AbstractBackgroundChronic pelvic pain is a burdensome condition that involves multiple medical sub‐specialties and is often difficult to treat. Sacral stimulation for functional bladder disease has been well established, but little large‐scale evidence exists regarding utilization of other neuromodulation techniques to treat chronic pelvic pain. Emerging evidence does suggest that neuromodulation is a promising treatment, and we aim to characterize the use and efficacy of such techniques for treating chronic pelvic pain syndromes.Materials and MethodsA systematic review of the literature demonstrating the treatment of chronic pelvic pain syndromes with neuromodulation. Abstracts were reviewed and selected for inclusion, including case series, prospective studies, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Case studies and publications in abstract only were not included. The reporting for this systematic review follows Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis (PRISMA). The literature search was performed using MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus.ResultsA total of 50 studies were included in this review, three of which were randomized controlled trials, and the remaining were prospective and retrospective case series. The range of pelvic pain conditions treated included interstitial cystitis, peripheral neuralgia, pudendal neuralgia, gastrointestinal pain, urogenital pain, sacroiliac joint pain, and visceral chronic pelvic pain. We reported on outcomes involving pain, functionality, psychosocial improvement, and medication reduction.ConclusionsNeuromodulation is a growing treatment for various chronic pain syndromes. Peripheral nerve stimulation was the least studied form of stimulation. Posterior tibial nerve stimulation appears to offer short‐term benefit, but long‐term results are challenging. Sacral nerve stimulation is established for use in functional bladder syndromes and appears to offer pain improvement in these patients as well. Dorsal root ganglion stimulation and spinal cord stimulation have been used for a variety of conditions with promising results. Further studies of homogeneous patient populations are necessary before strong recommendations can be made at this time, although pooled analysis may also be impactful.
Treatment of Ulnar Neuropathic Pain with Peripheral Nerve Stimulation: Two Case Reports
Abstract Ulnar neuropathy is a condition that manifests with symptoms of neuropathic pain, numbness, tingling, and even possible motor deficits in the ulnar distribution of the arm. This debilitating painful condition may be refractory to conservative, pharmacologic, and surgical interventions. Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) technology has advanced significantly in recent years allowing for conditions such as ulnar neuropathy to be treated in a minimally invasive manner. Here we report the first case reports in the literature (to our knowledge) of two patients with intractable ulnar neuropathy who underwent minimally invasive PNS Bioventus implants. Both patients experienced at least 75% pain relief based on NRS scores at 6 months after ulnar nerve PNS implantation. The patients also experienced significant improvement in functional outcomes, including return to employment, ability to perform activities of daily living without any impairment, and improved quality of life measures. While the results presented in our two case reports are promising, we only provide observational data over a 6 to 15-month period post-implantation. Future well-powered, large-scale, and long-term randomized controlled trials are warranted to determine efficacy and long-term pain and functional outcomes from PNS therapy for treatment of ulnar neuropathy.
The state-of-the-art pharmacotherapeutic options for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain
Abstract Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is used to treat a variety of chronic pain conditions refractory to more conservative management including refractory angina pectoris. We identified 31 patients who underwent SCS implantation for the indication of refractory angina at a single institution from 2003 through 2018. Sixteen patients were male, and 15 were female. Average age was 53.9 years. Prior to SCS implantation, all patients had at least one coronary angiogram. Ten (32.3%) patients had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention, and four (12.9%) had undergone coronary artery bypass grafting. Thirty patients (96.7%) were currently using anti-angina medications. Twenty-six patients (83.9%) were on antiplatelet or anticoagulant agents at the time of SCS evaluation. Spinal cord stimulation implanters must perform a comprehensive evaluation incorporating appropriate multidisciplinary care particularly in patients with refractory angina given their cardiovascular comorbidities. It is important to have baseline data (e.g., pain scores, nitroglycerin consumption, frequency of angina episodes, and a questionnaire, such as the Seattle Angina Questionnaire) to compare with follow-up data to help define treatment success. We report a single institution’s pre-operative experience for patients undergoing SCS for refractory angina to illustrate unique pre-operative SCS considerations in this chronic pain population.
