ArticleFrontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland)2025
A forgotten frontier: spinal cord stimulation for iatrogenic and traumatic peripheral neuropathic pain.
Article in Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Peripheral neuropathy (PN) may cause severe, treatment-resistant pain, especially in traumatic and/or iatrogenic cases. In those with insufficient responses to conventional strategies, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) may be a useful treatment option. However, limited research has been performed on SCS for this indication. This study aims to assess the efficacy, satisfaction and safety of SCS in patients with PN caused by traumatic and/or iatrogenic factors. Methods: Patients with traumatic and/or iatrogenic PN, implanted with SCS between 2005 and 2021 at Radboudumc are included in this study. Perioperative data on efficacy, satisfaction, and safety were retrospectively collected from the electronic patient records (EPIC) and analyzed using descriptive statistics. The efficacy is assessed with the numeric rating score (NRS). Responders are defined as those having ≥50% reduction in NRS. Results: Fifteen patients ( Discussion: Unlike peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) and dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation, which are more frequently considered for patients with PN caused by traumatic and/or iatrogenic factors, SCS enables central nervous system stimulation via the spinal cord, thus targeting pain regions associated with multiple lower limb nerve roots. As PN, caused by trauma and/or iatrogenic factors may affect multiple nerves simultaneously, it is suggested that SCS offers improved clinical benefit for these patients. Conclusion: The current study demonstrates that SCS is a promising treatment modality for patients with traumatic and/or iatrogenic PN. Prospective trials comparing SCS to treatments like PNS and DRG stimulation are essential to substantiate its efficacy, expand its indications, and inform future clinical guidelines for patients with intractable traumatic or iatrogenic peripheral neuropathy.
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.