Neurosurgical Interventions for the Control of Chronic Pain Conditions



Fig. 31.1
Anatomic location of cordotomy and other destructive spinal cord lesions for the treatment of chronic pain. Figure by Daniel Kramer, University of Pennsylvania





Myelotomy


Commissural myelotomy is an ablative neurosurgical procedure that blocks transmission of pain fibers crossing the midline from the dorsal horn to the contralateral spinothalamic pathway. The classical spinal commissural myelotomy is performed three spinal levels above the source of painful stimulus, reflecting the fact that pain fibers typically ascend two or more levels within the dorsal horn before crossing at the midline. The procedure was first proposed by Greenfield in 1926 as a means to address bilateral or midline pain without the morbidity and mortality of bilateral cordotomy. Armor reported on the first successful commissural myelotomy in 1927 and the general technique he proposed continues to be employed today (Gildenberg 2006) (Fig. 31.1).

In theory, sphincter disturbances and respiratory dysfunction are less likely to occur with myelotomy than with cordotomy. Given the attractiveness of a single procedure producing bilateral pain relief without high risk of damaging essential axonal tracts, one would expect the procedure to be of great interest to the neurosurgical community. However, in spite of its potential advantages, the procedure has never gained wide acceptance as compared to other ablative neurosurgical pain interventions. Commissural myelotomy was applied on a relatively wide scale in the 1940s and early 1950s by French and German neurosurgeons Wertheimer, Lecuire, Mansuy, and others. However, the procedure soon fell out of favor, and Wertheimer’s group eventually abandoned the procedure in favor of unilateral or bilateral cordotomy (Papo and Luongo 1976). The procedure has endured periods of resurgence since this time, but only a few hundred myelotomies are reported in the literature.

A commissural myelotomy may be performed either percutaneously or open. The percutaneous method is less invasive but has only been described by a handful of surgeons. The more common open myelotomy technique is performed by means of a laminectomy. After making a midline incision in the dura, the midline septum of the dorsal spinal cord is exposed by laterally displacing, or where necessary, delicately dividing the network of overlying dorsal veins.

Success rates for commissural myelotomy of 60–70% have been reported, although the inclusion criteria, technique, and endpoints vary greatly among studies. Complications of commissural myelotomy include dysesthesias, bowel and bladder dysfunction, decreased proprioception, paralysis, and death. It is not uncommon for patients to report an “absent” sensation in their lower extremities that subsides within a few weeks of the operation (Sourek 1969; King 1977; Cook and Kawakami 1977). Pain may also recur with time; therefore, it may be advisable to select only patients with a relatively short life expectancy for this procedure. At the same time the open commissural myelotomy is a relatively invasive procedure requiring general anesthesia and, as such, may not be suitable for fragile patients in poor medical condition (Gybels and Sweet 1989).

The indications for high cervical myelotomy, performed at the C1-3 level, are more limited than for spinal commissurotomy. It has been suggested that high cervical myelotomy may be attempted to provide relief of shoulder, arm, and upper chest pain without the high rate of respiratory complications of high cervical cordotomy. Hitchcock showed in a series published in 1974 that such lesions may also relieve lower body pain. The finding that a focused central lesion could relieve upper and lower pain prompted the study of cervical lesions as an alternative to the longitudinal commissural procedures described above. However, the success rate of high cervical myelotomy reported in a small series by Papo was disappointing, as only three of ten patients had successful pain relief. Furthermore, pain returned to these patients within 4–6 weeks (Papo and Luongo 1976). Nonetheless, in cases where cordotomy is contraindicated because of respiratory impairment or a short life expectancy, a high cervical myelotomy may still be considered for patients with upper body bilateral or midline pain.

Since the advent of the classic commissural myelotomy, several modifications of this procedure have been developed. These modifications are intended to maintain similar visceral pain relief while potentially reducing the frequency of sensory perception disturbances. One such procedure, the limited midline myelotomy, was first described by Gildenberg and Hirshberg (Gildenberg and Hirshberg 1984). With this procedure, a small laminectomy is performed at approximately the thoracolumbar junction. The vertical extent of the midline dissection within the adjacent dorsal spinal cord need only span 5–7 mm with a depth of 6 mm. The procedure provides remarkably widespread visceral pain relief, and the authors reported satisfactory results in ten of 14 patients treated. No reported sensory loss, weakness, or other complications were reported in this series. Gildenberg and Hirshberg proposed that the procedure interrupts a previously unrecognized ascending midline pain pathway (Gildenberg 2006; Gildenberg and Hirshberg 1984). Although this claim was met with controversy, subsequent postmortem specimens and animal experiments have since supported the existence of a long midline dorsal column pathway involved in the perception of pelvic visceral pain (Willis and Westlund 2001).