Gender Representation in Fellowship Program Director Positions in ACGME-Accredited Chronic Pain and Acute Pain Fellowship Programs
AbstractObjectiveWe quantified the representation of female program directors (PDs) and assessed their respective demographics, academic metrics, and program-related characteristics in chronic pain and acute pain medicine fellowship programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME).MethodsWe identified chronic and acute pain PDs on the ACGME website on November 15, 2020. We abstracted data from public databases and performed comparisons of demographics, academic metrics, and program-related characteristics between female and male PDs.ResultsWe identified 111 chronic pain programs and 35 acute pain programs. Overall, there were 35 (31.5%) chronic pain programs with a female PD and 76 (68.5%) chronic pain programs with a male PD. Female chronic pain PDs published fewer peer-reviewed articles (4.0 publications, interquartile range [IQR] = 2.0–12.0) compared with male chronic pain PDs (9.0 publications, IQR = 4.0–27.0; P = 0.050), although there was no difference in the H-index score (3.0 vs 4.0 publications, respectively; P = 0.062) or senior academic rank status (57.1% vs 50.0%, respectively; P = 0.543). There were 10 (28.6%) acute pain programs with a female PD and 25 (71.4%) acute pain programs with a male PD. Similar to the chronic pain cohort, there was no difference in senior academic rank status based on gender in acute pain PDs (50.0% vs 24.0%, respectively; P = 0.227).ConclusionOur study highlights gender differences in the PD role in ACGME-accredited chronic and acute pain fellowships. Female PDs remain underrepresented and have fewer peer-reviewed publications. Senior academic rank status was similar across genders, contradicting the current evidence in academic medicine.
Characteristics of Designated Institutional Officials and Sponsoring Institutions of ACGME-Accredited Training Programs
ABSTRACT Background Since the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) established the designated institutional official (DIO) role in 1998, there have been major changes in sponsoring institutions (SIs) and DIO responsibilities. Yet there remains a large gap in our knowledge regarding baseline SI and DIO characteristics as well as a need for institutions wanting to increase diversity in the DIO role and other leadership positions within the medical education community. Objective We sought to characterize demographics of DIOs and the SIs they oversee. Methods We identified SIs and DIOs on the ACGME website on February 15, 2020. Reviewed data included SI accreditation status, number of programs and resident/fellow positions, and DIO characteristics. Results We identified 831 SIs. SIs with continued accreditation sponsored more programs (median 4.0) than SIs with initial accreditation (median 1.0, P < .001). DIO age ranged from 29–81 years (median 57 years). Two-hundred eighty-three of 831 (34%) DIOs were women. Of 576 DIOs with known academic rank, 356 (62%) DIOs held senior academic rank. A higher proportion of male DIOs had senior academic rank (68% vs 52%; OR 1.90 [95% CI 1.34–2.70]; P < .001) and professor rank (39% vs 24%; OR 2.01 [95% CI 1.38–2.94]; P < .001) compared to female DIOs. Female gender was associated with a greater number of ACGME-accredited programs and filled resident/fellow positions per SI (P < .001 for both). Conclusions This study describes characteristics of DIOs and SIs and offers insights for those pursuing a DIO position.
