MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024978309 · doi:10.36076/ppj.2017.106

Successful Long-term Nerve Root Stimulationfor Chronic Neuropathic Pain: A Real World,Single Center Canadian Experience

2017· article· en· W3024978309 on OpenAlexaffabout
Keith W. MacDougall

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Physician · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity HospitalWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVisual analogue scaleNeuropathic painDermatomeAnesthesiaChronic painSingle CenterNeurostimulationSpinal cord stimulatorGroinProspective cohort studySurgeryStimulationSpinal cord stimulationPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-established treatment for chronic neuropathic pain in the lower limbs. However, some patients have pain in distributions that are difficult to target specifically and consistently with SCS. This often involves pain in the groin or upper limbs, or pain limited to a specific dermatome. We hypothesized that dorsal nerve root stimulation (DNRS) would provide similar pain relief for these patients, compared to our results using SCS. OBJECTIVES: In this study we report our experience treating patients with chronic neuropathic pain using SCS and DNRS. STUDY DESIGN: Open label, prospective study that includes all patients treated with a new trial stimulator system at a single center between July 1, 2011, and October 31, 2013. SETTING: Academic university neurosurgical pain center. METHODS: One hundred thirty-two consecutive patients had trials of spinal stimulation. Seventy-six patients went on to permanent implants, of which 26 received only DNRS, 47 only SCS, and 3 both. The technique was selected based on clinical assessment and intraoperative test stimulation. Other than pain location and diagnosis, the DNRS and SCS groups had similar baseline characteristics. Follow-up is reported at 12 months. Patients were assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, the SF-36 for quality of life, and the morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD). RESULTS: At 12 months, the average VAS score for the DNRS group had decreased from 7.5 (SD 1.4) to 4.4 (SD 2.6) and 47% of patients with permanent implants achieved > 50% pain reduction. There were improvements in all subscores and component summary scores of the SF-36. The MEDD had been reduced in 55% of the patients with available data. There was no significant difference in complication or revision rates between the 2 groups. LIMITATIONS: Patients were not randomized to treatment groups, and instead were assigned to SCS or DNRS based on what was expected to provide superior pain coverage. There is incomplete follow-up data for some patients due to missed clinic visits. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, DNRS provided excellent pain reduction, quality of life improvement, and opioid medication use decreases. We conclude that it is an effective long-term treatment for chronic neuropathic pain.Key words: Spinal cord stimulation, dorsal nerve root stimulation, lumbar, thoracic, cervical, neuropathic pain, neuromodulation, clinical effectiveness, chronic pain, visual analogue scale.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain PhysicianSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207