Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39229594›Full record

ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2024

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.

Thomas White, Rafael Justiz, Wilson Almonte, Velimir Micovic, Binit Shah, Eric Anderson, Leonardo Kapural, Harold Cordner, Amr El-Naggar, Michael Fishman and 23 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in North American Spine Society journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  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. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. 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

33 authors.

Thomas WhiteProcura Pain and Spine, Pain Management. 111 Vision Park Blvd #100, Shenandoah, TX 77384.
Rafael JustizOklahoma Pain Physicians, Pain Management, 4117 NW 122nd St #C, Oklahoma City, OK 73120.
Wilson AlmonteVictoria Pain and Rehabilitation, Pain Management, 6902 Zac Lentz Parkway, Victoria, TX 77904.
Velimir MicovicPain Management Consultants, Pain Management, 7964 Summerlin Lakes Dr, Fort Myers, FL 33907.
Binit ShahCarolinas Pain Center, Pain Management, 9735 Kincey Ave STE 100, Huntersville, NC 28078.
Eric AndersonAdvanced Pain Institute of Texas, Pain Management, 500 W Main St Suite 230, Lewisville, TX 75057.
Leonardo KapuralCarolinas Pain Institute, Pain Management, 145 Kimel Park Dr #330, Winston-Salem, NC 27103.
Harold CordnerFlorida Pain Management Associates, Pain Management, 13825 U.S. Hwy 1, Sebastian, FL 32958.
Amr El-NaggarDREZ One, Pain Management, 75 Hail Knob Rd, Somerset, KY 42503.
Michael FishmanCenter for Interventional Pain and Spine, Pain Management, 160 N Pointe Blvd Suite 208, Lancaster, PA 17604.
Yashar EshraghiOchsner Medical Center, Pain Management, 1514 Jefferson Highway, New Orleans, LA 70121.
Philip KimCenter for Interventional Pain and Spine, Pain Management, 160 N Pointe Blvd Suite 208, Lancaster, PA 17604.
Al Abd-ElsayedUniversity of Wisconsin, Pain Management, 102 S Park St 3rd floor, Madison, WI 53715.
Krishnan ChakravarthyCoastal Research Institute, Pain Management, 6221 Metropolitan Street, Ste. 201, Carlsbad, CA 92009.
Yoann MilletProcura Pain and Spine, Pain Management. 111 Vision Park Blvd #100, Shenandoah, TX 77384.
Mahendra SanapatiGlobal Scientific Innovations, Pain Management, 1101 Professional Blvd, Ste 208, Evansville, IN 47714.
Nathan HarrisonOchsner Medical Center, Pain Management, 1514 Jefferson Highway, New Orleans, LA 70121.
Brandon GoffBurkhart Research Institute for Orthopaedics, Pain Management, 400 Concord Plaza Dr, San Antonio, TX, 78216.
Mayank GuptaNeuroscience Research Center, Pain Management. 10995 Quivira Road, Overland Park, KS 66210.
Prabhdeep GrewalBurkhart Research Institute for Orthopaedics, Pain Management, 400 Concord Plaza Dr, San Antonio, TX, 78216.
Michael WilkinsonPain Medicine Associates Surgery Center, Pain Management, 101 Med Tech Pkwy #200, Johnson City, TN 37604.
Richard BundschuCoastal Orthopedics and Sports Medicine and Pain Management, Pain Management, 6202 17th Ave W, Bradenton, FL 34209.
Andrew WillTwin Cities Pain Clinic; Pain Management, 7235 Ohms Lane, Edina, MN.
Pankaj SatijaPain & Headache Centers of Texas, Pain Management, 313 La Concha Lane, Suite 120, Houston, TX 77054.
Sean LiNational Spine and Pain Premier Pain Centers, Pain Management, 170 Ave at the Cmns Suite 6, Shrewsbury, NJ 07702.
Scott DulebohnPain Medicine Associates Surgery Center, Pain Management, 101 Med Tech Pkwy #200, Johnson City, TN 37604.
John BroadnaxAdvanced Pain Institute of Texas, Pain Management, 500 W Main St Suite 230, Lewisville, TX 75057.
Gennady GekhtCoastal Orthopedics and Sports Medicine and Pain Management, Pain Management, 6202 17th Ave W, Bradenton, FL 34209.
Ken WuProcura Pain and Spine, Pain Management. 111 Vision Park Blvd #100, Shenandoah, TX 77384.
Steven FalowskiCenter for Interventional Pain and Spine, Pain Management, 160 N Pointe Blvd Suite 208, Lancaster, PA 17604.
Wesley ParkSGX Medical LLC, Clinical Research, 33 Derby Way, Bloomington, IL 61704.
David L CedenoSGX Medical LLC, Clinical Research, 33 Derby Way, Bloomington, IL 61704.
Ricardo VallejoSGX Medical LLC, Clinical Research, 33 Derby Way, Bloomington, IL 61704.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Successful treatments for intractable chronic low back pain (CLBP) in patients who are not eligible for surgical interventions are scarce. The superior efficacy of differential target multiplexed spinal cord stimulation (DTM SCS) to conventional SCS (Conv-SCS) on the treatment of CLBP in patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS) who have failed surgical interventions (PSPS-T2) motivated the evaluation of DTM SCS versus Conv-SCS on PSPS patients who are non-surgical candidates (PSPS-T1). Methods: This is a prospective, open label, crossover, post-market randomized controlled trial in 20 centers across the United States. Eligible patients were randomized to either DTM SCS or Conv-SCS in a 1:1 ratio. Primary endpoint was CLBP responder rate (percentage of subjects with ≥50% CLBP relief) at 3-month in randomized subjects who completed trialing (modified intention-to-treat population). Patients were followed up to 12 months. Secondary endpoints included change of CLBP and leg pain, responder rates, changes in disability, quality of life, patient satisfaction and global impression of change, and safety profile. An optional crossover was available at 6-month to all patients. Results: About 121 PSPS-T1 subjects with CLBP and leg pain mostly associated with degenerative disc disease and radiculopathy and who were not eligible for spine surgery were randomized. CLBP responder rate with DTM SCS (93.5%) was superior to Conv-SCS (36.4%) at the primary endpoint. Superior CLBP responder rates (88.1%-90.5%) were obtained with DTM SCS at all other timepoints. Mean CLBP reduction with DTM SCS (6.52 cm) was superior to that with Conv-SCS (3.01 cm) at the primary endpoint. Similar CLBP reductions (6.23-6.43 cm) were obtained with DTM SCS at other timepoints. DTM SCS provided significantly better leg pain reduction and responder rate, improvement of disability and quality of life, and better patient satisfaction and global impression of change. 90.9% of Conv-SCS subjects who crossed over were CLBP responders at completion of the study. Similar safety profiles were observed between the two groups. Conclusion: DTM SCS for chronic CLBP in nonsurgical candidates is superior to Conv-SCS. Improvements were sustained and provided significant benefits on the management of these patients.

Indexed as

Conventional SCSDifferential target multiplexed SCSNonsurgical candidatesPersistent spinal pain syndrome type 1Randomized controlled trialSpinal cord stimulation

Identifiers

PMID39229594
PMCPMC11369449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.