Analyzing Spinal Cord Stimulator Explants in Refractory Angina Pectoris Patients
Abstract Background The Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) is a self-administered questionnaire used in cardiac patients to quantify angina based on five scales: physical limitation scale, anginal stability scale, anginal frequency scale, treatment satisfaction scale, and the disease perception scale. Here we report the use of the SAQ to assess angina symptoms in 18 patients who underwent spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for refractory angina pectoris (RAP) at the Mayo Clinic. Methods Electronic health records were searched to find patients who underwent SCS for the treatment of RAP at a single institution from 2003 to 2018. Eligible patients were asked to participate in a phone survey that included the SAQ. Results Out of 13 patients who still had their implant, six (46%) had minimal physical limitations. Ten patients (76.9%) had favorable anginal frequency scores, defined as minimal or mild. Out of the five patients who had their device removed, one (20%) had minimal physical limitations and three (60%) had favorable anginal frequency scores. There was a high treatment satisfaction score for both those with their implant in place and those with the device removed. Conclusion The SAQ is useful as a comprehensive measure specific to patients with RAP assessing function, pain, and satisfaction. The utilization of this tool pre- and post-operatively may provide additional information to analyze the effectiveness of SCS for RAP.
Peripheral Nerve Stimulation: A New Treatment for Meralgia Paresthetica
Abstract Background Meralgia paresthetica is a condition caused by entrapment of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve that leads to paresthesia along the anterolateral portion of the thigh. Because of advancements in neuromodulation, peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) has been considered a new treatment option for meralgia paresthetica. Newer PNS technology targets peripheral nerves directly yet in a minimally invasive manner. We report a case in which a PNS device provided more than 12 months of complete pain relief in a patient with meralgia paresthetica and helped the patient avoid a neurolysis procedure. Case Presentation A 57-year-old male presented to clinic with a 6-year history of “painful numbness [and] burning” along the right lateral thigh. He rated his pain as 8 out of 10, which decreased to a rating of 2 out of 10 with the use of gabapentin, but unwanted side effects motivated him to seek alternative treatment. On the basis of his history, physical exam, and imaging results, he was diagnosed with meralgia paresthetica. He was offered neurolysis; however, after seeing a pain specialist, he agreed to the implantation of a SPRINT peripheral nerve stimulator. After the implantation procedure, his pain reduced to 0 out of 10, and his quality of life improved, with better sleep and less somnolence. The device was removed after 60 days, as planned. He continued to have complete resolution of pain at 12 months after the date of device implantation. Conclusion With recent advancements, PNS can be used to treat meralgia paresthetica in an effective yet minimally invasive manner. As newer PNS technology becomes more familiar to physicians and pain specialists, it is likely to be used as a mainstay treatment for meralgia paresthetica.
Advancement in Neuromodulation Technology with the Innovation of Design-Specific Peripheral Nerve Stimulators: Sural Nerve Stimulation for Radiculopathy
Abstract Background Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is a form of neuromodulation that is used to treat chronic and refractory neuropathic pain. Peripheral nerve stimulation was first described in the early 1960s when Shelden implanted a PNS device for trigeminal neuralgia. Despite PNS being known since the 1960s, technology designed specifically for PNS was lacking. Within the past few years, design-specific PNS devices have become widely available, with favorable efficacy and safety profiles. Here we report a case of design-specific PNS that provided two years of pain relief in a patient with lower extremity neuropathic pain. Case Presentation A 53-year-old female with a history of congenital lumbar meningocele status post–L4-L5 laminectomy presented to the Mayo Clinic for treatment of foot pain that began three days after her laminectomy. She experienced a 6/10 burning, tingling sensation in the lateral dorsal portion of her right foot and posterolateral calf in addition to allodynia that prevented her from wearing shoes. She failed gabapentin, amitriptyline, cannabis, transforaminal epidural steroid injections, and two spinal cord stimulator trials. The patient ultimately underwent implantation of a right sural nerve stimulator, resulting in a 50% improvement in pain and functionality at two-year follow-up. Conclusions This report emphasizes the recent development of design-specific PNS devices and their successful use in this patient. Peripheral nerve stimulation technology and applications have diminished the role of spinal cord stimulation devices used for the periphery. Peripheral nerve stimulation should be considered for patients with isolated extremity pain, especially in those with spinal abnormalities (e.g., arachnoid cyst).