Building on the anatomical discovery of an ascending midline dorsal column visceral pain pathway, Nauta introduced the punctuate midline myelotomy, a minimally invasive procedure that specifically lesions this newly recognized pathway while sparing the crossing spinothalamic fibers. Nauta’s punctuate midline myelotomy was produced with 5-mm deep puncture using a 16-gauge needle on either side of the median septum in the dorsal column of the spinal cord (T-8) in a patient with pelvic cancer pain (Nauta et al. 1997). Following Nauta’s initial positive report, the procedure has been reproduced successfully in a dozen patients with a variety of sources of visceral pain (Nauta et al. 2000; Hwang et al. 2004). In each case the procedure provided immediate pain reduction without neurological side-effects. Because punctuate midline myelotomy deliberately spares crossing spinothalamic fibers, the success of this operation corroborates the existence of an ascending visceral nociceptive pathway in the midline of the dorsal column.


Dorsal Root Entry Zone Lesioning


Dorsal root entry zone (DREZ) lesioning is a neuroablative procedure of the posterolateral aspect of the spinal cord, including the medial portion of Lissauer’s tract and the superficial five layers of Rexed’s laminae, where sensory root fibers synapse with axons that join the spinothalamic tract (Nashold and Ostdahl 1979). The procedure has classically been used to treat deafferentation pain arising from a brachial plexus injury, a pain syndrome that may be poorly managed with other medical or surgical interventions (Nashold and Ostdahl 1980). DREZ-lesioning has also been used to treat other forms of chronic pain including spinal cord “end zone” pain, trigeminal neuralgia, phantom limb pain, and radiation plexopathy (Saris et al. 1985; Zeidman et al. 1993; Friedman et al. 1984) (Fig. 31.1).

The concept of DREZ-lesioning was first introduced by Sindou and colleagues in 1972. Sindou successfully used microsurgical incisions to lesion the dorsal root and a small portion of the lateral portion of the dorsal horn as a means to relieve pain in a patient suffering from a malignancy within the brachial plexus (Sindou 1972). In 1974, Nashold built on Sindou’s experience and developed a wider and deeper lesion of the DREZ using radiofrequency thermocoagulation. Nashold greatly popularized the DREZ lesion and in time introduced the complete DREZ lesion as a means of controlling pain attributable to brachial plexus avulsion (Nashold and Ostdahl 1979). Nashold’s procedure requires complete laminectomy extending three levels on either side of the affected spinal cord. After opening the midline dura, an electrode is inserted approximately 2 mm into the DREZ portion of the cord at a 25° angle to the vertical plane; multiple lesions are produced approximately 1–2 mm apart in the inferior–superior direction. Other successful modalities of lesioning the DREZ have been introduced including laser light (Levy et al. 1983) and ultrasound (Dreval 1993).

DREZ-lesioning provides long-term efficacy in the management of pain from brachial plexus avulsion. In one series of 55 patients who underwent treatment of a severe brachial plexus avulsion with Sindou’s microsurgical DREZ technique, 95% reported excellent pain relief at discharge. At 3 months, 82% reported excellent or good pain relief, and at 29 months 66% of the patients not lost to follow-up had continued excellent or good pain relief, and 71% reported an improvement in activity level (Sindou et al. 2005). In a separate study, 77% of patients with brachial plexus avulsion treated by DREZ-lesioning had good or fair pain relief at 63 months (Thomas and Kitchen 1994). The success of DREZ-lesioning has been more varied when applied to other pain syndromes.

The introduction of the operating microscope and modern electrodes has greatly reduced complications of DREZ-lesioning. Nonetheless, neurological deficits remain a relatively common complication of the procedure, including ipsilateral lower-limb weakness, sensory changes, or both. These neurological deficits are typically mild and improve with time. Other reported complications include CSF leaks and transient loss of continence or bladder spasm (Thomas and Kitchen 1994), (Nashold and Ostdahl 1980).


