Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40394275›Full record

ReviewCurrent pain and headache reports2025

The Application of Artificial Intelligence to Enhance Spinal Cord Stimulation Efficacy for Chronic Pain Management: Current Evidence and Future Directions.

John V Prunskis, Tadas Masys, Stephen T Pyles, Alaa Abd-Elsayed, Timothy R Deer, Douglas P Beall, Ramis Gheith, Sheel Patel, Dawood Sayed, Hadi Moten and 5 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current pain and headache reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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.

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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. General Innovations in Pain Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Review
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

15 authors.

John V PrunskisDxTx Pain and Spine, Chicago, IL, USA. jvpr@protonmail.com.
Tadas MasysLoyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Stephen T PylesDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of Central Florida College of Medicine, Orlando, FL, USA.
Alaa Abd-ElsayedDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA.
Timothy R DeerThe Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USA.
Douglas P BeallComprehensive Specialty Care, Edmond, OK, USA.
Ramis GheithDxTx Pain and Spine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Sheel PatelDxTx Pain and Spine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Dawood SayedDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Hadi MotenDxTx Pain and Spine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Todd HagleDxTx Pain and Spine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Chadi I YaacoubDxTx Pain and Spine, Chicago, IL, USA.
Leon AnijarSpine and Wellness Centers of America, Miami, FL, USA.
Mayank GuptaKansas Pain Management and Neuroscience Research Center, LLC, Overland Park, KS, USA.
Terri Dallas-PrunskisDxTx Pain and Spine, Chicago, IL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewChronic pain significantly impacts quality of life for millions globally, with spinal cord stimulation (SCS) as an established treatment for refractory chronic pain. However, traditional SCS therapies face limitations including inconsistent patient outcomes, challenges in patient selection, and difficulties in sustaining therapeutic efficacy. This review examines how artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance the efficacy and personalization of SCS therapy by optimizing patient selection, refining stimulation parameters, and enabling real-time adaptive adjustments. RECENT

findingsRecent advances demonstrate that integrating AI with SCS significantly improves patient outcomes through predictive modeling for patient selection and real-time adaptive stimulation. Predictive analytics utilizing machine learning algorithms have successfully identified patient cohorts most likely to benefit from SCS therapy, enhancing response rates and reducing suboptimal outcomes. Closed-loop AI systems incorporating physiological feedback, such as evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs), dynamically optimize stimulation parameters, resulting in sustained pain relief, decreased programming burden, and improved device longevity. Despite these promising results, critical challenges persist, particularly related to data standardization, ethical considerations, and regulatory compliance. AI holds transformative potential for spinal cord stimulation, offering increased precision, personalization, and therapeutic efficiency in managing chronic pain. Although early results are encouraging, comprehensive clinical validation and multidisciplinary collaboration remain essential. Addressing ethical, regulatory, and data management challenges will be critical for widespread adoption of AI-enhanced SCS therapies in routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceChronic PainPain ManagementSpinal Cord StimulationHumansTreatment OutcomeArtificial intelligenceChronic pain managementClosed-loop systemsMachine learningNeuromodulationSpinal cord stimulation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.