Line Jacques

Patients with neuropathic pain secondary to failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) typically experience persistent pain, disability, and reduced quality of life. We hypothesised that spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective therapy in addition to conventional medical management (CMM) in this patient population. We randomised 100 FBSS patients with predominant leg pain of neuropathic radicular origin to receive spinal cord stimulation plus conventional medical management (SCS group) or conventional medical management alone (CMM group) for at least 6 months. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving 50% or more pain relief in the legs. Secondary outcomes were improvement in back and leg pain, health-related quality of life, functional capacity, use of pain medication and non-drug pain treatment, level of patient satisfaction, and incidence of complications and adverse effects. Crossover after the 6-months visit was permitted, and all patients were followed up to 1 year. In the intention-to-treat analysis at 6 months, 24 SCS patients (48%) and 4 CMM patients (9%) (p<0.001) achieved the primary outcome. Compared with the CMM group, the SCS group experienced improved leg and back pain relief, quality of life, and functional capacity, as well as greater treatment satisfaction (p<or=0.05 for all comparisons). Between 6 and 12 months, 5 SCS patients crossed to CMM, and 32 CMM patients crossed to SCS. At 12 months, 27 SCS patients (32%) had experienced device-related complications. In selected patients with FBSS, SCS provides better pain relief and improves health-related quality of life and functional capacity compared with CMM alone.

OBJECTIVE: After randomizing 100 failed back surgery syndrome patients to receive spinal cord stimulation (SCS) plus conventional medical management (CMM) or CMM alone, the results of the 6-month Prospective Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial of the Effectiveness of Spinal Cord Stimulation (i.e., PROCESS) showed that SCS offered superior pain relief, health-related quality of life, and functional capacity. Because the rate of crossover favoring SCS beyond 6 months would bias a long-term randomized group comparison, we present all outcomes in patients who continued SCS from randomization to 24 months and, for illustrative purposes, the primary outcome (>50% leg pain relief) per randomization and final treatment. METHODS: Patients provided data on pain, quality of life, function, pain medication use, treatment satisfaction, and employment status. Investigators documented adverse events. Data analysis included inferential comparisons and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: The 42 patients continuing SCS (of 52 randomized to SCS) reported significantly improved leg pain relief (P < 0.0001), quality of life (P <or= 0.01), and functional capacity (P = 0.0002); and 13 patients (31%) required a device-related surgical revision. At 24 months, of 46 of 52 patients randomized to SCS and 41 of 48 randomized to CMM who were available, the primary outcome was achieved by 17 (37%) randomized to SCS versus 1 (2%) to CMM (P = 0.003) and by 34 (47%) of 72 patients who received SCS as final treatment versus 1 (7%) of 15 for CMM (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: At 24 months of SCS treatment, selected failed back surgery syndrome patients reported sustained pain relief, clinically important improvements in functional capacity and health-related quality of life, and satisfaction with treatment.

BACKGROUND: Chronic back and leg pain conditions result in patients' loss of function, reduced quality of life and increased costs to the society. AIMS: To assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and cost implications of spinal cord stimulation plus non-surgical conventional medical management (SCS group) versus non-surgical conventional medical management alone (CMM group) in the management of neuropathic pain in patients with failed back surgery syndrome. METHODS: A total of 100 patients were randomised to either the SCS or CMM group. Healthcare resource consumption data relating to screening, the use of the implantable generator in SCS patients, hospital stay, and drug and non-drug pain-related treatment were collected prospectively. Resource consumption was costed using UK and Canadian 2005-2006 national figures. HRQoL was assessed using the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Costs and outcomes were assessed for each patient over their first 6-months of the trial. RESULTS: The 6-month mean total healthcare cost in the SCS group (CAN$19,486; 12,653 euros) was significantly higher than in the CMM group (CAN$3994; 2594 euros), with a mean adjusted difference of CAN$15,395 (9997 euros) (p<0.001). However, the gain in HRQoL with SCS over the same period of time was markedly greater in the SCS group, with a mean EQ-5D score difference of 0.25 [p<0.001] and 0.21 [p<0.001], respectively at 3- and 6-months after adjusting for baseline variables. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of SCS to CMM in patients with neuropathic leg and back pain results in higher costs to health systems but also generates important improvements in patients' EQ-5D over the same period.

BACKGROUND: Neuropathic pain commonly affects the back and legs and is associated with severe disability and psychological illness. It is unclear how patients with predominantly neuropathic pain due to failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) compare with patients with other chronic pain conditions. AIMS: To present data on characteristics associated with FBSS patients compared with those with complex regional pain syndrome, rheumatoid and osteoarthritis, and fibromyalgia. METHODS: The PROCESS (Prospective Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial of the Effectiveness of Spinal Cord Stimulation, ISRCTN 77527324) trial randomized 100 patients to spinal cord stimulation (n = 52) plus conventional medical management (CMM) or CMM alone (n = 48). Baseline patient parameters included age, sex, time since last surgery, employment status, pain location and severity (visual analogue scale), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), level of disability, medication, and nondrug therapies. Reference population data was drawn from the literature. RESULTS: At baseline, patients in the PROCESS study had a similar age and gender profile compared with other conditions. PROCESS patients suffered from greater leg pain and had lower HRQoL. PROCESS patients treatment cost was higher and they commonly took opioids, while antidepressants and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were more often used for other conditions. Prior to baseline, 87% of patients had tried at least 4 different treatment modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Patients suffering from chronic pain of neuropathic origin following FBSS often fail to obtain adequate relief with conventional therapies (eg, medication, nondrug therapies) and suffer greater pain and lower HRQoL compared with patients with other chronic pain conditions. Neuropathic FBSS patients may require alternative and possibly more (cost-) effective treatments, which should be considered earlier in their therapeutic management.