Cingulotomy


The cingulate gyrus is a part of the limbic system and is involved in pain perception. The history of surgery in this brain region as a treatment for pain, i.e. cingulotomy, dates back to the mid-twentieth century discovery that prefrontal lobotomy often provides significant chronic pain relief (Foltz and White 1962). Although “lobotomy” lesions were relatively nonspecific and typically destroyed a large area of white matter tracts arising in the prefrontal cortex, the associated pain-reducing effects are now believed to stem from injury to the adjacent cingulate gyrus. Despite initial enthusiasm for prefrontal lobotomy as an innovative approach to managing severe pain, and even much more commonly treating disorders of the psyche, the lobotomy soon fell out of favor plagued by reports of devastating side-effects and changes in personality. After a period of dormancy, the field of psychosurgery was partially rejuvenated by the advent of stereotactic surgical method, which more accurately targets specific brain regions while simultaneously minimizes damage to adjacent structures (Brotis et al. 2009). Modern studies have clearly shown cingulotomy to be effective in the treatment of intractable pain when medical, surgical, and pharmacological interventions have failed (Wilkinson et al. 1999).

The cingulate gyrus is a paramedian cortical structure that is embedded deep within the interhemispheric fissure and wraps around the corpus collosum. A number of studies have implicated the cingulate gyrus in the perception of pain. Injection of lidocaine or morphine in the anterior cingulum of rats produces analgesia (Vaccarino and Melzack 1989), (LaGraize et al. 2006), and increased neuronal activity in areas of the cingulate gyrus of rabbits has been reported in response to noxious stimuli (Sikes and Vogt 1992). In particular, fibers of the cingulum bundle, which passes through the gyrus and connects the anterior and posterior cingulate cortex, appear to play a major role in pain perception (Vaccarino and Melzack 1989). Position emission tomography (PET) analysis of regional blood flow has confirmed these animal findings in humans. PET scans have identified the contralateral cingulate cortex as one of the centers in the brain that responds to a noxious, painful stimuli compared to a non-painful stimuli (Casey et al. 1994; Jones et al. 1991; Coghill et al. 1994).

Although it is clear that the cingulate cortex plays an important role in pain perception, its exact role remains poorly understood. The diffuse distribution of cortical and thalamic activation after a painful stimulus highlights the complex nature of pain and the difficulty in treating it (Coghill et al. 1994). The anterior cingulate cortex is highly interconnected with other limbic structures and cortical regions, which allows it to integrate affective, motor, and memory stimuli to modify the perception of a painful stimulus without actually changing the sensation itself. The region of the cingulate cortex responsible for this emotional component of pain has numerous connections with the amygdala, frontal cortex, and periaqueductal gray. Input from the hippocampus may allow the cingulate cortex to integrate nociceptive input with memory to evaluate the danger of a situation. The affective area of the anterior cingulate is implicated in conditioned emotional learning, vocalizations of emotion, motivation, and determining emotional relevance of stimuli. Another region of the cingulate cortex is the cognitive division, which is involved in information processing and determining appropriate motor responses to painful stimuli (Devinsky et al. 1995).

In 1962, Foltz and White reported the results from a study assessing the outcome of frontal cingulotomy in 16 patients with chronic, intractable pain. To test their hypothesis that chronic pain has a strong emotional component that is controlled by the cingulate, the authors chose a study population with intractable pain in whom emotional factors were thought to exacerbate their pain. The authors found that bilateral frontal cingulotomy in 12 of the 16 patients had a good or excellent outcome. Although the patients continued to sense pain, they did not react to the pain as strongly, saying that the pain “is not particularly bothersome” or “doesn’t worry me anymore” (Foltz and White 1962). Hurt and Ballantine in 1974 found that 66–67% of a total of 68 patients with chronic pain experienced some degree of pain relief after stereotactic anterior cingulate lesions (Hurt and Ballantine 1974). In subsequent studies the percent of patients who experience pain relief after an anterior cingulotomy ranges from 45 to 67% (Faillace et al. 1971; Hurt and Ballantine 1974; Yen et al. 2005; Wilkinson et al. 1999; Wong et al. 1997). A recent report published in 1999 found that the majority of 18 patients who received a bilateral anterior cingulotomy for chronic noncancer pain experienced improvement in their pain, were no longer taking narcotics, noted improvements in their family life and social interactions, and thought that cingulotomy was beneficial (Wilkinson et al. 1999).

