ArticleJournal of pain research2024
Retrospective Evaluation of Bipolar Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Nociceptive and Neuropathic Pain: A Pilot Study.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Asymmetric tripolar nerve cuff electrode designs for optimizing anodal block of myelinated fibers.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Article
- Review of Guidelines for Implantable Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) in the Management of Chronic Pain.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This retrospective review evaluates pain and patient-defined functional goal improvement utilizing bipolar peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) in chronic neuropathic and nociceptive pain states. Patients and Methods: Our dataset includes 24 patients who underwent implantation of a permanent peripheral nerve stimulator from January 2018 through December 2022. A total of 29 leads were implanted amongst 24 patients, with 5 patients having leads at 2 different dermatomes. Fifteen leads were placed for primarily neuropathic pain, and 14 leads were placed for nociceptive pain. Inclusion criteria were the following: pain duration greater than 6 months, documented peri-procedural Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and greater than 60 days follow-up post implant. Results: Data was collected and analyzed showing that 89.6% of implants at 6 months follow-up and 70% at 12 months follow-up achieved 50% or greater pain relief. A significant reduction in NPRS scores when comparing pre-procedure pain scores (Median = 7, n = 29) to 6-month follow-up data (Median = 2, n = 29), Conclusion: This retrospective review demonstrates the potential clinical application of PNS in both nociceptive and neuropathic pain states. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate the effectiveness of PNS in the treatment of refractory nociceptive and neuropathic pain states.
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.