Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30570187›Full record

ArticleNeuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society2019

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in Experimental Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: Burst vs. Conventional Stimulation Paradigm.

Glenn Franken, Jacques Debets, Elbert A J Joosten

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Current Strategies for the Management of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Glenn FrankenDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, Pain Management and Research Centre, MUMC, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Jacques DebetsMuroidean Facility, School of Cardiovascular Diseases (CARIM), Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Elbert A J JoostenDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, Pain Management and Research Centre, MUMC, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

Abbott LaboratoriesDorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in neuropathic pain: Effect of stimulation settings and pain relief in an experimental model of painful diabetic polyneuropathy
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPainful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) is a long-term complication of diabetes mellitus (DM). Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation (DRGS) has recently emerged as a neuromodulation modality in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of burst DRGS (Burst-DRGS) and conventional DRGS (Con-DRGS) in an experimental model of PDPN. MATERIALS AND

methodsDM was induced in female Sprague-Dawley rats by intraperitoneal injection of streptozotocin (STZ, n = 48). Animals were tested for mechanical hypersensitivity (50% hind paw withdrawal threshold on Von Frey test) before, and 4 weeks after STZ injection. PDPN rats were then implanted with a unilateral bipolar lead at the L5 DRG (n = 22) and were stimulated for 30 min at days 2 and 3 postimplantation. Animals received Con-DRGS and Burst-DRGS in a randomized crossover design (n = 10), or received Sham-DRGS (n = 7) for 30 min, and were tested for mechanical hypersensitivity at baseline, 15 and 30 min during DRGS, and 15 and 30 min following DRGS. Five animals were withdrawn from the study due to electrode-related technical problems.

resultsCon-DRGS and Burst-DRGS normalized STZ-induced mechanical hypersensitivity at 15 and 30 min during stimulation. A significant difference in terms of mechanical hypersensitivity was observed between both of the stimulated groups and the Sham-DRGS group at 15 and 30 min during stimulation. Interestingly, Burst-DRGS showed signs of a residual effect at 15 min after cessation of stimulation, while this was not the case for Con-DRGS.

conclusionsUnder the conditions tested, Con-DRGS and Burst-DRGS are equally effective in attenuating STZ-induced mechanical hypersensitivity in an animal model of PDPN. Burst-DRGS showed signs of a residual effect at 15 min after cessation of stimulation, which requires further investigation.

Indexed as

Ganglia, SpinalAnimalsDiabetes Mellitus, ExperimentalDiabetic NeuropathiesFemalePainPain ManagementPain MeasurementPain ThresholdRatsRats, Sprague-DawleySpinal Cord StimulationBurst stimulationdorsal root ganglion stimulationmechanical hypersensitivityneuropathic painpainful diabetic peripheral neuropathy

Identifiers

PMID30570187
PMCPMC7027839
OpenAlexW2906356102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.