Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31143246›Full record

ReviewAsian journal of neurosurgery

Spinal Cord Stimulation in Pregnant Patients: Current Perspectives of Indications, Complications, and Results in Pain Control: A Systematic Review.

Bruno Camporeze, Renata Simm, Marcos Vinícius Calfat Maldaun, Paulo Henrique Pires de Aguiar

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Asian journal of neurosurgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Bruno CamporezeDepartment of Postgraduate Program in Health Science, Laboratory of Cellular and Molecular Biology and Bioactive Compounds, São Francisco University, Bragança Paulista, Brazil.
Renata SimmDepartment of Neurology, Santa Paula Hospital, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marcos Vinícius Calfat MaldaunDepartment of Neurosurgery, Hospital Santa Paula, São Paulo, Brazil.
Paulo Henrique Pires de AguiarDepartment of Neurosurgery, Postgraduate Program in Health Science, Institute of Medical Assistance of The State Public Servant (IAMSPE), São Paulo, Brazil.
Hospital do Servidor Público Estadual · BRHospital Santa Paula · BRHospital São Paulo · BRUniversidade São Francisco · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been described as a valuable neuromodulator procedure in the management of chronic medically untreated neuropathic pain. Although the use of this technique has been published in many papers, a question still remains regarding its applicability in pregnant patients. The goal of this paper is to discuss the risks, complications, and results as well as the prognosis of SCS in pregnant patients. We performed a systematic review from 1967 to 2018 using the databases MEDLINE, LILACS, SciELO, PubMed, and BIREME, utilizing language as selection criteria. Eighteen studies that met our criteria were found and tabulated. SCS is a reversible and adjustable surgical procedure, which results in patients that demonstrated a significant effect in the reduction of pain intensity in pregnant patients. The etiologies most frequent were complex regional pain and failed back pain syndromes, which together represented 94% of analyzed cases. The technical complications most frequent were lead migration (3%,

Indexed as

Neuropathic painpain managementpregnancyspinal cord stimulation

Identifiers

PMID31143246
PMCPMC6516025
OpenAlexW2942169625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.