ReviewCureus2020
The Effects of Spinal Cord Stimulators on End Organ Perfusion: A Literature Review.
Review in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal cord stimulators (SCS) have been gaining momentum in the last decade as their role in the management of chronic pain has become more apparent. Our intention was to search, analyze and highlight the effects of spinal cord stimulators on end-organ perfusion. We also looked at vascular diseases of atherosclerotic and nonatherosclerotic nature by examining objective evidence of improved circulation, pain control, limb salvage, and quality of life. We paid specific attention to disease processes such as cerebral hypoperfusion, Chronic-Critical Limb Ischemia, Intractable Angina Pectoris (IAP), Raynaud's syndrome and Thromboangiitis Obliterans. We performed a Medline database search for medical literature relevant to Spinal cord stimulators encompassing the years 1950 to 2019. Search terms included "Spinal cord stimulator," plus one of the following search terms: vasculopathy, stroke, cerebral blood flow, angina pectoris, diabetic ulcers, chronic critical leg ischemia, thromboangiitis obliterans and peripheral vascular disease. We included both clinical and experimental human studies that investigated the effect of SCS's on end-organ perfusion. We also investigated the pathophysiological mechanism of action of SCS's on the vasculature. We found 497 articles of which 43 more relevant and impactful articles investigating the hemodynamic effects of SCS and its possible mechanism were selected. Animal studies were excluded from the literature review as they provided heterogeneity. In addition to reporting literature supporting the use of stimulators for currently FDA approved uses, we also actively looked for potential future uses. Spinal Cord stimulators showed improvement in cerebral blood flow, increased capillary recruitment, and better quality of life in many studies. Patients also had increased exercise capacity and a significant reduction in the use of narcotic drug use and daily anginal attacks in patients suffering from IAP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.