Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33616178›Full record

ArticlePain medicine (Malden, Mass.)2021

Percutaneous Peripheral Nerve Stimulation of the Medial Branch Nerves for the Treatment of Chronic Axial Back Pain in Patients After Radiofrequency Ablation.

Timothy R Deer, Christopher A Gilmore, Mehul J Desai, Sean C Li, Michael J DePalma, Thomas J Hopkins, Abram H Burgher, David A Spinner, Steven P Cohen, Meredith J McGee and 1 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Pain Management: A Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Timothy R DeerSpine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, West Virginia, USA.
Christopher A GilmoreCenter for Clinical Research, Winston Salem, North Carolina, USA.
Mehul J DesaiInternational Spine Pain and Performance Center, George Washington University, School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA.
Sean C LiPremier Pain Centers, Shrewsbury, New Jersey, USA.
Michael J DePalmaVirginia iSpine Physicians, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
Thomas J HopkinsDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Abram H BurgherThe Pain Center, Peoria, Arizona, USA.
David A SpinnerMount Sinai Health System, New York, New York, USA.
Steven P CohenJohns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Meredith J McGeeSPR Therapeutics, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Joseph W BoggsSPR Therapeutics, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Sprint PNS System (United States) · USCenter for Clinical Research (United States) · USDuke University · USGeorge Washington University · USJohns Hopkins University · USMount Sinai Health System · USPain Management Centers Of America · USThe Spine & Nerve Centers of the Virginias · USVirginia Spine Research Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveLumbar radiofrequency ablation is a commonly used intervention for chronic back pain. However, the pain typically returns, and though retreatment may be successful, the procedure involves destruction of the medial branch nerves, which denervates the multifidus. Repeated procedures typically have diminishing returns, which can lead to opioid use, surgery, or implantation of permanent neuromodulation systems. The objective of this report is to demonstrate the potential use of percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) as a minimally invasive, nondestructive, motor-sparing alternative to repeat radiofrequency ablation and more invasive surgical procedures.

designProspective, multicenter trial.

methodsIndividuals with a return of chronic axial pain after radiofrequency ablation underwent implantation of percutaneous PNS leads targeting the medial branch nerves. Stimulation was delivered for up to 60 days, after which the leads were removed. Participants were followed up to 5 months after the start of PNS. Outcomes included pain intensity, disability, and pain interference.

resultsHighly clinically significant (≥50%) reductions in average pain intensity were reported by a majority of participants (67%, n = 10/15) after 2 months with PNS, and a majority experienced clinically significant improvements in functional outcomes, as measured by disability (87%, n = 13/15) and pain interference (80%, n = 12/15). Five months after PNS, 93% (n = 14/15) reported clinically meaningful improvement in one or more outcome measures, and a majority experienced clinically meaningful improvements in all three outcomes (i.e., pain intensity, disability, and pain interference).

conclusionsPercutaneous PNS has the potential to shift the pain management paradigm by providing an effective, nondestructive, motor-sparing neuromodulation treatment.

Indexed as

Radiofrequency AblationTranscutaneous Electric Nerve StimulationBack PainHumansPeripheral NervesProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeChronic PainLow Back PainPercutaneous Peripheral Nerve StimulationRadiofrequency Ablation

Identifiers

PMID33616178
PMCPMC7971467
OpenAlexW3131610529

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.