Trial reportActa neurochirurgica2023
Effect of low-frequency dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain.
Trial report in Acta neurochirurgica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07170722 (Efficacy of Sub-Threshold Dorsal Root Ganglion), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Efficacy of Sub-Threshold Dorsal Root Ganglion (DRG) Stimulation Versus Sham in Established Responders: A Randomised, Double-Blind, Two-Period Crossover Trial
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Continuous electrical stimulation of the dorsal root ganglion (drg-s) as a salvation therapy in patients previously treated with spinal cord stimulation. systematic review and pooled analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation for Postherpetic Neuralgia: A Pilot Scoping Review of the Current Evidence.Cureus · 2025Review
- A meta-analysis of modern neuro-stimulation modalities-Advances in neuro-stimulation techniques.Surgical neurology international · 2025Article
- Tonic Stimulation of Dorsal Root Ganglion Results in Progressive Decline in Recruitment of Aα/β-Fibers in Rats.Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2024Article
- A Narrative Review of the Dorsal Root Ganglia and Spinal Cord Mechanisms of Action of Neuromodulation Therapies in Neuropathic Pain.Brain sciences · 2024Review
- Pathology of pain and its implications for therapeutic interventions.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2024Review
- Mechanisms of Action of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Comparison of the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation and dorsal root ganglion stimulation in the treatment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a prospective, cohort-controlled study.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe role of stimulation parameters, especially stimulation frequency is not well understood in dorsal root ganglion stimulation. Previous studies documented higher effectiveness for frequencies as low as 20 Hz, but there is evidence that even lower values could lead to better outcomes. In this study, we investigate the influence of low-frequency DRG-S.
methodThis is a randomized double-blind clinical trial with a crossover design. Patients with an already implanted DRG-S system were included and randomly tested with 4 Hz, 20 Hz, 60 Hz, and sham stimulation. Amplitude was adjusted to subthreshold values for each frequency. Each frequency was tested for 5 days, followed by a 2-day washout period. Patients were assessed using VAS, McGill Pain Questionnaire, EQ-5D-5L, and Beck Depression Inventory.
resultsSeventeen patients were in included. Time between inclusion in this study and primary implant was 32.8 months. Baseline stimulation frequency was 20 Hz in all patients. Mean baseline pain intensity was VAS 3.2 (SD 2.2). With 4-Hz stimulation, VAS was 3.8 (SD 1.9), with 20 Hz VAS 4.2 (SD 2.0) and with 60 Hz VAS 4.6 (SD 2.7). Worst pain control was seen with sham stimulation with a VAS of 5.3 (SD 3.0). Stimulation with 4 Hz achieved lower VAS scores, but this was only statistically significant when compared to sham (p = 0.001). A similar trend favoring 4-Hz stimulation was seen using the Beck Depression Inventory, but in this case no statistical significance was found. Outcomes of McGill Pain Questionnaire and EQ-5D-5L favored 20 Hz stimulation, but again without statistical significance.
conclusionsLow-frequency stimulation was not significantly better than classic 20-Hz stimulation in relieving pain intensity; the study might however be underpowered. Longer washout and observational periods might also be necessary to show clear differences in frequency response.
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.