» Articles » PMID: 37001888

Evidence-based Consensus Guidelines on Patient Selection and Trial Stimulation for Spinal Cord Stimulation Therapy for Chronic Non-cancer Pain

Abstract

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has demonstrated effectiveness for neuropathic pain. Unfortunately, some patients report inadequate long-term pain relief. Patient selection is emphasized for this therapy; however, the prognostic capabilities and deployment strategies of existing selection techniques, including an SCS trial, have been questioned. After approval by the Board of Directors of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, a steering committee was formed to develop evidence-based guidelines for patient selection and the role of an SCS trial. Representatives of professional organizations with clinical expertize were invited to participate as committee members. A comprehensive literature review was carried out by the steering committee, and the results organized into narrative reports, which were circulated to all the committee members. Individual statements and recommendations within each of seven sections were formulated by the steering committee and circulated to members for voting. We used a modified Delphi method wherein drafts were circulated to each member in a blinded fashion for voting. Comments were incorporated in the subsequent revisions, which were recirculated for voting to achieve consensus. Seven sections with a total of 39 recommendations were approved with 100% consensus from all the members. Sections included definitions and terminology of SCS trial; benefits of SCS trial; screening for psychosocial characteristics; patient perceptions on SCS therapy and the use of trial; other patient predictors of SCS therapy; conduct of SCS trials; and evaluation of SCS trials including minimum criteria for success. Recommendations included that SCS trial should be performed before a definitive SCS implant except in anginal pain (grade B). All patients must be screened with an objective validated instrument for psychosocial factors, and this must include depression (grade B). Despite some limitations, a trial helps patient selection and provides patients with an opportunity to experience the therapy. These recommendations are expected to guide practicing physicians and other stakeholders and should not be mistaken as practice standards. Physicians should continue to make their best judgment based on individual patient considerations and preferences.

Citing Articles

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Guidelines and Consensus on the Definition, Current Evidence, Clinical Use and Future Applications for Physiologic Closed-Loop Controlled Neuromodulation in Chronic Pain: A NEURON Group Project.

Pope J, Deer T, Sayed D, Antony A, Bhandal H, Calodney A J Pain Res. 2025; 18:531-551.

PMID: 39926188 PMC: 11804234. DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S475527.


Turning back the clock: reintroducing 'SAFE' principles to spinal cord stimulation for long-term therapy preservation.

Chakravarthy K, Green M Pain Manag. 2025; 15(2):55-57.

PMID: 39838833 PMC: 11853542. DOI: 10.1080/17581869.2025.2455372.


Development and Feasibility Study of a Triage Tool for Early Referral to Spinal Cord Stimulation for Patients With Chronic Low Back and Leg Pain.

Bastiaens F, van Hooff M, Bruaset I, van den Eede E, Maandag N, Kurt E Eur J Pain. 2025; 29(2):e4780.

PMID: 39757549 PMC: 11701354. DOI: 10.1002/ejp.4780.


Reporting guidelines for protocols of randomised controlled trials of implantable neurostimulation devices: the SPIRIT-iNeurostim extension.

Bresnahan R, Copley S, Eldabe S, Thomson S, North R, Baranidharan G EClinicalMedicine. 2024; 78:102933.

PMID: 39610902 PMC: 11602573. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102933.


Reporting guidelines for randomised controlled trial reports of implantable neurostimulation devices: the CONSORT-iNeurostim extension.

Duarte R, Bresnahan R, Copley S, Eldabe S, Thomson S, North R EClinicalMedicine. 2024; 78:102932.

PMID: 39606687 PMC: 11600657. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102932.


References
1.
Bir S, Konar S, Maiti T, Nanda A, Guthikonda B . Neuromodulation in intractable pain management: outcomes and predictors of revisions of spinal cord stimulators. Neurosurg Focus. 2016; 40(5):E4. DOI: 10.3171/2016.3.FOCUS15634. View

2.
Mekhail N, Costandi S, Saweris Y, Armanyous S, Chauhan G . Impact of biological sex on the outcomes of spinal cord stimulation in patients with chronic pain. Pain Pract. 2021; 22(4):432-439. DOI: 10.1111/papr.13097. View

3.
Kumar K, Malik S, Demeria D . Treatment of chronic pain with spinal cord stimulation versus alternative therapies: cost-effectiveness analysis. Neurosurgery. 2002; 51(1):106-15; discussion 115-6. DOI: 10.1097/00006123-200207000-00016. View

4.
Kapural L, Jameson J, Johnson C, Kloster D, Calodney A, Kosek P . Treatment of nonsurgical refractory back pain with high-frequency spinal cord stimulation at 10 kHz: 12-month results of a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. J Neurosurg Spine. 2022; 37(2):188-199. DOI: 10.3171/2021.12.SPINE211301. View

5.
de Jongste M, Hautvast R, Hillege H, Lie K . Efficacy of spinal cord stimulation as adjuvant therapy for intractable angina pectoris: a prospective, randomized clinical study. Working Group on Neurocardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994; 23(7):1592-7. DOI: 10.1016/0735-1097(94)90661-0. View