ArticlePain and therapy2024
Durability of Evoked Compound Action Potential (ECAP)-Controlled, Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) in a Real-World European Chronic Pain Population.
Article in Pain and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05272137 (Prospective Data Collection to Evaluate the Feedback Control of the Saluda Medical's Evoke Spinal Cord Stimulation System in the Treatment of Patients With Chronic Pain of the Trunk and/or Limbs), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
Prospective Data Collection to Evaluate the Feedback Control of the Saluda Medical's Evoke Spinal Cord Stimulation System in the Treatment of Patients With Chronic Pain of the Trunk and/or Limbs
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- In-Clinic and At-Home Patient Experiences with Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation: 12-Month Outcomes from the Closed-Loop Australia Randomized Crossover Trial.Pain and therapy · 2026Article
- Harnessing Spinal Cord Stimulation and Neuromodulation for Functional Restoration: From Pain Management to Motor Recovery.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- A case series of two patients using closed-loop spinal cord stimulation: demonstration of the impact of real-time adjustments.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Closed-loop neuromodulation: a paradigm shift in precision neuroscience for clinical and cognitive applications.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Significant pain reduction in refractory post-mastectomy pain syndrome with closed-loop spinal cord stimulation: illustrative cases.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2025Article
- Automated Neural Dosing for Fast-Acting Subperception Therapy: Sustained Spinal Cord Stimulation Outcomes from a Multicenter Study.Pain and therapy · 2025Article
- Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Pain Management: Mechanisms, Clinical Evidence, and Emerging Perspectives.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Turning back the clock: reintroducing 'SAFE' principles to spinal cord stimulation for long-term therapy preservation.Pain management · 2025Article
- Transforming Chronic Pain Management: Integrating Neuromodulation with Advanced Technologies to Tackle Cognitive Dysfunction - A Narrative Review.Journal of pain research · 2025Review
- Research hotspots and frontiers of neuromodulation technology in the last decade: a visualization analysis based on the Web of Science database.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionClosed-loop spinal cord stimulation (CL-SCS) is a recently introduced system that records evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) from the spinal cord elicited by each stimulation pulse and uses this information to automatically adjust the stimulation strength in real time, known as ECAP-controlled SCS. This innovative system compensates for fluctuations in the distance between the epidural leads and the spinal cord by maintaining the neural response (ECAP) at a predetermined target level. This data collection study was designed to assess the performance of the first CL-SCS system in a real-world setting under normal conditions of use in multiple European centers. The study analyzes and presents clinical outcomes and electrophysiological and device data and compares these findings with those reported in earlier pre-market studies of the same system.
methodsThis prospective, multicenter, observational study was conducted in 13 European centers and aimed to gather electrophysiological and device data. The study focused on the real-world application of this system in treating chronic pain affecting the trunk and/or limbs, adhering to standard conditions of use. In addition to collecting and analyzing basic demographic information, the study presents data from the inaugural patient cohort permanently implanted at multiple European centers.
resultsA significant decrease in pain intensity was observed for overall back or leg pain scores (verbal numerical rating score [VNRS]) between baseline (mean ± standard error of the mean [SEM]; n = 135; 8.2 ± 0.1), 3 months (n = 93; 2.3 ± 0.2), 6 months (n = 82; 2.5 ± 0.3), and 12 months (n = 76; 2.5 ± 0.3). Comparison of overall pain relief (%) to the AVALON and EVOKE studies showed no significant differences at 3 and 12 months between the real-world data release (RWE; 71.3%; 69.6%) and the AVALON (71.2%; 73.6%) and EVOKE (78.1%; 76.7%) studies. Further investigation was undertaken to objectively characterize the physiological parameters of SCS therapy in this cohort using the metrics of percent time above ECAP threshold (%), dose ratio, and dose accuracy (µV), according to previously described methods. Results showed that a median of 90% (40.7-99.2) of stimuli were above the ECAP threshold, with a dose ratio of 1.3 (1.1-1.4) and dose accuracy of 4.4 µV (0.0-7.1), based on data from 236, 230, and 254 patients, respectively. Thus, across all three metrics, the majority of patients had objective therapy metrics corresponding to the highest levels of pain relief in previously reported studies (usage over threshold > 80%, dose ratio > 1.2, and error < 10 µV).
conclusionsIn conclusion, this study provides valuable insights into the real-world application of the ECAP-controlled CL-SCS system, highlighting its potential for maintaining effective pain relief and objective neurophysiological therapy metrics at levels seen in randomized control trials, and potential for quantifying patient burden associated with SCS system use via patient-device interaction metrics. CLINICAL
trial registrationIn the Netherlands, the study is duly registered on the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (Trial NL7889). In Germany, the study is duly registered as NCT05272137 and in the United Kingdom as ISCRTN27710516 and has been reviewed by the ethics committee in both countries.
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.