Low-frequency dorsal root stimulation is effective for various pain etiologies and pain locations.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Pain Practice Pub Date : 2024-06-06 DOI:10.1111/papr.13392
Pedram Tabatabaei, Pavlina Kakas, Linda Bredemo, Josef Salomonsson
{"title":"Low-frequency dorsal root stimulation is effective for various pain etiologies and pain locations.","authors":"Pedram Tabatabaei, Pavlina Kakas, Linda Bredemo, Josef Salomonsson","doi":"10.1111/papr.13392","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S) has emerged as a novel therapeutic approach for managing chronic neuropathic pain.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study aims to compare the effectiveness of 4-20 Hz DRG-S through a retrospective analysis of a cohort of 28 patients with various neuropathic pain etiologies and pain locations.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patient responses to both stimulation frequencies were examined using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) assessments. Factors such as patient preference and satisfaction were also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results indicate that 4 Hz DRG-S is not only as effective as 20 Hz stimulation but may also surpass it. Among the 28 patients, 26 assessed 4 Hz stimulation to be at least as effective as 20 Hz, with the majority (22 out of 26) considering 4 Hz stimulation superior. After trying 4 Hz stimulation, 24 out of 28 patients chose it over 20 Hz, while two patients opted for a combination of both settings. Only two patients reverted to their original 20 Hz stimulation program. A statistically significant pain reduction of 24% was observed when comparing the effects of 4 Hz versus 20 Hz.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The study highlights the broader applicability of low-frequency DRG-S, extending its benefits beyond the realm of low back pain. Patients with diverse pain etiologies and locations experienced comparable positive outcomes, suggesting that the advantages of low-frequency stimulation are not confined to specific pain types or locations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study emphasizes the potential of 4 Hz DRG-S as a valuable alternative to the standard 20 Hz stimulation. Although the exact mechanisms require further investigation, the observed clinical benefits and patient preferences for low-frequency stimulation suggest its viability across diverse pain indications and locations. Additional research is necessary to substantiate these findings and assess the durability and economic implications of low-frequency DRG-S.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.13392","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S) has emerged as a novel therapeutic approach for managing chronic neuropathic pain.

Aims: This study aims to compare the effectiveness of 4-20 Hz DRG-S through a retrospective analysis of a cohort of 28 patients with various neuropathic pain etiologies and pain locations.

Materials and methods: Patient responses to both stimulation frequencies were examined using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) assessments. Factors such as patient preference and satisfaction were also evaluated.

Results: The results indicate that 4 Hz DRG-S is not only as effective as 20 Hz stimulation but may also surpass it. Among the 28 patients, 26 assessed 4 Hz stimulation to be at least as effective as 20 Hz, with the majority (22 out of 26) considering 4 Hz stimulation superior. After trying 4 Hz stimulation, 24 out of 28 patients chose it over 20 Hz, while two patients opted for a combination of both settings. Only two patients reverted to their original 20 Hz stimulation program. A statistically significant pain reduction of 24% was observed when comparing the effects of 4 Hz versus 20 Hz.

Discussion: The study highlights the broader applicability of low-frequency DRG-S, extending its benefits beyond the realm of low back pain. Patients with diverse pain etiologies and locations experienced comparable positive outcomes, suggesting that the advantages of low-frequency stimulation are not confined to specific pain types or locations.

Conclusion: This study emphasizes the potential of 4 Hz DRG-S as a valuable alternative to the standard 20 Hz stimulation. Although the exact mechanisms require further investigation, the observed clinical benefits and patient preferences for low-frequency stimulation suggest its viability across diverse pain indications and locations. Additional research is necessary to substantiate these findings and assess the durability and economic implications of low-frequency DRG-S.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
低频背根刺激对各种疼痛病因和疼痛部位都有效。
背景:背根神经节刺激(DRG-S背根神经节刺激(DRG-S)已成为治疗慢性神经病理性疼痛的一种新型治疗方法。目的:本研究旨在通过对28例不同神经病理性疼痛病因和疼痛部位的患者进行回顾性分析,比较4-20赫兹DRG-S的有效性:采用数字评定量表(NRS)和患者总体变化印象(PGIC)评估方法检查患者对两种刺激频率的反应。此外,还对患者的偏好和满意度等因素进行了评估:结果:研究结果表明,4 赫兹 DRG-S 不仅与 20 赫兹刺激同样有效,而且可能更胜一筹。在 28 名患者中,26 人认为 4 赫兹刺激至少与 20 赫兹刺激同样有效,大多数患者(26 人中有 22 人)认为 4 赫兹刺激更有效。在尝试了 4 赫兹刺激后,28 名患者中有 24 人选择了 4 赫兹刺激而不是 20 赫兹刺激,还有两名患者选择了两种刺激相结合。只有两名患者恢复了原来的 20 赫兹刺激程序。在比较 4 赫兹与 20 赫兹的效果时,发现疼痛明显减轻了 24%:讨论:这项研究强调了低频 DRG-S 更广泛的适用性,将其益处扩展到腰背痛领域之外。不同病因和疼痛部位的患者都获得了相似的积极疗效,这表明低频刺激的优势并不局限于特定的疼痛类型或部位:这项研究强调了 4 赫兹 DRG-S 作为标准 20 赫兹刺激的一种有价值的替代疗法的潜力。虽然确切的机制还需要进一步研究,但观察到的临床益处和患者对低频刺激的偏好表明,低频刺激在不同的疼痛适应症和部位都具有可行性。有必要开展更多研究来证实这些发现,并评估低频 DRG-S 的耐用性和经济意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Pain Practice
Pain Practice ANESTHESIOLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
3.80%
发文量
92
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Pain Practice, the official journal of the World Institute of Pain, publishes international multidisciplinary articles on pain and analgesia that provide its readership with up-to-date research, evaluation methods, and techniques for pain management. Special sections including the Consultant’s Corner, Images in Pain Practice, Case Studies from Mayo, Tutorials, and the Evidence-Based Medicine combine to give pain researchers, pain clinicians and pain fellows in training a systematic approach to continuing education in pain medicine. Prior to publication, all articles and reviews undergo peer review by at least two experts in the field.
期刊最新文献
The sacroiliac joint. Lead fracture in dorsal root ganglion stimulation. Caudal epidural steroid injections: Is ultrasound guidance sufficient? Narrative review: Managing buprenorphine and opioid use disorder in the perioperative setting. Challenges in removing an aged spinal cord stimulator: A case study of complete fracture in a 9-year-old S-series paddle lead.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1