Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience for the Use of Implantable Peripheral Nerve Stimulation in the Treatment of Chronic Pain
Natalie Strand,Jonathan M Hagedorn,Scott Pritzlaff,Dawood Sayed,Nomen Azeem,Alaa Abd-Elsayed,Alexander Escobar,Christopher M Lam,Timothy R Deer,Ryan S D'Souza,Mark A Huntoon
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S362204
IF: 2.8319
2022-08-24
Journal of Pain Research
Abstract:Natalie Strand, 1 Ryan S D'Souza, 2 Jonathan M Hagedorn, 3 Scott Pritzlaff, 4 Dawood Sayed, 5 Nomen Azeem, 6 Alaa Abd-Elsayed, 7 Alexander Escobar, 8 Mark A Huntoon, 9 Christopher M Lam, 5 Timothy R Deer 10 1 Department of Anesthesiology, Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA; 2 Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 3 iSpine Pain Physicians, Burnsville, MN, USA; 4 Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Division of Pain Medicine, University of California-Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA; 5 The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA; 6 Florida Spine & Pain Specialists, Bradenton, FL, USA; 7 Department of Anesthesiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA; 8 Comprehensive Centers for Pain Management, Toledo, OH, USA; 9 Department of Anesthesiology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Henrico, VA, USA; 10 The Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USA Correspondence: Natalie Strand, Department of Anesthesiology, Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA, Tel +1 480-301-8000, Fax +1 480-342-2986, Email The objective of this peripheral nerve stimulation consensus guideline is to add to the current family of consensus practice guidelines and incorporate a systematic review process. The published literature was searched from relevant electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science from database inception to March 29, 2021. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies that described peripheral nerve stimulation in patients in terms of clinical outcomes for various pain conditions, physiological mechanism of action, surgical technique, technique of placement, and adverse events. Twenty randomized controlled trials and 33 prospective observational studies were included in the systematic review process. There is Level I evidence supporting the efficacy of PNS for treatment of chronic migraine headaches via occipital nerve stimulation; chronic hemiplegic shoulder pain via stimulation of nerves innervating the trapezius, supraspinatus, and deltoid muscles; failed back surgery syndrome via subcutaneous peripheral field stimulation; and lower extremity neuropathic and lower extremity post-amputation pain. Evidence from current Level I studies combined with newer technologies facilitating less invasive and easier electrode placement make peripheral nerve stimulation an attractive alternative for managing patients with complex pain disorders. Peripheral nerve stimulation should be used judiciously as an adjunct for chronic and acute postoperative pain following adequate patient screening and positive diagnostic nerve block or stimulation trial. Keywords: post-amputation pain, low back pain, peripheral neuropathy, chronic postoperative pain While the use of peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) originated more than five decades ago, this therapy has only recently experienced a resurgence after falling out of favor for many years. In the 1960s, after the publication of the gate control theory, 1 Wall and Sweet published their first case series demonstrating decreases in pain perception throughout the entire episode of electrical stimulation of the infraorbital foramina 2,3 and Shelden reported that temporary pain relief was achieved through implantation of PNS electrodes stimulated via an implanted receiver at 14,000 Hz. 4 Over the next three decades, as evident in multiple publications, PNS treatment was mired by suboptimal outcomes, poor long-term success rates, and complications such as nerve damage or stimulation-induced fibrosis. 3,5,6 Many of the adverse occurrences could be attributed to lead migration, pulse generator locations, and other technical problems. In the 1990s, interest in PNS was revived after Weiner and Reed first described a percutaneous technique of electrode insertion in the vicinity of the greater occipital nerves to treat occipital neuralgia. 7 More recently, the emergence of a minimally invasive percutaneous approach, typically performed under ultrasound, has led to even more widespread interest in PNS as an alternative to neurosurgically implanted spinal cord stimulator (SCS) systems. 8,9 Multiple options exist for the percutaneous placement of leads which are stimulated directly with an external power source/impulse generator (IPG) or hybrid systems that have an internal IPG that is powered via an external power source. Although the exact mechanism of action of PNS is unknown, there is evidence that bot -Abstract Truncated-
clinical neurology