BACKGROUND CONTEXT Within the last few decades, the use of dorsal column stimulation has increased as an alternative method for the long-term treatment of chronic neuropathic pain of the axial spine and extremities. The explicit purpose of this therapy has been to replace pain in the affected area with a more favorable paresthesia. However, the electrical stimulation may elicit paresthesias which are unfavorable to a subset of patients making the therapy untenable despite adequate pain control. To address this issue, an innovative form of high-dose (HD) programming that utilizes a range of frequencies which provide paresthesia-free pain control has been clinically successful in thoracic dorsal column stimulation. To date, no such use of HD programming has been reported in cervical dorsal column stimulation. PURPOSE The purpose of this study is to evaluate the utility of high-dose stimulation in the cervical spine for the paresthesia-free treatment of upper extremity and neck pain. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING The study design follows a retrospective analysis to evaluate the history, treatment conditions and results of three patients with chronic upper extremity and neck pain treated with high-dose cervical spinal cord stimulation. A review of the literature regarding cervical spinal cord stimulation and the current state of high-dose stimulation was also undertaken. PATIENT SAMPLE Three patients, two male and one female, were included in the case series. The first patient, a 43 year old male, suffered from post-traumatic neck and right upper extremity neuropathic pain as a result of ballistic cervical spinal cord injury. The second patient, a 68 year male, presented with cervical degenerative foraminal and central moderate stenosis from C2 through C7 with neck pain and bilateral radiculopathy. The third patient, a 32 year old female, was referred for left upper extremity chronic regional pain syndrome after a work related injury, without significant cervical pathology. OUTCOME MEASURES Outcome measures in this case series were evaluated through the typical method of identifying candidacy for permanent dorsal column stimulator implantation, specifically relative percent pain relief with and without stimulation. METHODS Patients were evaluated preoperatively both clinically and radiographically to determine candidacy for a stimulator trial. Adequate patency of the cervical spinal canal on MRI and pain locations amenable to cervical spinal cord stimulation were found to be present in all patients. Each patient then underwent a stage 1 cervical spinal cord stimulator placement with externalized extension leads. Specifically, two 1 × 8 percutaneous Medtronic epidural arrays were advanced to the level of C2-3 bilaterally or eccentric to the affected side. A five-day trial of both low-dose paresthesia and high-dose paresthesia-free therapy was applied. All patients experienced greater than 50% pain relief (range 70%–90%) without paresthesias and requested permanent implantation. Stage 2 extension lead removal with generator connection and implantation was performed in all three cases using the Medtronic Intellis rechargeable generator without complication and with persistent and current paresthesia-free pain control since implantation (range 6-12 months). RESULTS During the trial period, all patients experienced greater than 50% pain relief (range 70%–90%) without paresthesias utilizing high-dose programming. Pain returned to baseline levels with the device off. Low-dose therapy was applied during the trial period as well, resulting in all cases with similar pain relief, but with the presence of paresthesias, which in all cases was less favorable to the paresthesia-free high-dose programming. After permanent implantation, all three patients continue to experience persistent and current paresthesia-free pain control (range 6-12 months). CONCLUSIONS This retrospective case series first reports and demonstrates the effectiveness of high-dose cervical spinal cord stimulation in the paresthesia-free treatment of a variety of upper extremity chronic pain generators. This suggests a potential benefit to a subset of patients who may benefit from cervical spinal cord stimulation but defer therapy due to unfavorable paresthesias. In the future, a larger study should be conducted in order to fully understand the use of high-dose cervical spinal cord stimulation. Medtronic Spinal Cord Stimulator (Approved for this indication) FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Read full abstract