15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Predictors of Pain Relief Following Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Back and Leg Pain and Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We sought to assess the extent to which pain relief in chronic back and leg pain (CBLP) following spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is influenced by patient-related factors, including pain location, and technology factors. A number of electronic databases were searched with citation searching of included papers and recent systematic reviews. All study designs were included. The primary outcome was pain relief following SCS, we also sought pain score (pre- and post-SCS). Multiple predictive factors were examined: location of pain, history of back surgery, initial level of pain, litigation/worker's compensation, age, gender, duration of pain, duration of follow-up, publication year, continent of data collection, study design, quality score, method of SCS lead implant, and type of SCS lead. Between-study association in predictive factors and pain relief were assessed by meta-regression. Seventy-four studies ( N = 3,025 patients with CBLP) met the inclusion criteria; 63 reported data to allow inclusion in a quantitative analysis. Evidence of substantial statistical heterogeneity ( P < 0.0001) in level of pain relief following SCS was noted. The mean level of pain relief across studies was 58% (95% CI: 53% to 64%, random effects) at an average follow-up of 24 months. Multivariable meta-regression analysis showed no predictive patient or technology factors. SCS was effective in reducing pain irrespective of the location of CBLP. This review supports SCS as an effective pain relieving treatment for CBLP with predominant leg pain with or without a prior history of back surgery. Randomized controlled trials need to confirm the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of SCS in the CLBP population with predominant low back pain.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Spinal cord stimulation for patients with failed back surgery syndrome or complex regional pain syndrome: a systematic review of effectiveness and complications.

          We conducted a systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in relieving pain and improving functioning for patients with failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). We also reviewed SCS complications. Literature searches yielded 583 articles, of which seven met the inclusion criteria for the review of SCS effectiveness, and 15 others met the criteria only for the review of SCS complications. Two authors independently extracted data from each article, and then resolved discrepancies by discussion. We identified only one randomized trial, which found that physical therapy (PT) plus SCS, compared with PT alone, had a statistically significant but clinically modest effect at 6 and 12 months in relieving pain among patients with CRPS. Similarly, six other studies of much lower methodological quality suggest mild to moderate improvement in pain with SCS. Pain relief with SCS appears to decrease over time. The one randomized trial suggested no benefits of SCS in improving patient functioning. Although life-threatening complications with SCS are rare, other adverse events are frequent. On average, 34% of patients who received a stimulator had an adverse occurrence. We conclude with suggestions for methodologically stronger studies to provide more definitive data regarding the effectiveness of SCS in relieving pain and improving functioning, short- and long-term, among patients with chronic pain syndromes.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            The back pain revolution

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Spinal cord stimulation versus reoperation for failed back surgery syndrome: a cost effectiveness and cost utility analysis based on a randomized, controlled trial.

              We analyzed the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of treating failed back-surgery syndrome using spinal cord stimulation (SCS) versus reoperation. A disinterested third party collected charge data for the first 42 patients in a randomized controlled crossover trial. We computed the difference in cost with regard to success (cost-effectiveness) and mean quality-adjusted life years (cost-utility). We analyzed the patient-charge data with respect to intention to treat (costs and outcomes as a randomized group), treated as intended (costs as randomized; crossover failure assigned to a randomized group), and final treatment costs and outcomes. By mean 3.1-year follow-up, 13 of 21 patients (62%) crossed from reoperation versus 5 of 19 patients (26%) who crossed from SCS (P < 0.025) [corrected]. The mean cost per success was US $117,901 for crossovers to SCS. No crossovers to reoperation achieved success despite a mean per-patient expenditure of US $260,584. The mean per-patient costs were US $31,530 for SCS versus US $38,160 for reoperation (intention to treat), US $48,357 for SCS versus US $105,928 for reoperation (treated as intended), and US $34,371 for SCS versus US $36,341 for reoperation (final treatment). SCS was dominant (more effective and less expensive) in the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and incremental cost-utility ratios. A bootstrapped simulation for incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years confirmed SCS's dominance, with approximately 72% of the cost results occurring below US policymakers' "maximum willingness to pay" threshold. SCS was less expensive and more effective than reoperation in selected failed back-surgery syndrome patients, and should be the initial therapy of choice. SCS is most cost-effective when patients forego repeat operation. Should SCS fail, reoperation is unlikely to succeed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Pain Pract
                Pain Pract
                papr
                Pain Practice
                BlackWell Publishing Ltd (Oxford, UK )
                1530-7085
                1533-2500
                July 2014
                08 July 2013
                : 14
                : 6
                : 489-505
                Affiliations
                [* ]Institute of Health Services Research, University of Exeter Medical School Exeter, U.K
                []Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care and of Neurosurgery, The George Washington University Medical Center Washington, District of Columbia, U.S.A
                []Service de Neurochirurgie, CHU Poitiers Poitiers, France
                Author notes
                Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Rod Taylor, PhD, Chair in Health Services Research, University of Exeter Medical School, Veysey Building, Salmon Pool Lane, Exeter EX2 4SG, U.K. E-mail: rod.taylor@ 123456pms.ac.uk .
                Article
                10.1111/papr.12095
                4238825
                23834386
                0fca910f-e797-40d2-baca-48573804a729
                © 2013 The Authors Pain Practice Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of World Institute of Pain

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

                History
                : 16 April 2013
                : 29 May 2013
                Categories
                Original Articles

                spinal cord stimulation,back pain,systematic review,meta-regression analysis,predictive factors,outcomes

                Comments

                Comment on this article