Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39521475›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Differential target multiplexed spinal cord stimulation in patients with Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Type II: a study protocol for a 12-month multicentre cohort study (DETECT).

Lisa Goudman, Ann De Smedt, Sam Eldabe, Philippe Rigoard, Maxime Billot, Manuel Roulaud, DETECT consortium, Maarten Moens

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05068011 (Differential Target Multiplexed Spinal Cord Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT05068011 recruitingnot on this map

Differential Target Multiplexed Spinal Cord Stimulation: a Multicenter Cohort Study

TypeobservationalSponsorMoens MaartenRan2021 to 2026Enrolled250ConditionsFailed Back Surgery Syndrome, Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Type 2ArmsSpinal Cord Stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Lisa GoudmanSTIMULUS research group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium lisa.goudman@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-2271-9855
Ann De SmedtSTIMULUS research group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium.
Sam EldabePain Clinic, The James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK.
Philippe RigoardPRISMATICS Lab (Predictive Research in Spine/Neuromodulation Management and Thoracic Innovation/Cardiac Surgery), CHU de Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
Maxime BillotPRISMATICS Lab (Predictive Research in Spine/Neuromodulation Management and Thoracic Innovation/Cardiac Surgery), CHU de Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
Manuel RoulaudPRISMATICS Lab (Predictive Research in Spine/Neuromodulation Management and Thoracic Innovation/Cardiac Surgery), CHU de Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
DETECT consortium
Maarten MoensSTIMULUS research group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDifferential target multiplexed spinal cord stimulation (DTM SCS) is a new stimulation paradigm for chronic pain management with the aim of modulating glial cells and neurons in order to rebalance their interactions. Animal studies revealed positive effects of this type of stimulation; however, studies in humans are still scarce, pointing towards the need for an evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of DTM SCS in clinical settings. Furthermore, the differential target multiplexed (DTM) algorithm consists of a combination of several programmes, which will presumably consume more energy from the spinal cord stimulation (SCS) battery. Therefore, the objective of DETECT is to investigate the feasibility, effectiveness and safety of DTM SCS in patients with Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Type II through a longitudinal cohort study. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: DETECT is a prospective multicentre cohort study (n≥250) with a follow-up until 12 months after receiving DTM SCS. The study initiated in October 2021 and is currently still recruiting patients. Self-reporting outcome variables were evaluated at baseline (before SCS) and at 1, 6 and 12 months of DTM SCS. The primary effectiveness endpoint is overall pain intensity, measured with the visual analogue scale. Secondary effectiveness outcome measures are back pain intensity, leg pain intensity, disability, health-related quality of life, pain medication use, functional disability, clinical holistic responder status, self-management, impression of change, work status, pain catastrophising, symptoms of central sensitisation, anxiety, depression and healthcare utilisation. Time spent in different body postures and SCS stimulation parameters will be read out from the pulse generator. The prevalence of technical issues, recharge frequency, (serious) adverse events and the proportion of successful DTM trials will be collected as well. Longitudinal mixed models will be calculated to evaluate the effectiveness of DTM SCS over time. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the central Ethics Committee of the Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (B.U.N.1432021000563) and the Ethics Committees of each participating centre. Research findings will be disseminated to key stakeholders through peer-reviewed publications in scientific journals and presentations to clinical audiences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05068011.

Indexed as

Chronic PainPain MeasurementSpinal Cord StimulationHumansLongitudinal StudiesMulticenter Studies as TopicPain ManagementProspective StudiesQuality of LifeTreatment OutcomeChronic PainNeurosurgeryPain management

Identifiers

PMID39521475
PMCPMC11551985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.