Comparison of Tonic vs. Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation During Trial Period. Issue 3 (17th October 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Demartini, Laura; Terranova, Gaetano; Innamorato, Massimo A.; Dario, Alessandro; Sofia, Michele; Angelini, Carlo; Duse, Genni; Costantini, Amedeo; Leoni, Matteo L.G.
• Is Part Of: Neuromodulaton. Volume 22:Issue 3(2019)
• Page Start: 327
• Page End: 332
• Publication Date: 2018-10-17
• Subjects: Burst stimulation -- neuromodulation trial -- one‐year follow‐up -- spinal cord stimulation; Central nervous system -- Physiology -- Periodicals; Central nervous system -- Diseases -- Periodicals; 616.8
• DOI: 10.1111/ner.12867
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1094-7159

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well‐known treatment in patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). Burst stimulation is a recently developed stimulation modality that seems to be superior to tonic stimulation. Methods: This observational multicenter study compared tonic and burst stimulation during a trial period in patients with FBSS or radiculopathy. All the patients enrolled underwent two weeks of tonic stimulation followed by another two weeks of BurstDR stimulation, without randomization. The primary outcome was the reduction of pain in the legs and back. Health‐related quality of life (EQ‐5D) and the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) were assessed before and after the trial. Patients were reevaluated after 12 months. Results: We recruited 23 patients, 57% of whom had FBSS and 43% had radiculopathies. Five patients failed both the tonic and burst stimulation trials. While tonic stimulation reduced leg pain ( p < 0.05), the burst mode added an extra pain reduction (ΔNRS 1.2 ± 1.5) ( p < 0.01). No significant reduction in back pain was found (p 0.29). Pain on movement was reduced only by BurstDR ( p < 0.01). Both stimulation modalities increased EQ‐5D and reduced PCS from the baseline ( p < 0.0001). At the end of the SCS trial phase, 26% patients chose tonic SCS, while 74% preferred burst. On 12‐month follow‐up examination, the benefits recorded at the end of the trial were maintained. Conclusions: Burst stimulation confers a greater reduction in leg pain intensity at rest and on movement. Reducing axial pain is still a challenge. Further studies are needed in order to provide each patient with the most appropriate stimulation paradigm.