ArticleNeuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society2023
Exceptional Cases of Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Refractory Cancer-Related Pain.
Article in Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain treatment following sacral chordoma resection: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesCancer pain has traditionally been managed with opioids, adjuvant medications, and interventions including injections, neural blockade, and intrathecal pump (ITP). Spinal cord stimulation (SCS), although increasingly used for conditions such as failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome, is not currently recommended for cancer pain. However, patients with cancer-related pain have demonstrated benefit with SCS. We sought to better characterize these patients and the benefit of SCS in exceptional cases of refractory pain secondary to progression of disease or evolving treatment-related complications. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a single-center, retrospective case series at a tertiary cancer center. Adults ≥18 years old with active cancer and evolving pain secondary to disease progression or treatment, whose symptoms were refractory to systemic opioids, and who underwent SCS trial followed by percutaneous implantation between 2016 and 2021 were included. Descriptive statistics included mean, SD, median, and interquartile range (IQR).
resultsEight patients met the inclusion criteria. The average age at SCS trial was 60.0 (SD: ±11.6) years, and 50% were men. Compared with baseline, the median (IQR) change in pain score by numeric rating scale (NRS) after trial was -3 (2). At an average of 14 days after implant, the median (IQR) change in NRS and daily oral morphine equivalents were -2 (3.5) and -126 mg (1095 mg), respectively. At a median of 63 days after implant, the corresponding values were -3 (0.75) and -96 mg (711 mg). There was no significant change in adjuvant therapies after SCS implantation at follow-up. Six patients were discharged within two days after implantation. Two patients were readmitted for pain control within the follow-up period.
conclusionsIn patients with cancer-related pain, SCS may significantly relieve pain, reduce systemic daily opioid consumption, and potentially decrease hospital length of stay and readmission for pain control. It may be appropriate to consider an SCS trial before ITP in select cases of cancer-related pain.
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.