Pingree, Matthew J.

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a 60‐day peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) treatment targeting the occipital nerves for reducing pain and improving function in individuals diagnosed with cervicogenic headache or occipital neuralgia. Background Headache conditions are prevalent and commonly disabling, and conventional therapeutic strategies are often insufficient. Development of a percutaneous 60‐day PNS treatment has created new opportunities to evaluate PNS of the occipital nerves. Methods This study was an institutional review board‐approved, multicenter, prospective, single‐arm study that enrolled participants from October 2022 to March 2024. Participants with cervicogenic headache or occipital neuralgia received a 60‐day PNS treatment targeting the occipital nerves. The primary endpoint was the proportion reporting clinically significant (≥30%) reductions in average pain and/or pain interference at end of treatment (EOT). Additional analysis included the proportion of participants with ≥50% reduction in average pain intensity and/or pain interference and additional outcomes including Patient Global Impression of Change, six‐item Headache Impact Test, and Neck Disability Index. Results At EOT, 90% of participants (18/20) met the primary endpoint. Further, 85% (17/20) and 83% (15/18) reported ≥50% reductions in pain and/or pain interference at EOT and 3 months, respectively. Clinically meaningful improvements were observed in functional and headache‐related disability and quality‐of‐life measures. All study‐related adverse events were non‐serious. Conclusion Most participants reported significant reductions in pain and/or pain interference following 60‐day PNS targeting the occipital nerves. Outcomes through 3 months demonstrate how 60‐day PNS offers an effective approach for the treatment of headache.

This case series aims to highlight the efficacy of peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) in the treatment of phantom limb pain, as well as provide an alternative method for the treatment of this pain syndrome. In this report, we describe three amputee patients with severe phantom limb pain who obtained substantial analgesia and improvement in physical functionality after implantation of a temporary PNS device. Future studies should assess predictors of successful response or poor response to PNS therapy, such as mental health, environmental stressors, coping skills, and procedural factors. These factors may facilitate an individualized approach for each patient to ensure appropriate candidacy for PNS and better prognosis. Considering that patients in our cohort did not achieve long-lasting benefit after removal of temporary PNS, future research should assess if patients with phantom limb pain would benefit from permanent PNS, rather than temporary PNS.

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.

Abstract The primary aim of this randomized clinical trial is to investigate the effects of ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) vs ultrasound-guided trigger point injections (TPIs) on numerical rating scale pain scores at month 3 follow-up in patients with a chronic abdominal wall pain. The primary outcome measure was the difference in mean numeric rating scale pain scores between the TAP and TPI groups at month 3 in an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis. A total of 60 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive an ultrasound-guided TAP block (n = 30) or an ultrasound-guided TPI (n = 30). No significant group differences in baseline demographic or clinical characteristics were observed. The mean baseline pain score for the TAP and TPI groups was 5.5 and 4.7, respectively. In the ITT analysis at month 3, the between-group difference in pain scores was 1.7 (95% confidence interval, 0.3-3.0) favoring the TPI group. In a secondary per-protocol analysis, the between-group difference in pain scores was 1.8 (95% confidence interval, 0.4-3.2) favoring the TPI group. For the ITT and per-protocol analyses, the group differences in pain scores were consistent with a medium effect size. The main finding of this randomized clinical trial is that adults with chronic abdominal wall pain who received a TPI reported significantly lower pain scores at month 3 follow-up compared with patients who received a TAP block.

Abstract Purpose Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is a rapidly expanding field within neuromodulation; however, there is limited data on therapeutic efficacy. This study describes the indications and clinical outcomes for patients undergoing PNS for chronic pain states. Patients and Methods This is a retrospective case series of adults undergoing PNS implantation from 2004 to 2017 at an academic medical center. The primary outcomes were changes in numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scores, opioid utilization in oral morphine milligram equivalent (MME), and self‐reported patient functioning at 6 months postoperatively. Infectious and device‐related complications were also assessed. Results A total of 72 patients underwent PNS implantation, including 59 patients that received a preceding PNS trial (59/78; 76% progression rate) and 13 that did not receive a PNS trial. The most common indication for stimulation was occipital neuralgia (47%) followed by lower‐extremity neuropathies (17%). PNS implantation was associated with 6‐month reductions in pain scores (7 [6, 8] baseline vs. 4 [2, 5] 6 months; P < 0.001) and opioid utilization (eg, median 60 [31, 104] vs. 18 [0, 52] MME among those with baseline opioid use; P < 0.001). Median functional improvement was 73% (50%, 88%). Seven patients (10%) suffered a postoperative surgical site infection at a median of 50 (30, 124) days, of which five devices were removed. Conclusion Peripheral nerve stimulation was associated with reduced pain scores, lower opioid utilization, and improved patient function at 6 months. These data support PNS as a potentially effective nonopioid analgesic modality in chronic pain, though prospective multicenter evaluation is warranted to evaluate longer‐term outcomes.

Background: Knee osteoarthritis is a painful and sometimes debilitating disease that often affects patients for years. Current treatments include short-lasting and often repetitive nonsurgical options, followed by surgical intervention for appropriate candidates. Cooled radiofrequency ablation (CRFA) is a minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of pain related to knee osteoarthritis. This trial compared the efficacy and safety of CRFA with those of a single hyaluronic acid (HA) injection. Methods: Two hundred and sixty subjects with knee osteoarthritis pain that was inadequately responsive to prior nonoperative modalities were screened for enrollment in this multicenter, randomized trial. One hundred and eighty-two subjects who met the inclusion criteria underwent diagnostic block injections and those with a minimum of 50% pain relief were randomized to receive either CRFA on 4 genicular nerves or a single HA injection. One hundred and seventy-five subjects were treated (88 with CRFA and 87 with HA). Evaluations for pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS]), function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]), quality of life (Global Perceived Effect [GPE] score and EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Level [EQ-5D-5L] questionnaire), and safety were performed at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment. Results: Demographic characteristics did not differ significantly between the 2 study groups. A total of 158 subjects (76 in the CRFA group and 82 in the HA group) completed the 6-month post-treatment follow-up. In the CRFA group, 71% of the subjects had ≥50% reduction in the NRS pain score (primary end point) compared with 38% in the HA group (p < 0.0001). At 6 months, the mean NRS score reduction was 4.1 ± 2.2 for the CRFA group compared with 2.5 ± 2.5 for the HA group (p < 0.0001). The mean WOMAC score improvement at 6 months from baseline was 48.2% in the CRFA group and 22.6% in the HA group (p < 0.0001). At 6 months, 72% of the subjects in the CRFA group reported improvement in the GPE score compared with 40% in the HA group (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: CRFA-treated subjects demonstrated a significant improvement in pain relief and overall function compared with subjects treated with a single injection of HA. No serious adverse events related to either procedure were noted, and the overall adverse-event profiles were similar. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.