+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Clinical Outcomes of 1 kHz Subperception Spinal Cord Stimulation in Implanted Patients With Failed Paresthesia-Based Stimulation: Results of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial



Clinical Outcomes of 1 kHz Subperception Spinal Cord Stimulation in Implanted Patients With Failed Paresthesia-Based Stimulation: Results of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial



Neuromodulation 19(7): 731-737



Pain relief via spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has historically revolved around producing paresthesia to replace pain, with success measured by the extent of paresthesia-pain overlap. In a recent murine study, by Shechter et al., showed the superior efficacy of high frequency SCS (1 kHz and 10 kHz) at inhibiting the effects of mechanical hypersensitivity compared to sham or 50 Hz stimulation. In the same study, authors report there were no differences in efficacy between 1 kHz and 10 kHz delivered at subperception stimulation strength (80% of motor threshold). Therefore, we designed a randomized, 2 × 2 crossover study of low frequency supra-perception SCS vs. subperception SCS at 1 kHz frequency in order to test whether subperception stimulation at 1 kHz was sufficient to provide effective pain relief in human subjects. Twenty-two subjects with SCS, and inadequate pain relief based on numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) scores (>5) were enrolled, and observed for total of seven weeks (three weeks of treatment, one week wash off, and another three weeks of treatment). Subjects were asked to rate their pain on NPRS as a primary efficacy variable, and complete the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC) as secondary outcome measures. Out of 22 subjects that completed the study, 21 subjects (95%) reported improvements in average, best, and worst pain NPRS scores. All NPRS scores were significantly lower with subperception stimulation compared to paresthesia-based stimulation (p < 0.01, p < 0.05, and p < 0.05, respectively). As with NPRS scores, the treatment effect of subperception stimulation was significantly greater than that of paresthesia based stimulation on ODI scores (p = 3.9737 × 10-5 ) and PGIC scores (p = 3.0396 × 10-5 ).

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 057416361

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 27186822

DOI: 10.1111/ner.12441


Related references

Spinal cord stimulation electrode design: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing percutaneous with laminectomy electrodes: part II-clinical outcomes. Neurosurgery 57(5): 990, 2005

The effects of spinal cord stimulation in neuropathic pain are sustained: a 24-month follow-up of the prospective randomized controlled multicenter trial of the effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation. Neurosurgery 63(4): 762, 2008

Subcutaneous Stimulation as ADD-ON Therapy to Spinal Cord Stimulation Is Effective in Treating Low Back Pain in Patients With Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. Neuromodulation 19(2): 171-178, 2016

Spinal cord stimulation electrode design: prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing percutaneous and laminectomy electrodes-part I: technical outcomes. Neurosurgery 51(2): 381-9; Discussion 389-90, 2002

Spinal cord stimulation versus re-operation in patients with failed back surgery syndrome: an international multicenter randomized controlled trial (EVIDENCE study). Neuromodulation 14(4): 330-5; Discussion 335-6, 2012

Lower thoracic spinal cord stimulation to restore cough in patients with spinal cord injury: results of a National Institutes of Health-Sponsored clinical trial. Part II: clinical outcomes. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 90(5): 726-732, 2009

Spinal cord stimulation versus reoperation for failed back surgery syndrome: a cost effectiveness and cost utility analysis based on a randomized, controlled trial. Neurosurgery 63(2): E376; Author Reply E376, 2008

Spinal cord stimulation versus reoperation for failed back surgery syndrome: a cost effectiveness and cost utility analysis based on a randomized, controlled trial. Neurosurgery 61(2): 361-8; Discussion 368-9, 2007

Spinal Cord Stimulation vs. Conventional Medical Management: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Study of Patients with Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (PROCESS Study). Neuromodulation 8(4): 213-218, 2005

A prospective, randomized study of spinal cord stimulation versus reoperation for failed back surgery syndrome: initial results. Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery 62(1-4): 267-272, 1994

Long-Term Effect of Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation as Add-On Therapy to Spinal Cord Stimulation to Treat Low Back Pain in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Patients: A 12-Month Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Study. Neuromodulation 2018:, 2018

Spinal Cord Stimulation Electrode Design: A Prospective, Randomized Trial of Percutaneous versus Surgically Implanted, Insulated Electrode Arrays. Neurosurgery 45(3): 722-722, 1999

Spinal Cord Stimulation Electrode Design: A Prospective Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Percutaneous and Laminectomy Electrodes. Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery 73(1-4): 134-134, 1999

Spinal cord stimulation electrode design: A prospective randomized, controlled trial comparing percutaneous and laminectomy electrodes. StereotacticandFunctionalNeurosurgery73(1-4):134, 1999

Spinal cord stimulation and pain relief in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a prospective two-center randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care 37(11): 3016-3024, 2014