首页> 外文期刊>Pain Physician >Comparison of FDA-Approved Electrical Neuromodulation Techniques for Focal Neuropathic Pain: A Narrative Review of DRG, HF10, and Burst Neuromodulation
【24h】

Comparison of FDA-Approved Electrical Neuromodulation Techniques for Focal Neuropathic Pain: A Narrative Review of DRG, HF10, and Burst Neuromodulation

机译:FDA批准电神经调节技术对局灶性神经性疼痛的比较:DRG,HF10和爆发神经调节的叙事综述

获取原文
           

摘要

Narrative Review Edward Podgorski III, MD, Pedro Mascaro, MD, and Dennis Patin, MD. Evidence suggests that dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) is a more effective treatment for focal neuropathic pain (FNP) compared with tonic, paresthesia-based dorsal column spinal cord stimulation (SCS). However, new advancements in waveforms for dorsal column SCS have not been thoroughly studied or compared with DRGS for the treatment of FNP. The purpose of this review was to examine the evidence for these novel technologies; to highlight the lack of high-quality evidence for the use of neuromodulation to treat FNP syndromes other than complex regional pain syndrome I or II of the lower extremity; to emphasize the absence of comparison studies between DRGS, burst SCS, and high-frequency SCS; and to underscore that consideration of all neuromodulation systems is more patient-centric than a one-size-fits-all approach. STUDY DESIGN: This is a review article summarizing case reports, case series, retrospective studies, prospective studies, and review articles. SETTING: The University of Miami, Florida. METHODS: A literature search was conducted from February to March 2020 using the PubMed and EMBASE databases and keywords related to DRGS, burst SCS, HF10 (high-frequency of 10 kHz), and FNP syndromes. All English-based literature from 2010 reporting clinical data in human patients were included. RESULTS: Data for the treatment of FNP using burst SCS and HF10 SCS are limited (n = 11 for burst SCS and n = 11 for HF10 SCS). The majority of these studies were small, single-center, nonrandomized, noncontrolled, retrospective case series and case reports with short follow-up duration. To date, there are only 2 randomized controlled trials for burst and HF10 for the treatment of FNP. LIMITATIONS: No studies were available comparing DRGS to HF10 or burst for the treatment of FNP. Data for the treatment of FNP using HF10 and burst stimulation were limited to a small sample size reported in mostly case reports and case series. CONCLUSIONS: FNP is a complex disease, and familiarity with all available systems allows the greatest chance of success.
机译:叙事点评爱德华Podgorski III,MD,Pedro Mascaro,MD和Dennis Patin,MD。证据表明,与滋补,基于痛苦的背柱脊髓刺激(SCS)相比,背根神经节刺激(DRGS)是对局灶性神经性疼痛(FNP)更有效的治疗方法。然而,与DRG的DRG进行了处理FNP的DRG,尚未彻底研究背部柱SC波形的新进步。本评论的目的是审查这些新技术的证据;要突出缺乏使用神经调节的高质量证据来治疗除了下肢的复杂区域疼痛综合征I或II之外的FNP综合征;强调DRG,BURST SC和高频SC之间没有比较研究;并且强调,考虑所有神经调节系统的考虑比一定尺寸适合所有方法更为患者。研究设计:这是一篇审查文章总结案例报告,案例系列,回顾性研究,前瞻性研究和审查文章。环境:佛罗里达州迈阿密大学。方法:使用与DRGS,BURST SCS,HF10相关的PUBMED和EMBASE数据库和关键字从2月至3月20日进行了文献搜索。包括来自2010年的所有英语文学,从2010年报告人类患者患者临床数据。结果:使用突发SCS和HF10 SC处理FNP的数据是有限的(对于HF10SCS的突发SCS和N = 11)。这些研究的大多数是小型,单中心,非扫描,非控制,回顾性案例系列和案例报告,具有短暂的后续持续时间。迄今为止,只有2个随机对照试验,用于治疗FNP的突发和HF10。局限性:没有研究可以将DRG与HF10或突发进行比较,以治疗FNP。使用HF10处理FNP的数据和突发刺激的数据仅限于大多数情况下报告的小样本大小。结论:FNP是一种复杂的疾病,熟悉所有可用系统允许最大的成功机会。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号