A Survey on the Choice of Spinal Cord Stimulation Parameters and Implantable Pulse Generators and on Reasons for Explantation
Objective: Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) is a vital treatment for chronic intractable pain. In the last few years, the field has undergone dramatic changes in new waveform and frequency introduction as well as device miniaturization. It is important to understand contemporary practice patterns regarding these parameters.
Methods: We surveyed the active membership of Spine Intervention Society (SIS), and American Society of Regional Anesthesia (ASRA) on their practices regarding various aspects of Spinal Cord Stimulation therapy. Here we report on SCS waveform usage, battery types, and causes of explant in this cohort of providers.
Results: There was similar degree of usage of tonic, burst, and 10 kHz usage at 71.5%, 74.1% and 61.7% respectively. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation was used by 32.6% and other modes of stimulation by 13.5%. Rechargeable systems were often or always used by 67.2% whereas 10% never used a rechargeable system. Most common cause of explant was loss of effectiveness, reported by 53.7%.
Conclusion: There has been significant adoption of new waveforms in daily practice of spinal cord stimulation therapy and there is robust mixed usage of new waveforms and frequencies. Rechargeable systems are the most commonly used but primary cell is also used in significant numbers. Loss of efficacy remains the most common cause of explant for the majority of practitioners. This survey establishes practice patterns of SCS usage regarding these important variables against which future changes can be gauged.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2022 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2022 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:14 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Orthopedic reviews - 14(2022), 4 vom: 05., Seite 39648 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Gill, Jatinder S [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Explantation |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 17.11.2022 published: Electronic-eCollection Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.52965/001c.39648 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM348949065 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM348949065 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226041509.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.52965/001c.39648 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1163.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM348949065 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)36381501 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Gill, Jatinder S |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 2 | |a A Survey on the Choice of Spinal Cord Stimulation Parameters and Implantable Pulse Generators and on Reasons for Explantation |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 17.11.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic-eCollection | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Objective: Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) is a vital treatment for chronic intractable pain. In the last few years, the field has undergone dramatic changes in new waveform and frequency introduction as well as device miniaturization. It is important to understand contemporary practice patterns regarding these parameters | ||
| 520 | |a Methods: We surveyed the active membership of Spine Intervention Society (SIS), and American Society of Regional Anesthesia (ASRA) on their practices regarding various aspects of Spinal Cord Stimulation therapy. Here we report on SCS waveform usage, battery types, and causes of explant in this cohort of providers | ||
| 520 | |a Results: There was similar degree of usage of tonic, burst, and 10 kHz usage at 71.5%, 74.1% and 61.7% respectively. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation was used by 32.6% and other modes of stimulation by 13.5%. Rechargeable systems were often or always used by 67.2% whereas 10% never used a rechargeable system. Most common cause of explant was loss of effectiveness, reported by 53.7% | ||
| 520 | |a Conclusion: There has been significant adoption of new waveforms in daily practice of spinal cord stimulation therapy and there is robust mixed usage of new waveforms and frequencies. Rechargeable systems are the most commonly used but primary cell is also used in significant numbers. Loss of efficacy remains the most common cause of explant for the majority of practitioners. This survey establishes practice patterns of SCS usage regarding these important variables against which future changes can be gauged | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Explantation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Implantable pulse generators | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Non-rechargeable implantable pulse generators | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Rechargeable | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Waveforms | |
| 650 | 4 | |a spinal cord stimulation | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kohan, Lynn R |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hasoon, Jamal |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Urits, Ivan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Viswanath, Omar |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Cai, Viet L |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yazdi, Cyrus |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Aner, Musa M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kaye, Alan D |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Simopoulos, Thomas T |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Orthopedic reviews |d 2009 |g 14(2022), 4 vom: 05., Seite 39648 |w (DE-627)NLM202030040 |x 2035-8164 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:14 |g year:2022 |g number:4 |g day:05 |g pages:39648 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.52965/001c.39648 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 14 |j 2022 |e 4 |b 05 |h 39648 | ||