Samir J Sheth, Denise D Lester, Jaudat Mahmood, Sarah E Trampota, G Lawson Smith, Raheleh Rahimi Darabad, Brandon D Swan, Meredith J McGee, Joseph W Boggs
{"title":"Durable Outcomes and Intervention Avoidance in Low Back Pain Up to 5 Years After Percutaneous 60-Day Peripheral Nerve Stimulation.","authors":"Samir J Sheth, Denise D Lester, Jaudat Mahmood, Sarah E Trampota, G Lawson Smith, Raheleh Rahimi Darabad, Brandon D Swan, Meredith J McGee, Joseph W Boggs","doi":"10.1007/s40122-026-00858-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of disability worldwide, and treatment often necessitates invasive interventions that carry significant risks and economic burdens. While prior studies demonstrated durable benefit following percutaneous 60-day peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS), real-world data are needed to characterize long-term outcomes across routine clinical practice. This survey evaluated the durability of patient-reported improvements among a real-world cohort of patients with LBP who responded to 60-day PNS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional follow-up survey was administered to patients who previously responded to 60-day PNS targeting the lumbar medial branch nerves. Outcomes assessed included patient-reported percent pain relief and impression of change in quality of life (QoL), physical function, mood, and sleep. Participants also reported use or avoidance of other LBP treatments or interventions since completing 60-day PNS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey was completed by 602 participants, with follow-up durations ranging from 6 to 68 months. Overall, 79% (475/602) of participants required no radiofrequency ablation (RFA), permanent implant, or surgery following 60-day PNS. Among participants who avoided subsequent interventions, 79% (376/475) reported durable improvements in at least one domain (≥ 50% pain relief and/or clinically meaningful improvement of QoL, physical function, mood, and/or sleep) at follow-up. Among participants without a prior permanent neurostimulator implant, 92% (309/336) of those who sought to avoid permanent implantation succeeded. Among those without prior low back surgery who wanted to avoid it, 95% (353/370) avoided surgery through follow‑up.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings suggest that patients with LBP who respond to percutaneous 60-day PNS may experience durable relief, with benefits sustained by some for 5+ years. Participants reported reductions in pain leading to improvements in other health domains, and avoidance of subsequent interventions, including surgery, permanent implants, and/or RFA, through long-term follow-up, highlighting the potential use of percutaneous 60-day PNS as a minimally invasive, short-term treatment capable of producing long-lasting benefits in patients with LBP.</p>","PeriodicalId":19908,"journal":{"name":"Pain and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1345-1361"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13623810/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-026-00858-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Low back pain (LBP) is a leading cause of disability worldwide, and treatment often necessitates invasive interventions that carry significant risks and economic burdens. While prior studies demonstrated durable benefit following percutaneous 60-day peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS), real-world data are needed to characterize long-term outcomes across routine clinical practice. This survey evaluated the durability of patient-reported improvements among a real-world cohort of patients with LBP who responded to 60-day PNS.
Methods: A cross-sectional follow-up survey was administered to patients who previously responded to 60-day PNS targeting the lumbar medial branch nerves. Outcomes assessed included patient-reported percent pain relief and impression of change in quality of life (QoL), physical function, mood, and sleep. Participants also reported use or avoidance of other LBP treatments or interventions since completing 60-day PNS.
Results: The survey was completed by 602 participants, with follow-up durations ranging from 6 to 68 months. Overall, 79% (475/602) of participants required no radiofrequency ablation (RFA), permanent implant, or surgery following 60-day PNS. Among participants who avoided subsequent interventions, 79% (376/475) reported durable improvements in at least one domain (≥ 50% pain relief and/or clinically meaningful improvement of QoL, physical function, mood, and/or sleep) at follow-up. Among participants without a prior permanent neurostimulator implant, 92% (309/336) of those who sought to avoid permanent implantation succeeded. Among those without prior low back surgery who wanted to avoid it, 95% (353/370) avoided surgery through follow‑up.
Conclusions: These findings suggest that patients with LBP who respond to percutaneous 60-day PNS may experience durable relief, with benefits sustained by some for 5+ years. Participants reported reductions in pain leading to improvements in other health domains, and avoidance of subsequent interventions, including surgery, permanent implants, and/or RFA, through long-term follow-up, highlighting the potential use of percutaneous 60-day PNS as a minimally invasive, short-term treatment capable of producing long-lasting benefits in patients with LBP.
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.