Sayed E Wahezi, Ugur Yener, Tahereh Naeimi, Joshua B Lewis, Sandeep Yerra, Philip Sgobba, Hatice Begum Ciftci, Amaresh Vydyanathan, Elisa Chiu, Denis Cherkalin, Jay Y Darji, Ryan Masterson, Danielle Lee, Atthakorn Jarusriwanna, Suwannika Palee, Nicole R Ortiz, Moorice Caparo, Eli Dayon, Camille Fontaine, Marom Bikson, Michael E Schatman, Scott G Pritzlaff, Timothy R Deer, Corey W Hunter
{"title":"Spinal Cord Stimulation Explantation and Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review and Technology Recommendations.","authors":"Sayed E Wahezi, Ugur Yener, Tahereh Naeimi, Joshua B Lewis, Sandeep Yerra, Philip Sgobba, Hatice Begum Ciftci, Amaresh Vydyanathan, Elisa Chiu, Denis Cherkalin, Jay Y Darji, Ryan Masterson, Danielle Lee, Atthakorn Jarusriwanna, Suwannika Palee, Nicole R Ortiz, Moorice Caparo, Eli Dayon, Camille Fontaine, Marom Bikson, Michael E Schatman, Scott G Pritzlaff, Timothy R Deer, Corey W Hunter","doi":"10.2147/JPR.S514732","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic pain affects 20.5% of the US population, costing $296 billion annually in lost productivity. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has become a key treatment for refractory neuropathic and nociceptive pain, with increasing usage due to technological advancements. However, the durability of SCS therapy, including explantation rates, remains a concern. Understanding explantation causes is essential for improving patient selection and device effectiveness. This study aims to analyze SCS explantation rates and reasons, as well as evaluate the financial burden of these procedures on the healthcare system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three primary screening methods were used: manual search with keywords, MeSH term query, and reference list screening. The search covered PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases from inception to November 2024, yielding 719 articles. After applying eligibility criteria, 72 articles were identified, and 25 were selected for analysis. Data extraction was done by independent reviewers, with a second reviewer ensuring accuracy. Discrepancies were resolved by the corresponding editor.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We reviewed data from 13,026 patients who underwent permanent SCS implantation between 1984 and 2024, across 25 studies. A total of 1882 patients (9.82%) underwent explantation. The most common reason was lack of efficacy and inadequate pain relief (38%), followed by lead failure (15%) and infection (14%). While SCS is generally effective, issues related to device longevity and patient satisfaction persist, with explantation rates due to technical failures and lack of efficacy being concerns.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SCS efficacy varies, with explantation rates reaching up to 38%, often due to inadequate pain relief. Most explantations occur within the first year, despite SCS being a safe and effective treatment. High implantation costs ($35,000 to $70,000) and revision costs ($15,000 to $25,000) raise concerns among payors. The hardware-driven model limits waveform flexibility, highlighting the need for innovation.</p>","PeriodicalId":16661,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain Research","volume":"18 ","pages":"1327-1340"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11929510/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S514732","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Chronic pain affects 20.5% of the US population, costing $296 billion annually in lost productivity. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has become a key treatment for refractory neuropathic and nociceptive pain, with increasing usage due to technological advancements. However, the durability of SCS therapy, including explantation rates, remains a concern. Understanding explantation causes is essential for improving patient selection and device effectiveness. This study aims to analyze SCS explantation rates and reasons, as well as evaluate the financial burden of these procedures on the healthcare system.
Methods: Three primary screening methods were used: manual search with keywords, MeSH term query, and reference list screening. The search covered PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases from inception to November 2024, yielding 719 articles. After applying eligibility criteria, 72 articles were identified, and 25 were selected for analysis. Data extraction was done by independent reviewers, with a second reviewer ensuring accuracy. Discrepancies were resolved by the corresponding editor.
Results: We reviewed data from 13,026 patients who underwent permanent SCS implantation between 1984 and 2024, across 25 studies. A total of 1882 patients (9.82%) underwent explantation. The most common reason was lack of efficacy and inadequate pain relief (38%), followed by lead failure (15%) and infection (14%). While SCS is generally effective, issues related to device longevity and patient satisfaction persist, with explantation rates due to technical failures and lack of efficacy being concerns.
Conclusion: SCS efficacy varies, with explantation rates reaching up to 38%, often due to inadequate pain relief. Most explantations occur within the first year, despite SCS being a safe and effective treatment. High implantation costs ($35,000 to $70,000) and revision costs ($15,000 to $25,000) raise concerns among payors. The hardware-driven model limits waveform flexibility, highlighting the need for innovation.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Pain Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that welcomes laboratory and clinical findings in the fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Original research, reviews, symposium reports, hypothesis formation and commentaries are all considered for publication. Additionally, the journal now welcomes the submission of pain-policy-related editorials and commentaries, particularly in regard to ethical, regulatory, forensic, and other legal issues in pain medicine, and to the education of pain practitioners and researchers.