• Kenneth B Chapman, Connor Tupper, Ajax Yang, Noud van Helmond, and Tariq Yousef.
• The Spine & Pain Institute of New York, New York City, NY, USA; Department of Anesthesiology, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York City, NY, USA; Department of Anesthesiology, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, New York City, NY, USA. Electronic address: chapmanken@spinepainny.com.
• Neuromodulation. 2022 Oct 1; 25 (7): 989-997.

IntroductionDorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S) is a form of neuromodulation used to treat chronic pain. A spinal cord stimulation (SCS) method with paresthesia-free waveform used in the dorsal columns, burst-SCS, recently demonstrated efficacy using intermittent stimulation, where stimulation is cycled on and off for set durations. Tonic SCS is a paresthesia-based therapy that is ineffective at sub-perception levels and when delivered in a cycled manner. DRG-S also uses a tonic waveform, yet unlike tonic SCS, it is effective at sub-perception levels. This study aimed to determine whether the cycling of stimulation at the DRG could maintain DRG-S efficacy.Materials And MethodsThis study followed a prospective, randomized, and balanced, double-blinded (assessor) protocol. Twenty DRG-S responders were randomized to a sequence of three programs for consecutive two-week intervals: continuous stimulation; 1 minute on:1 minute off; or 1 minute on:2 minutes off. The primary outcome of this study was change in pain ratings with the cycled programs compared with continuous stimulation. Secondary outcomes included changes in function and scores for quality of life, and stimulation program preference.ResultsMean scores were similar at the end of each two-week stimulation program for Numerical Rating Scale pain (continuous = 2.9 ± 0.8, 1:1 on-off = 2.6 ± 0.7, and 1:2 on-off = 2.7 ± 0.7 cm, p = 0.39), disability (p = 0.72), and general health (p = 0.95). No clinically significant differences were found from the upper boundaries of the 95% confidence intervals of the mean difference in pain, disability, and general health for each intermittent stimulation program vs the continuous program. At the end of the study, the continuous stimulation, 1:1 on-off dosing, and 1:2 on-off dosing programs were preferred by a similar number of patients.ConclusionsIntermittent DRG-S produces comparable results to continuous stimulation over a two-week period. Intermittent delivery may extend battery life and facilitate a smaller implantable pulse generator.Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

18 keywords...

hide…