TY - JOUR
T1 - Effect of Burst Stimulation Evaluated in Patients Familiar With Spinal Cord Stimulation
AU - Tjepkema-Cloostermans, Marleen C.
AU - de Vos, Cecile C.
AU - Wolters, Rian
AU - Dijkstra-Scholten, Cindy
AU - Lenders, Mathieu W.P.M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 International Neuromodulation Society
PY - 2016/7
Y1 - 2016/7
N2 - Objective: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used for treating intractable neuropathic pain. It has been suggested that burst SCS (five pulses at 500 Hz, delivered 40 times per second) suppresses neuropathic pain at least as well as conventional tonic SCS, but without evoking paraesthesia. The efficacy of paraesthesia-free high and low amplitude burst SCS for the treatment of neuropathic pain in patients who are already familiar with tonic SCS was evaluated. Materials and Methods: Forty patients receiving conventional (30–120 Hz) tonic SCS for at least six months were included. All patients received high and low amplitude burst SCS, for a two-week period in a double blind randomized crossover design, with a two-week period of tonic stimulation in between. The average visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain during the last three days of each stimulation period were evaluated as well as quality of life (QoL) scores, and patient's preferences. Results: Average VAS score for pain were lower during high (40, p = 0.013) and low amplitude burst stimulation (42, p = 0.053) compared with tonic stimulation (52). QoL scores did not differ significantly. At the individual level 58% of the patients experienced significant additional pain reduction (>30% decrease in VAS for pain) during high and/or low amplitude burst stimulation. Eleven patients preferred tonic stimulation, fifteen high, and fourteen low amplitude burst stimulation. Conclusion: Burst stimulation is in general more effective than tonic stimulation. Individual patients can highly benefit from burst stimulation; however, the therapeutic range of burst stimulation amplitudes requires individual assessment.
AB - Objective: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used for treating intractable neuropathic pain. It has been suggested that burst SCS (five pulses at 500 Hz, delivered 40 times per second) suppresses neuropathic pain at least as well as conventional tonic SCS, but without evoking paraesthesia. The efficacy of paraesthesia-free high and low amplitude burst SCS for the treatment of neuropathic pain in patients who are already familiar with tonic SCS was evaluated. Materials and Methods: Forty patients receiving conventional (30–120 Hz) tonic SCS for at least six months were included. All patients received high and low amplitude burst SCS, for a two-week period in a double blind randomized crossover design, with a two-week period of tonic stimulation in between. The average visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain during the last three days of each stimulation period were evaluated as well as quality of life (QoL) scores, and patient's preferences. Results: Average VAS score for pain were lower during high (40, p = 0.013) and low amplitude burst stimulation (42, p = 0.053) compared with tonic stimulation (52). QoL scores did not differ significantly. At the individual level 58% of the patients experienced significant additional pain reduction (>30% decrease in VAS for pain) during high and/or low amplitude burst stimulation. Eleven patients preferred tonic stimulation, fifteen high, and fourteen low amplitude burst stimulation. Conclusion: Burst stimulation is in general more effective than tonic stimulation. Individual patients can highly benefit from burst stimulation; however, the therapeutic range of burst stimulation amplitudes requires individual assessment.
KW - burst stimulation
KW - crossover study
KW - diabetic neuropathic pain
KW - failed back surgery syndrome
KW - neuropathic pain
KW - peripheral neuropathy
KW - spinal cord stimulation
KW - stimulation amplitude
KW - tonic stimulation
KW - n/a OA procedure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84979491931&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/ner.12429
DO - 10.1111/ner.12429
M3 - Article
C2 - 27059278
AN - SCOPUS:84979491931
SN - 1094-7159
VL - 19
SP - 492
EP - 497
JO - Neuromodulation
JF - Neuromodulation
IS - 5
ER -