Early epidural lead migration in spinal cord stimulator trials: A case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) devices are routinely trialed to assess pain and functional improvement before permanent lead implantation. Lead migration is a common complication that may cause a loss of therapeutic effect in patients who may otherwise benefit from SCS. The timing of lead migration during the trial period is currently unknown. Objectives: We hypothesize that significant lead migration may occur early in the SCS trial period, such as postoperative day 1 or 2, which may allow for contact stimulation adjustment to prevent false negative trial results. As such, in this study, we aim to evaluate the incidence and distance of lead migration in early thoracic SCS trial period. Methods: We performed a case series of 27 patients ≥19 years of age who received differential target multiplexed thoracic SCS trials for chronic neuropathic pain from July 1, 2020 to July 1, 2023. Patients with a neuropathic pain diagnosis failing medical treatment, without structural pathology limiting epidural access, and with psychiatric clearance for suitability are eligible for SCS trials at our center. Pre- and post-flexion radiographs taken immediately after implantation and on postoperative day 1 or 2 were examined to assess the distance of lead migration. Clinically significant lead migration was pre-defined as ≥ 10 mm. Results: The mean (SD) distances of epidural lead migration on postoperative day 1 or 2 were 18.2 (12.9) mm and 19.1 (13.3) mm for the cephalic and caudal leads, respectively. All migrations were caudad except for one trial. Clinically significant lead migration occurred in 20/27 (74 %) patients. Conclusion: Clinically significant epidural lead migration occurs in the early SCS trial period.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".