ArticleNeurosurgery practice2025
Study Protocol: Single-Blinded, Controlled, Clinical Trial Evaluating the Feasibility of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Improving Neuropathic Pain and Rehabilitation Outcomes in Patients With Thoracic Spinal Cord Injury.
Article in Neurosurgery practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesTraumatic thoracic spinal cord injury (SCI) is complicated by chronic neuropathic pain and neurological deficits including bowel and bladder dysfunction. Treatment with spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has demonstrated possible utility in previous observational studies. In this article, we discuss the protocol for an actively enrolling, NIH-funded clinical trial investigating the use of dual lead (thoracic and conus medullaris) SCS as a possible treatment of SCI.
methodsThe clinical trial is a single-blinded, 2-arm parallel study for patients with a history of chronic neuropathic pain after thoracic SCI. Patients are allocated 1:1 to SCS "on" or SCS "off" to which they are formally blinded for 3 months. At 3 months, a 1-way crossover will occur. The primary outcome is the change in the Pain Impact Score of the Multidimensional Pain Inventory-SCI from baseline to 3 months. Secondary outcomes include the changes in electromyography amplitudes, motor and sensory American Spinal Injury Association scores, functional status using the spinal cord independence measure, Visual Analog Scale for pain, active medication use, Patient Global Impression of Change scale, quality of life, bladder control diaries, and harness-supported walking. As the trial is ongoing, data are not yet available for public access. Details regarding data access will be provided in the subsequent publication. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: We expect to see differential improvements in the Pain Impact Score of the Multidimensional Pain Inventory-SCI, motor and sensory American Spinal Injury Association score, Visual Analog Scale, spinal cord independence measure, and Patient Global Impression of Change in the initial "on" vs "off" groups at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. DISCUSSION: Dual lead SCS may serve as a safe and viable treatment option for patients living with SCI. We anticipate patients who undergo SCS to have improved neuropathic pain and neurological function, with greater improvement in patients receiving longer SCS.
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.