Hassenbusch was the first to propose using magnetic resonance-guided stereotaxis for cingulotomies. Prior to this, stereotactic localization had been achieved using air ventriculograms, which requires lumbar or cisternal puncture to inject filtered air into the ventricles and was associated with a higher risk of meningitis and hemorrhage. MRI-guided stereotaxis also has the benefit of not requiring general anesthesia, is more accurate because it images the cingulate gyrus directly, and is useful for postoperative follow-up of the lesion (Hassenbusch et al. 1990; Pillay and Hassenbusch 1992). Since the 1990s, MRI-guided stereotaxis is routinely used when performing cingulotomies (Brotis et al. 2009).

Despite recent improvements in technology that have made cingulotomies more accurate and less destructive, cingulotomy remains an invasive procedure that can have serious side-effects including seizures or lasting behavioral deficits. Neurocognitive function is generally preserved after cingulotomy, although some studies have reported deficits in focused and sustained attention (Yen et al. 2009; Cohen, Kaplan, Moser et al. 1999; Cohen, Kaplan, Zuffante et al. 1999), learning and organizing verbal material (Faillace et al. 1971), and self-initiated behaviour (Cohen, Kaplan, Zuffante et al. 1999). Another study reported altered emotional experiences of patients who underwent cingulotomy, especially in regards to emotional agitation and tension. Although family members often noted personality changes after the surgery and described the patients as being more “relaxed” (or even more apathetic in a few cases), the patients were not functionally crippled by these emotional changes. The patients felt less tension and anger, but did not report a significant reduction in self-perceived energy level (Cohen et al. 2001). Despite the severity of pre-existing pain and the subtle nature of possible changes, cingulotomy remains a controversial procedure; any risk of altering a patient’s affect and personality appears to preclude widespread acceptance of this approach.


Hypophysectomy


Several methods of pituitary ablation, a procedure called hypophysectomy, have been described for the treatment of chronic pain. These include transcranial hypophysectomy and microsurgical hypophysectomy. The mechanisms underlying the analgesic effect of hypophysectomy are not completely understood. The pituitary gland secretes a number of essential endocrine hormones, but the analgesic effect does not appear to directly relate to the interruption of these hormones, leading some to postulate that a direct neuronal mechanism is involved. Another theory is that the analgesic effect of hypophysectomy is mediated by a change in hypothalamic-pituitary axis (HPA) peptides in the cerebrospinal fluid (Takeda et al. 1986).

Hypophysectomy has classically been used to relieve pain from severe and diffuse cancer such as seen with widely metastatic breast and prostate adenocarcinoma. Surgical and chemical hypophysectomy with injection of alcohol are fundamentally similar procedures that have been shown to produce comparable levels of pain relief (Ramirez and Levin 1984). Chemical hypophysectomy is carried out by introducing a needle through the nostril to puncture the sphenoid sinus. Once the sinus has been punctured and rinsed, a 19-gauge or 20-gauge needle is advanced using biplanar fluoroscopy guidance to the floor of the sella turcica. Once the needle is in place, 1–2 ml of absolute alcohol is slowly injected and the patient’s pupillary reactions and body movements are closely monitored. Afterwards, the hole in the sella is sealed and the nasal cavity is packed (Ramirez and Levin 1984), (Lloyd et al. 1981).

Despite the unknown mechanism of action of hypophysectomy, it is highly effective, providing satisfactory or excellent relief of pain in 70–83% of patients with metastatic cancer (Ramirez and Levin 1984; Tindall et al. 1976; Lloyd et al. 1981). Interruption of normal pituitary function is a common complication of the procedure, resulting in the insufficiency of one or multiple pituitary hormones (Evans et al. 1982). In one published series, central diabetes insipidus occurred in 17% of patients, resulting from interruption of ADH secretion from the posterior pituitary gland. Prolonged visual disturbance was another frequent complication in this study (Lloyd et al. 1981).



Neuropharmacological



Intraspinal Pumps


Intraspinal analgesic pumps are the most commonly used alternative pain management approach in patients who cannot tolerate the side-effects or achieve adequate pain relief from systemic pharmacotherapy. The pumps deliver analgesics directly into the cerebrospinal fluid that engulfs the spinal cord. Because the drugs are delivered closer to their site of action in the dorsal horn, lower doses of analgesics can be administered as compared to systemic therapy, resulting in fewer systemic side-effects. Intraspinal pumps reduce the amount of systemic narcotic exposure by a factor of 30–300 depending on the route of spinal cord administration (Smith et al. 2005; Kim 2005). The device itself consists of a pump that stores the medication and can be refilled percutaneously, which is itself attached to an intraspinal catheter. Implantation of the pump is an invasive procedure that can cause serious side-effects and therefore is reserved for the minority of patients who do not achieve adequate pain control with traditional pharmacotherapy (Hogan et al. 1991).

