脊髓刺激加常规药物治疗与单独常规药物治疗对严重、非手术、难治性背痛的治疗:一项随机临床试验。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
James North, Aaron Calodney, Drew Trainor, Zachary L McCormick, Julio Paez, Eric Loudermilk, Anne Christopher, John Noles, Gregory Phillips, Suneil Jolly, Michael I Yang, Maged Guirguis, Daniel Kloster, Daniel J Pak, Jeffery Peacock, Mitchell Engle, Binit Shah, Derron Wilson, Magdalena Anitescu, Joseph Atallah, John Chatas, Tim Leier, Steven Rosen, Edward Goldberg
{"title":"脊髓刺激加常规药物治疗与单独常规药物治疗对严重、非手术、难治性背痛的治疗:一项随机临床试验。","authors":"James North, Aaron Calodney, Drew Trainor, Zachary L McCormick, Julio Paez, Eric Loudermilk, Anne Christopher, John Noles, Gregory Phillips, Suneil Jolly, Michael I Yang, Maged Guirguis, Daniel Kloster, Daniel J Pak, Jeffery Peacock, Mitchell Engle, Binit Shah, Derron Wilson, Magdalena Anitescu, Joseph Atallah, John Chatas, Tim Leier, Steven Rosen, Edward Goldberg","doi":"10.1136/rapm-2024-106335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Chronic low back pain is a major contributor to long-term disability. Many patients lack a clearly identifiable source for their pain on physical examination or imaging or present with multiple pain generators. This subset of patients, who do not have surgical pathology, relies on conservative medical management (CMM) in the absence of effective and lasting treatment alternatives. For those who fail to respond to CMM, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) should be considered as an effective adjunctive therapy for improving pain, disability and health-related quality of life.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>SOLIS is a prospective, multicenter trial that randomized patients with non-surgical, refractory back pain (with or without leg pain) to receive either SCS combined with CMM or CMM alone. The primary endpoint at 3 months compared the proportion of patients with ≥50% overall pain relief without an increase in mean daily opioid use between the SCS+CMM and CMM groups. Three months after treatment activation, patients initially randomized to receive CMM alone had the option to cross over and add SCS to their pain management regimen. Patients in both randomized groups underwent 12-month follow-up visits to assess long-term effects on pain relief, disability, health-related quality of life, global impression of change, and treatment satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>147 patients were randomized to SCS+CMM (n=79) or CMM alone (n=68). At the 3-month follow-up, 89.5% of patients who received SCS+CMM (including subperception and paresthesia-based programming modalities) and 8.1% who received CMM alone were classified as study responders (≥50% pain relief without an increase in mean daily opioid use; modified intention-to-treat analysis, p<0.0001). The level of disability due to low back pain improved significantly: the Oswestry Disability Index score decreased by -27.5±15.9 points in the SCS+CMM group versus -7.2±9.9 points in the CMM alone group (p<0.0001). Health-related quality of life also improved at 3 months: the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level questionnaire index score increased by 0.247±0.164 points in the SCS+CMM group versus 0.031±0.151 points in the CMM alone group (p<0.0001). The benefits of SCS were sustained until the 12-month visit. Seven patients experienced serious adverse events related to SCS, including 5 (3.6%) implant site infections resulting in explant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SCS relieved pain and resulted in clinically significant improvements in functional disability and health-related quality of life in patients with non-surgical, refractory back pain with or without accompanying leg pain.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04676022.</p>","PeriodicalId":54503,"journal":{"name":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Spinal cord stimulation plus conventional medical management versus conventional medical management alone for severe, non-surgical, refractory back pain: a randomized clinical trial followed by crossover.\",\"authors\":\"James North, Aaron Calodney, Drew Trainor, Zachary L McCormick, Julio Paez, Eric Loudermilk, Anne Christopher, John Noles, Gregory Phillips, Suneil Jolly, Michael I Yang, Maged Guirguis, Daniel Kloster, Daniel J Pak, Jeffery Peacock, Mitchell Engle, Binit Shah, Derron Wilson, Magdalena Anitescu, Joseph Atallah, John Chatas, Tim Leier, Steven Rosen, Edward Goldberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/rapm-2024-106335\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Chronic low back pain is a major contributor to long-term disability. Many patients lack a clearly identifiable source for their pain on physical examination or imaging or present with multiple pain generators. This subset of patients, who do not have surgical pathology, relies on conservative medical management (CMM) in the absence of effective and lasting treatment alternatives. For those who fail to respond to CMM, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) should be considered as an effective adjunctive therapy for improving pain, disability and health-related quality of life.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>SOLIS is a prospective, multicenter trial that randomized patients with non-surgical, refractory back pain (with or without leg pain) to receive either SCS combined with CMM or CMM alone. The primary endpoint at 3 months compared the proportion of patients with ≥50% overall pain relief without an increase in mean daily opioid use between the SCS+CMM and CMM groups. Three months after treatment activation, patients initially randomized to receive CMM alone had the option to cross over and add SCS to their pain management regimen. Patients in both randomized groups underwent 12-month follow-up visits to assess long-term effects on pain relief, disability, health-related quality of life, global impression of change, and treatment satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>147 patients were randomized to SCS+CMM (n=79) or CMM alone (n=68). At the 3-month follow-up, 89.5% of patients who received SCS+CMM (including subperception and paresthesia-based programming modalities) and 8.1% who received CMM alone were classified as study responders (≥50% pain relief without an increase in mean daily opioid use; modified intention-to-treat analysis, p<0.0001). The level of disability due to low back pain improved significantly: the Oswestry Disability Index score decreased by -27.5±15.9 points in the SCS+CMM group versus -7.2±9.9 points in the CMM alone group (p<0.0001). Health-related quality of life also improved at 3 months: the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level questionnaire index score increased by 0.247±0.164 points in the SCS+CMM group versus 0.031±0.151 points in the CMM alone group (p<0.0001). The benefits of SCS were sustained until the 12-month visit. Seven patients experienced serious adverse events related to SCS, including 5 (3.6%) implant site infections resulting in explant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SCS relieved pain and resulted in clinically significant improvements in functional disability and health-related quality of life in patients with non-surgical, refractory back pain with or without accompanying leg pain.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>NCT04676022.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-106335\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-106335","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

