Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37642628›Full record

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.

Timothy Deer, Christopher Gilligan, Steven Falowski, Mehul Desai, Julie Pilitsis, Jessica Jameson, Susan Moeschler, Robert Heros, Edward Tavel, Anne Christopher and 21 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.0field-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.

NCT04479787 nacompletednot on this map

Dorsal Spinal Cord Stimulation vs Medical Management for the Treatment of Low Back Pain (DISTINCT)

TypeinterventionalSponsorAbbott Medical DevicesRan2020 to 2024Enrolled270ConditionsChronic Low-Back Pain, Refractory Pain, Neuropathic PainArmsSpinal Cord Stimulation, Conventional Medical Management
NCT06585033 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Therapy-Resistant Neuropathic Pain After Lumbar Spinal Surgery - A Randomized, Double-Blind, Sham-Controlled, Cross-over Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorSahlgrenska University HospitalRan2024 to 2027Enrolled50ConditionsChronic Postoperative PainArmsSpinal cord stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Implementation of Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome (PSPS): Mechanism-Based Recommendations.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2026
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Paddle leads for the treatment of nonsurgical back pain-The DISTINCT study.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2025
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

31 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.

Timothy DeerThe Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USA.
Christopher GilliganBrigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Steven FalowskiCenter for Interventional Pain & Spine, Lancaster, PA, USA.
Mehul DesaiInternational Spine, Pain & Performance Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Julie PilitsisFlorida Atlantic University, FL, USA.
Jessica JamesonAxis Spine Center, ID, USA.
Susan MoeschlerMayo Clinic, Rochester, NY, USA.
Robert HerosSpinal Diagnostics, OR, USA.
Edward TavelClinical Trials of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Anne ChristopherSaint Louis Pain Consultants, Chesterfield, MO, USA.
Denis PattersonNevada Advanced Pain Specialists, Reno, NV, USA.
Sayed WaheziMontefiore Medical Center-Waters Place, New York, NY, USA.
Jacqueline WeisbeinNapa Valley Orthopedic Medical Group, Napa, CA, USA.
Ajay AntonyThe Orthopaedic Institute, FL, USA.
Robert FunkIndiana Spine Group, IN, USA.
Mohab IbrahimBanner University Medical Center Tucson Campus, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Chi LimCarolina Orthopaedic & Neurosurgical Associates, SC, USA.
Derron WilsonGoodman Campbell Brain & Spine, IN, USA.
Michael FishellAdvanced Pain Care, NV, USA.
Keith ScarfoRhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USA.
David DickersonNorthshore University HealthSystem, Chicago, IL, USA.
Edward BraunKansas University Medical Center, KS, USA.
Patrick BuchananSpanish Hills Interventional Pain Specialists, Camarillo, CA, USA.
Robert M LevyAnesthesia Pain Care Consultants-Tamarac.
Nathan MillerCoastal Pain & Spinal Diagnostics Medical Group, Carlsbad, CA, USA.
Jonathan DuncanBurkhart Research Institute for Orthopaedics, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Jijun XuThe Cleveland Clinic Foundation, OH, USA.
Kenneth CandidoChicago Anesthesia Associates, SC, Chicago, IL, USA.
Scott KreinerBarrow Brain & Spine-Ahwatukee, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Marie E FaheyAbbott Labs, Austin, TX, USA.
James YueConnecticut Orthopaedics, CT, USA.
International Spine, Pain & Performance · USMedical Advanced Pain Specialists · USSpinal Diagnostics and Treatment Center · USAbbott Fund · USAdvanced Breast Care · USBanner - University Medical Center Tucson · USBarrow Brain and Spine · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USCarolina Neurosurgery and Spine Associates · USCleveland Clinic · USClinical Trials of South Carolina · USFlorida Atlantic University · USIndiana Spine Group · USMayo Clinic in Florida · USMontefiore Medical Center · USNapa Valley College · USNorthShore University HealthSystem · USOphthalmology Consultants · USPain and Rehabilitation Medicine · USProvidence College · US

Funding

Complement in Paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathyK08CA228039 · NCI · CLEVELAND CLINIC LERNER COM-CWRU · PI XU, JIJUN · 2020 to 2024
$1.2M
NCI NIH HHS K08 CA228039
6 · The paper itself

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

Chronic PainLow Back PainSpinal Cord StimulationBack PainHumansProspective StudiesTreatment Outcomecomposite outcomespersistent spinal pain syndromerefractory chronic low back painspinal cord stimulation

Identifiers

PMID37642628
PMCPMC10801705
OpenAlexW4386213968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.