ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Long-Term Outcomes of Epidural Motor Cortex Stimulation for Refractory Chronic Neuropathic Orofacial Pain.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Occipital nerve stimulation for refractory facial pain following occipital pain onset: a case report supporting cervicotrigeminal convergence.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEpidural motor cortex stimulation (MCS) is an established neuromodulatory option for refractory neuropathic pain; however, structured data on long-term outcomes, stimulation dependency, and real-world device management remain limited, particularly in chronic neuropathic orofacial pain.
methodsThis retrospective single-center cohort study included patients with refractory neuropathic orofacial pain treated with epidural MCS at a tertiary neurosurgical center. Clinical data were extracted from medical records and longitudinal follow-up documentation. Pain intensity was assessed using a unified 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS/VAS) at baseline, best achieved response, and last follow-up. Responder status was defined at the last follow-up (≥50% pain reduction from baseline). Secondary outcomes included stimulation dependency during OFF periods, reprogramming burden, device-related events, and safety.
resultsTen patients (6 women, 4 men; mean age 61.5 ± 8.6 years) were followed for a mean of 7.6 ± 6.3 years (range 2-22 years), with 70% exceeding five years of follow-up. Baseline pain intensity (8.8 ± 0.4) decreased to 4.6 ± 0.8 at the best achieved response and remained lower at last follow-up (5.6 ± 0.9). At the last follow-up, eight patients (80%) were classified as partial responders (30-49% pain reduction), while two (20%) were classified as non-responders. Clinically relevant worsening during stimulator OFF periods occurred in 70% of patients. Reprogramming was required in all patients, and 60% underwent battery replacement. No clinically significant stimulation-related adverse effects were observed.
conclusionsEpidural MCS was associated with sustained pain reduction over extended follow-up. These findings support the interpretation of MCS as a chronic neuromodulatory therapy requiring ongoing stimulation, individualized programming, and long-term device management, contributing clinically relevant long-term evidence to the evolving role of neuromodulation in refractory chronic neuropathic pain.
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.