Opiates can be delivered into either the intrathecal (subarachnoid) or epidural space to reach their site of action in the brain and the substantia gelatinosa of the spinal cord (Kedlaya et al. 2002). Both these methods of delivery can be equally effective. The advantage of intrathecal opioid delivery is that one-tenth the dose of analgesic is necessary to achieve the same degree of pain relief, which results in fewer systemic side-effects (Kim 2005). Epidural delivery is less potent but also causes less respiratory depression and somnolence. Intrathecal delivery is preferred for therapy longer than 3 months because of the association between long-term epidural drug delivery and catheter obstruction, fibrosis, and loss of analgesic efficacy (Aldrete 1995).

Physicians can choose the rate at which analgesics are delivered around the spinal cord. A fixed-rate pump delivers the medication at a constant rate, whereas a programmable pump delivers the medication at a rate pre-set by a computer program. In addition, patient-controlled analgesia systems allow the patient to deliver the bolus of drug based on their current state of pain (Rauck et al. 2003). The physician’s choice of drug delivery system should take into account the patient’s predicted life-expectancy, cost-effectiveness, and the route of administration (whether epidural or intrathecal). Type 1 (percutaneous) catheters are designed for short-term use of less than 1 week, whereas Type 2 catheters are subcutaneous and are designed for outpatients. Type 3 catheters require a minor surgical procedure to implant the device and can be placed in the epidural or intrathecal space, while Type 4 catheters are totally implanted (Kim 2005). An external drug delivery system should be used if the patient has less than 3 months to live. Permanent implantation of the catheter under local anesthesia is preceded by a trial period with a temporary external pump (Kedlaya et al. 2002).

Morphine is the most commonly used analgesic in intraspinal pumps. Other opioids such as fentanyl, hydromorphine, sufentanil, methadone, and meperidine are also available if morphine fails or the patient does not tolerate morphine well. In addition, a number of conditions may respond poorly to morphine, in which case other nonopioid drugs such as local anesthetics may be substituted. If tolerance develops, another opioid can be used or the opioid can be used in combination with a co-analgesic, such as a local anesthetic (bupivicaine, tetracaine), calcium-channel blocker (ziconitide), alpha-2-agonist (clonidine), or gaba-B-agonist (baclofen) (Kim 2005).

Although intraspinal pumps are more targeted and therefore minimize systemic side-effects, many of the effects of morphine are mediated by the central nervous system and remain of primary concern. The patient must be monitored after initial implantation for signs of toxicity such as respiratory depression and hypotension. More common but less serious side-effects associated with morphine pump-use include nausea, vomiting, constipation, itching, edema, sexual dysfunction, and hyperalgesia (Ruan 2007). Prolonged use of an intraspinal pump is associated with complications such as pain on injection of the analgesic, hyperesthesia, infection, epidural abscess, and technical problems with the catheter and pump (Hogan et al. 1991). Catheter dislocation, obstruction, rupture, or disconnection occurred in 17 of 165 patients over the course of 3 years in one study by Koulousakis et al. (2007).

Despite the effectiveness in controlling chronic pain, the benefits of intraspinal drug delivery must be balanced with the side-effects from the drug and potential complications from the procedure itself. A randomized control trial involving 202 patients found that intraspinal pumps in combination with comprehensive pain management improved pain control compared to comprehensive pain management alone, and decreased the incidence of drug toxicities, fatigue, and depressed levels of consciousness. There was also a trend toward increased 6-month survival among patients receiving intraspinal drug delivery (Smith et al. 2002).


Augmentative/Neuromodulatory Surgeries for the Treatment of Pain



Spinal Cord Stimulation


Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an important technology for treating chronic, localized neuropathic pain. A device that contains a set of electrodes is implanted into the epidural space either percutaneously or by laminectomy, and delivers electrical impulses to a targeted area of the dorsal column of the spinal cord. A pulse generator implanted in the buttocks or abdomen generates the electrical current (Shealy, Mortimer et al. 1967; Shealy, Taslitz et al. 1967). This therapy is used to treat a wide variety of chronic pain conditions, including intractable low back pain, complex regional pain syndromes, phantom pain, diabetic neuropathy, and angina pectoris (North et al. 1993).

