ReviewSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2026
[Dorsal root ganglion stimulation in neuromodulation-Evidence, indications and clinical application].
Review in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) has become established as a specialized neuromodulation technique for focal neuropathic pain syndromes, such as complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), peripheral nerve injuries as well as groin and knee pain. It enables targeted segmental coverage, selective stimulation of hard to reach dermatomal areas and improves daily functioning and treatment adherence.
objectiveThe aim of this work is to present the current evidence on DRGS, analyze its clinical fields of application and evaluate its effectiveness, safety, quality of care, and economic aspects. MATERIAL AND
methodsA review of the relevant literature was conducted, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), reviews, cohort studies and clinically significant case reports. Key outcomes assessed included pain reduction, function, quality of life, patient selection, technique, adverse events and the cost-benefit ratio.
resultsThe results of RCTs confirm response rates ≥ 50% and a pain reduction >80% in CRPS and similar pain conditions. Observational studies confirm sustained effects, improved quality of life and reduced medication dependency. The infection rates range between 2-5%. The electrodes for DRGS can be placed with high precision. Advantages include low stimulation amplitudes, high energy efficiency and stable therapeutic effects.
conclusionThe DRGS is an evidence-based, selective treatment option with high therapeutic potential for focal neuropathic pain. It offers high response rates, functional improvements and a favorable safety profile. Technical innovations and expanded indications further enhance the clinical utility. Critical factors remain careful patient selection, structured follow-up and further studies on long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41912888What 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.