慢性腰痛是导致长期残疾的主要原因。许多患者在体格检查或影像学检查中缺乏明确的疼痛来源,或存在多种疼痛源。这部分患者没有手术病理,在缺乏有效和持久的治疗方案的情况下依赖于保守的医疗管理(CMM)。对于那些对CMM没有反应的患者,脊髓刺激(SCS)应被视为一种有效的辅助治疗,以改善疼痛、残疾和与健康相关的生活质量。方法:SOLIS是一项前瞻性、多中心试验,随机选择非手术、难治性背痛(伴或不伴腿痛)患者接受SCS联合CMM或单独CMM治疗。3个月时的主要终点比较了SCS+CMM组和CMM组之间总体疼痛缓解≥50%且平均每日阿片类药物使用量未增加的患者比例。在治疗启动3个月后,最初随机接受CMM的患者可以选择交叉并将SCS添加到他们的疼痛管理方案中。两个随机分组的患者都进行了12个月的随访,以评估在疼痛缓解、残疾、健康相关生活质量、总体变化印象和治疗满意度方面的长期效果。结果:147例患者随机分为SCS+CMM组(n=79)或单独CMM组(n=68)。在3个月的随访中,89.5%接受SCS+CMM(包括亚知觉和基于感觉异常的编程方式)的患者和8.1%单独接受CMM的患者被归类为研究应答者(疼痛缓解≥50%,且平均每日阿片类药物使用量增加;结论:SCS缓解了非手术、伴有或不伴有腿部疼痛的难治性背痛患者的疼痛,并导致其功能残疾和健康相关生活质量的临床显著改善。试验注册号:NCT04676022。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Spinal cord stimulation plus conventional medical management versus conventional medical management alone for severe, non-surgical, refractory back pain: a randomized clinical trial followed by crossover.

Introduction: Chronic low back pain is a major contributor to long-term disability. Many patients lack a clearly identifiable source for their pain on physical examination or imaging or present with multiple pain generators. This subset of patients, who do not have surgical pathology, relies on conservative medical management (CMM) in the absence of effective and lasting treatment alternatives. For those who fail to respond to CMM, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) should be considered as an effective adjunctive therapy for improving pain, disability and health-related quality of life.

Methods: SOLIS is a prospective, multicenter trial that randomized patients with non-surgical, refractory back pain (with or without leg pain) to receive either SCS combined with CMM or CMM alone. The primary endpoint at 3 months compared the proportion of patients with ≥50% overall pain relief without an increase in mean daily opioid use between the SCS+CMM and CMM groups. Three months after treatment activation, patients initially randomized to receive CMM alone had the option to cross over and add SCS to their pain management regimen. Patients in both randomized groups underwent 12-month follow-up visits to assess long-term effects on pain relief, disability, health-related quality of life, global impression of change, and treatment satisfaction.

Results: 147 patients were randomized to SCS+CMM (n=79) or CMM alone (n=68). At the 3-month follow-up, 89.5% of patients who received SCS+CMM (including subperception and paresthesia-based programming modalities) and 8.1% who received CMM alone were classified as study responders (≥50% pain relief without an increase in mean daily opioid use; modified intention-to-treat analysis, p<0.0001). The level of disability due to low back pain improved significantly: the Oswestry Disability Index score decreased by -27.5±15.9 points in the SCS+CMM group versus -7.2±9.9 points in the CMM alone group (p<0.0001). Health-related quality of life also improved at 3 months: the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level questionnaire index score increased by 0.247±0.164 points in the SCS+CMM group versus 0.031±0.151 points in the CMM alone group (p<0.0001). The benefits of SCS were sustained until the 12-month visit. Seven patients experienced serious adverse events related to SCS, including 5 (3.6%) implant site infections resulting in explant.

Conclusion: SCS relieved pain and resulted in clinically significant improvements in functional disability and health-related quality of life in patients with non-surgical, refractory back pain with or without accompanying leg pain.

Trial registration number: NCT04676022.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
175
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, the official publication of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA), is a monthly journal that publishes peer-reviewed scientific and clinical studies to advance the understanding and clinical application of regional techniques for surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. Coverage includes intraoperative regional techniques, perioperative pain, chronic pain, obstetric anesthesia, pediatric anesthesia, outcome studies, and complications. Published for over thirty years, this respected journal also serves as the official publication of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA), the Asian and Oceanic Society of Regional Anesthesia (AOSRA), the Latin American Society of Regional Anesthesia (LASRA), the African Society for Regional Anesthesia (AFSRA), and the Academy of Regional Anaesthesia of India (AORA).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信