Little is known about the mechanism of action of SCS. The Gate Control Theory of pain, proposed in 1965 by Melzack and Wall, argues that excess stimulation of large afferent non-pain A-β fibers closes the “gate” in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord and therefore prevents the transmission of painful nociceptive signals in small afferent fibers (Krames 1999). Although this theory is commonly thought to be the primary mechanism of pain relief, it is an imperfect explanation because it fails to reconcile many clinical observations, such as why SCS is only effective in the treatment of chronic and not acute pain, or why activation of large afferent fibers can signal pain. Several other explanations have been proposed, and it is likely that multiple mechanisms interact in a complex and poorly understood way to result in pain relief (Oakley and Prager 2002). Other proposed theories that may explain the efficacy of SCS include inhibition of signal transmission in the spinothalamic tract, modulation of supraspinal neurons, inhibition of sympathetic efferent neurons, or the release of vasoactive substances such as vasoactive peptide and substance P (Krames 1999). In support of these other theories, patients often experience pain relief many hours after cessation of the stimulation, which suggests that long-lasting neural modulation occurs from SCS (Linderoth and Foreman 1999).

The sensation of pain is modified in many patients receiving SCS and is perceived as paresthesia, or a tingling sensation. The efficacy of SCS depends on the type of pain. SCS seems to specifically block continuous and induced pain such as tactile or thermal allodynia, but it has no effect on acute nociceptive pain (Meyerson and Linderoth 2000). While SCS is generally more effective at treating neuropathic pain than nociceptive pain, interestingly patients with peripheral vascular disease and angina pectoris also experience pain relief from SCS. Such benefits possibly stem from an inhibitory effect of SCS on the sympathetic nervous system, which in turn promotes vasodilation and reduces the noxious signals that underlie angina (Oakley and Prager 2002).

A large number of case and descriptive studies have been published that find SCS to be beneficial in relieving pain. In a study by North et al. 52% of the patients self-reported at least 50% pain relief from SCS, and 60% of the patients were satisfied enough with the treatment to be willing to repeat the implantation. However, not all patients benefit from SCS equally. In this same study, 22% of the patients did not experience at least 50% pain relief and 7% had no pain benefit at all (North et al. 1993).

The paucity of well-controlled studies evaluating SCS makes it difficult to arrive at any strong conclusions regarding its efficacy. To date there have been only a handful of randomized control trials. One well-designed study found that patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome that received SCS and physical therapy had a significant reduction in pain intensity and improved health-related quality of life at 6 and 12 months compared to those who only received physical therapy. However, there was no improvement in functional status after 6 months. Notably, only two-thirds of patients in this study who responded positively to a test stimulation went on to receive permanent implantations (Kemler et al. 2000). In a series of failed back syndrome patients, 15% of the patients who underwent SCS returned to work over the course of 5 years, compared to zero patients in the control group. This functional improvement was attributed to pain relief and reduction in drug usage. Moreover, patients in the SCS group reported a 27% improvement in quality of life over the 5 years of follow-up compared to only 12% in the control group (Kumar et al. 2002). Of note, SCS is rarely used in terminal cancer patients because of the high cost to the procedure and need for patient involvement in monitoring their pain. Nevertheless, SCS shows great promise in treating a variety of other chronic pain conditions.

Patients undergoing SCS are at risk for a number of complications, including infection, bleeding, pain in the region of the stimulator, spinal cord or nerve injury, equipment failure, and in some patients such symptoms can require stimulator removal. A metanalysis of 18 studies found an average complication rate of 34% from SCS (Turner et al. 2004). Because of the invasive nature of SCS, it should be reserved for patients who fail to respond to more conservative treatments. Although the complication rate will continue to drop as technology improves (Meyerson and Linderoth 2000), such a significant complication rate and the high price tag for both surgery and the implanted stimulator underscore the need for more long-term, randomized control trials to determine the true efficacy of SCS.

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Oct 16, 2016 | Posted by in PAIN MEDICINE | Comments Off on Neurosurgical Interventions for the Control of Chronic Pain Conditions

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access