ArticleInterventional pain medicine2024
Dorsal root ganglion stimulation for patients with chronic pelvic pain: A retrospective review of patient experiences and long-term outcomes.
Article in Interventional pain medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Algorithmic Overview of Advanced Pain Therapies: A Narrative Review.Current pain and headache reports · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is a refractory condition that has physical, emotional, and financial impacts on patients. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) is a promising interventional modality for patients with refractory CPP, however studies of long-term outcomes are limited. We aim to present the results from a retrospective review of 31 patients with CPP treated using DRGS. Materials and methods: IRB approval was obtained. A retrospective chart review was conducted, including 31 patients who underwent a DRGS trial between 2017 and 2022 at two academic centers. Pain history, trial/implant lead configuration, complications/revisions, pain scores, functional goals, and medication use were recorded. Results: Thirty-one patients with CPP underwent a 7-10 day DRGS trial between 2017 and 2022. Of the 31 patients, 21 (68%, CI 50-81%) had a successful trial, defined as >50% reported pain relief. Twenty patients underwent DRGS implantation. Average follow-up was 28.2 ± 17.3 months. Nine patients (45%) required revision surgery for lead migration or fracture. Thirteen patients remain implanted with an average reported percent relief of 55 ± 15%. Seven patients were explanted (35%), with an average time to explant of 12.5 ± 3 months. Conclusions: This study presents one of the largest groups of patients with DRGS for the treatment of CPP. The results highlight the variable experiences of patients after DRGS trial/implant. We report on the incidence of lead migration and fracture, sparingly described in the literature. Larger, prospective studies are needed to elucidate which patients with CPP may benefit most from DRGS, and to better understand the incidence and implications of complications.
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.