Christopher A Gilmore, Timothy R Deer, Mehul J Desai, Sean Li, Michael J DePalma, Steven P Cohen, Brandon D Swan, Meredith J McGee, Joseph W Boggs
{"title":"Four-Year Follow-Up from a Prospective, Multicenter Study of Percutaneous 60-Day Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Chronic Low Back Pain.","authors":"Christopher A Gilmore, Timothy R Deer, Mehul J Desai, Sean Li, Michael J DePalma, Steven P Cohen, Brandon D Swan, Meredith J McGee, Joseph W Boggs","doi":"10.1007/s40122-025-00737-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of healthcare expenditure and long-term disability associated with complex treatment challenges and the need for progressively invasive interventions. Percutaneous 60-day Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) is a minimally invasive neurostimulation treatment that has shown efficacy for chronic LBP, providing sustained improvements through 1 year of follow-up after treatment. The present work explores the long-term clinical outcomes of Percutaneous 60-day PNS for chronic LBP approximately 4 years after initial treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Follow-up surveys were sent to participants from a prior prospective study who reported clinically meaningful reductions in pain, disability, or pain interference 12 months after Percutaneous 60-day PNS for LBP. The present long-term follow-up survey assessed current levels of LBP, disability, pain interference, and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Use of medications and other interventions for LBP treatment since completing Percutaneous 60-day PNS was also surveyed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 23 participants returned completed long-term follow-up surveys. A majority of survey respondents (65%, n = 15/23) reported sustained, clinically meaningful (≥ 30%) relief of back pain compared with baseline an average of 4.7 years after PNS treatment was initiated. On average, these long-term responders reported clinically substantial (≥ 50%) reductions in pain (average 63% reduction), as well as clinically meaningful improvements in disability and quality of life. Furthermore, 70% (n = 16/23) of survey respondents avoided progression to more costly, invasive, and/or destructive LBP pain interventions (i.e., radiofrequency ablation, neurostimulation implant, or lumbar surgery).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Treatment with Percutaneous 60-day PNS provided clinically meaningful pain relief among a majority of surveyed participants an average of more than 4 years after the short-term treatment. These results demonstrate that Percutaneous 60-day PNS can provide durable outcomes that are often sustained for multiple (4+) years by patients with chronic axial LBP who subsequently avoid the need for more invasive treatment interventions.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the initial study is NCT03179202.</p>","PeriodicalId":19908,"journal":{"name":"Pain and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1103-1115"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12085521/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-025-00737-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Chronic low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of healthcare expenditure and long-term disability associated with complex treatment challenges and the need for progressively invasive interventions. Percutaneous 60-day Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) is a minimally invasive neurostimulation treatment that has shown efficacy for chronic LBP, providing sustained improvements through 1 year of follow-up after treatment. The present work explores the long-term clinical outcomes of Percutaneous 60-day PNS for chronic LBP approximately 4 years after initial treatment.
Methods: Follow-up surveys were sent to participants from a prior prospective study who reported clinically meaningful reductions in pain, disability, or pain interference 12 months after Percutaneous 60-day PNS for LBP. The present long-term follow-up survey assessed current levels of LBP, disability, pain interference, and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Use of medications and other interventions for LBP treatment since completing Percutaneous 60-day PNS was also surveyed.
Results: In total, 23 participants returned completed long-term follow-up surveys. A majority of survey respondents (65%, n = 15/23) reported sustained, clinically meaningful (≥ 30%) relief of back pain compared with baseline an average of 4.7 years after PNS treatment was initiated. On average, these long-term responders reported clinically substantial (≥ 50%) reductions in pain (average 63% reduction), as well as clinically meaningful improvements in disability and quality of life. Furthermore, 70% (n = 16/23) of survey respondents avoided progression to more costly, invasive, and/or destructive LBP pain interventions (i.e., radiofrequency ablation, neurostimulation implant, or lumbar surgery).
Conclusions: Treatment with Percutaneous 60-day PNS provided clinically meaningful pain relief among a majority of surveyed participants an average of more than 4 years after the short-term treatment. These results demonstrate that Percutaneous 60-day PNS can provide durable outcomes that are often sustained for multiple (4+) years by patients with chronic axial LBP who subsequently avoid the need for more invasive treatment interventions.
Clinical trial registration: The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the initial study is NCT03179202.
期刊介绍:
Pain and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of pain therapies and pain-related devices. Studies relating to diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged.
Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, acute pain, cancer pain, chronic pain, headache and migraine, neuropathic pain, opioids, palliative care and pain ethics, peri- and post-operative pain as well as rheumatic pain and fibromyalgia.
The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports, trial protocols, short communications such as commentaries and editorials, and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from around the world. Pain and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.