Trial reportNeuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society2023
Treatment of Refractory Low Back Pain Using Passive Recharge Burst in Patients Without Options for Corrective Surgery: Findings and Results From the DISTINCT Study, a Prospective Randomized Multicenter Controlled Trial.
Trial report 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. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Dorsal Spinal Cord Stimulation vs Medical Management for the Treatment of Low Back Pain (DISTINCT)
Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Therapy-Resistant Neuropathic Pain After Lumbar Spinal Surgery - A Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled, Cross-over Study
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Implementation of Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome (PSPS): Mechanism-Based Recommendations.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2026Guideline
- Emotional and psychosocial function after dorsal column spinal cord stimulator implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Regional anesthesia and pain medicine · 2025Pooled it
- The Analgesic Efficacy and Safety of Intramuscular Hydromorphone Versus Butorphanol for Acute Pain in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Trial.Pain research & management · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Paddle leads for the treatment of nonsurgical back pain-The DISTINCT study.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2025Trial
- Comparing Conventional Medical Management to Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Low Back Pain in a Cohort of DISTINCT RCT Patients.Journal of pain research · 2024Trial
- Passive recharge burst spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of refractory nonsurgical low back pain: 24-month results from a prospective randomized controlled trial and predictors of success.North American Spine Society journal · 2026Article
- History of SCS and patient-focused innovations: a manufacturer's perspective on the role of technology.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2026Review
- Differential target multiplexed SCS (DTM SCS): a rational hypothesis.Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2026Review
- Effectiveness of Spinal Cord Stimulation in the Treatment of Lumbar Spine Pain Syndromes.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Spinal Cord Stimulation as a Potential Therapeutic Modality for Managing Concurrent Chronic Low Back and Abdominal Pain Complicated by Device Migration: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Spooky action at a distance: neuromodulation, physiologic distress signals, and limb preservation.Burns & trauma · 2026Review
- Neuromodulation in chronic pain management: addressing persistent doubts in spinal cord stimulation.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2025Review
- A Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Spinal Cord Stimulation versus Conventional Medical Management for the Treatment of Low Back Pain Using Data from DISTINCT RCT and Medical Claims from a U.S. Commercial Payer Database.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- An Evidence-Based Consensus for the Use of Neurostimulation for the Treatment of Non-Surgical Low Back Pain: The NEURON Group.Journal of pain research · 2025Review
- A meta-analysis of modern neuro-stimulation modalities-Advances in neuro-stimulation techniques.Surgical neurology international · 2025Article
- Real-World Outcomes of Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Consecutive Institutional Experience with 505 Trials, Trial-to-Implant Ratio, Long-Term Efficacy, and Explantation Risk Factors.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- Surgical treatment of refractory low back pain using implanted BurstDR spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in a cohort of patients without options for corrective surgery: Findings and results from the DISTINCT study, a prospective randomized multi-center-controlled trial.North American Spine Society journal · 2024Article
- Twelve-month results from a randomized controlled trial comparing differential target multiplexed spinal cord stimulation and conventional spinal cord stimulation in subjects with chronic refractory axial low back pain not eligible for spine surgery.North American Spine Society journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSpinal cord stimulation (SCS) is effective for relieving chronic intractable pain conditions. The Dorsal spInal cord STImulatioN vs mediCal management for the Treatment of low back pain study evaluates the effectiveness of SCS compared with conventional medical management (CMM) in the treatment of chronic low back pain in patients who had not undergone and were not candidates for lumbar spine surgery. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients were randomized to passive recharge burst therapy (n = 162) or CMM (n = 107). They reported severe pain and disability for more than a decade and had failed a multitude of therapies. Common diagnoses included degenerative disc disease, spondylosis, stenosis, and scoliosis-yet not to a degree amenable to surgery. The six-month primary end point compared responder rates, defined by a 50% reduction in pain. Hierarchical analyses of seven secondary end points were performed in the following order: composite responder rate (numerical rating scale [NRS] or Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), NRS, ODI, Pain Catastrophizing Scale responder rate, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) responder rate, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Information System-29 in pain interference and physical function.
resultsIntention-to-treat analysis showed a significant difference in pain responders on NRS between SCS (72.6%) and CMM (7.1%) arms (p < 0.0001). Of note, 85.2% of those who received six months of therapy responded on NRS compared with 6.2% of those with CMM (p < 0.0001). All secondary end points indicated the superiority of burst therapy over CMM. A composite measure on function or pain relief showed 91% of subjects with SCS improved, compared with 16% of subjects with CMM. A substantial improvement of 30 points was observed on ODI compared with a <one-point change in the CMM arm. Three serious and 14 non-serious device- or procedure-related events were reported.
conclusionsThis study found substantial improvement at six months in back pain, back pain-related disability, pain-related emotional suffering, PGIC, pain interference, and physical function in a population with severe, debilitating back pain for more than a decade. These improvements were reported in conjunction with reduced opioid use, injection, and ablation therapy. CLINICAL
trial registrationThe Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT04479787.
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.