Stanton-Hicks M, Salamon J
Anaesthesia Pain Management Center, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, OH 44195, USA.
J Clin Neurophysiol. 1997 Jan;14(1):46-62. doi: 10.1097/00004691-199701000-00004.
After suffering some setbacks since its introduction in 1967, stimulation of the spinal and peripheral nervous systems has undergone rapid development in the last ten years. Based on principles enunciated in the Gate Control Hypothesis that was published in 1968, stimulation-produced analgesia [SPA] has been subjected to intensive laboratory and clinical investigation. Historically, most new clinical ideas in medicine have tended to follow a three-tiered course. Initial enthusiasm gives way to a reappraisal of the treatment or modality as side-effects or unanticipated problems arise. The last and third phase proceeds at a more measured pace as the treatment is refined by experience. This review is divided into three parts as it traces the progress of spinal cord stimulation [SCS] and peripheral nerve stimulation [PNS]. The review commences with a discussion of the theory of SCS and PNS, and is followed by early reports during which it became apparent that the modality is essentially only effective in the treatment of neuropathic pain. The last section describes the modern experience including efficacy in specific types of pain and concludes with recent accomplishments that dramatize the relief of pain which can be achieved in nonoperable peripheral vascular disease or myocardial ischemia. Over the years, a search for those transmitters that might be influenced by spinal cord stimulation focused on somatostatin, cholecystokinin (CCK), vasoactive intestinal polypeptide (VIP), neurotensin and other amines, although only substance "P" was implicated. More recently, in animal studies, evidence that GABA-ergic systems are affected may explain the frequent successful suppression of allodynia that follows spinal cord stimulation. During the past eight years, much attention has been directed to studies that use a chronic neuropathic pain model. While PNS held significant promise as a pain relieving modality, early electrode systems and their surgical implantation yielded variable results due to evolving technical and surgical skills. These results dramatically reduced the continued development of PNS, which then gave way to a preoccupation with SCS. Modern development of SCS with outcome studies, particularly in relation to failed back surgery syndrome [FBSS] and the outcome of peripheral nerve surgery for chronic regional pain syndromes, has earned both modalities a place in the ongoing management of patients with intractable neuropathic pain. The last section, dealing with pain of peripheral vascular and myocardial ischemia, is perhaps one of the more exciting developments in stimulation produced analgesia and as the papers discussed demonstrate, can provide a level of analgesia and efficacy that is unattainable by other treatment modalities. SCS and PNS has an important role to play in the management of conditions that are otherwise refractory to conservative or other conventional management.
自1967年引入以来经历了一些挫折后,脊髓和周围神经系统刺激技术在过去十年中得到了迅速发展。基于1968年发表的闸门控制假说中阐述的原理,刺激产生的镇痛作用[SPA]已经接受了深入的实验室和临床研究。从历史上看,医学上大多数新的临床理念往往遵循三个阶段的过程。最初的热情随着副作用或意外问题的出现而让位于对治疗方法或方式的重新评估。最后一个也是第三个阶段随着经验对治疗方法的完善而以更稳健的步伐推进。这篇综述分为三个部分,追溯脊髓刺激[SCS]和周围神经刺激[PNS]的发展历程。综述首先讨论SCS和PNS的理论,接着是早期报告,在此期间很明显这种治疗方式基本上仅对神经性疼痛有效。最后一部分描述了现代经验,包括在特定类型疼痛中的疗效,并以最近的成果作为结尾,这些成果凸显了在无法手术的外周血管疾病或心肌缺血中可以实现的疼痛缓解。多年来,对那些可能受脊髓刺激影响的递质的研究集中在生长抑素、胆囊收缩素(CCK)、血管活性肠肽(VIP)、神经降压素和其他胺类物质上,尽管只有P物质与之相关。最近,在动物研究中,γ-氨基丁酸能系统受影响的证据可能解释了脊髓刺激后经常成功抑制异常性疼痛的现象。在过去八年里,很多注意力都集中在使用慢性神经性疼痛模型的研究上。虽然PNS作为一种缓解疼痛方式具有很大潜力,但由于技术和手术技能不断发展,早期的电极系统及其手术植入产生了不同的结果。这些结果极大地减少了PNS的持续发展,随后人们的注意力转向了SCS。SCS的现代发展及结果研究,特别是与失败的脊柱手术综合征[FBSS]以及慢性区域疼痛综合征的周围神经手术结果相关的研究,使这两种治疗方式在难治性神经性疼痛患者的持续管理中都占有一席之地。最后一部分讨论外周血管和心肌缺血性疼痛,这可能是刺激产生镇痛作用中最令人兴奋的发展之一,正如所讨论的论文所示,它可以提供其他治疗方式无法达到的镇痛水平和疗效。SCS和PNS在管理那些对保守治疗或其他传统治疗无效的疾病方面发挥着重要作用。