ArticleAsian journal of neurosurgery2024
Retrograde Epidural Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Intractable Neuropathic Pain Following Spinal Cord and Cauda Equina Injuries: A Case Report and Literature Review.
Article in Asian journal of neurosurgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spinal cord stimulation: An emerging strategy for chronic pain relief after spinal cord injury.Neural regeneration research · 2026Article
- Clinical effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation in managing refractory upper-extremity pain.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
- MRI Spinal Cord Reconstruction Provides Insights into Mapping and Migration Following Percutaneous Epidural Stimulation Implantation in Spinal Cord Injury.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) offers an alternative treatment for refractory pain resulting from various etiologies. Generally, SCS electrodes are inserted in an anterograde fashion, moving from caudal to rostral direction. However, there are instances where anterograde placement is unfeasible due to technical limitations. We present the use of retrograde surgical electrode placement in SCS for a patient with extensive epidural fibrosis at the site intended for electrode insertion. A 48-year-old female suffering from refractory neuropathic pain caused from injuries to the conus medullaris and cauda equina opted for SCS. During the SCS trial procedure, challenges emerged when attempting percutaneous electrode insertion at the site of a prior T12 laminectomy. However, the trial stimulation resulted in significant pain relief. For the permanent placement of the stimulator, utilizing a surgical electrode centered at T11 vertebral level, a considerable amount of epidural fibrosis was encountered at the entry of the spine, particularly at the T12 vertebral level. To avoid dural injury and ensure accurate electrode positioning, a retrograde technique for surgical electrode was employed via partial laminectomies at the T9-T10 level. The final electrode positioning was in accordance with the preoperative plan, well-centered at the T11 vertebral level. The patient experienced sustained relief from neuropathic pain over the long term. Retrograde epidural SCS is a suitable option for cases characterized by extensive epidural fibrosis resulting from a previous spinal surgery or when the anterograde placement of the electrode is unattainable due to aberrant vertebral anatomy.
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.