制定评估设备兼容性的标准化方案,以确保神经调节和心脏治疗的安全整合。临床试验编号 不适用。