Johnathan H Goree, Harold Nijhuis, Gregory L Smith, Erika A Petersen, Jason E Pope, Ajay B Antony, Chau M Vu, Dawood Sayed, Christopher M Lam, Usman Latif, Shrif J Costandi, Paul Verrills, Lalit Venkatesan, Weirong Ge, Ian Gould, Jan Willem Kallewaard
{"title":"首次使用ecap控制的闭环技术客观证据表征颈、胸脊髓神经生理学差异。","authors":"Johnathan H Goree, Harold Nijhuis, Gregory L Smith, Erika A Petersen, Jason E Pope, Ajay B Antony, Chau M Vu, Dawood Sayed, Christopher M Lam, Usman Latif, Shrif J Costandi, Paul Verrills, Lalit Venkatesan, Weirong Ge, Ian Gould, Jan Willem Kallewaard","doi":"10.1007/s40122-025-00782-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a widely accepted therapy in patients with chronic intractable neuropathic pain in the trunk and limbs. However, open-loop (OL) SCS systems, which rely on fixed stimulation parameters and subjective feedback, face limitations in delivering consistent neural activation and durable pain relief. Anatomical and physiological characteristics of the cervical spinal cord, such as decreased cerebrospinal fluid thickness and increased mobility, exacerbate these challenges. Limited evidence exists on differences in cervical and thoracic neurophysiology, and the corresponding impact on neural activation in SCS. This post hoc analysis characterizes neurophysiological differences between the cervical and thoracic regions using evoked compound action potential (ECAP)-controlled closed-loop (CL) technology to assess implications for SCS dosing and therapy optimization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Global study and real-world chronic pain patients implanted with ECAP-controlled CL-SCS systems were included. To identify differences between cervical (n = 187) and thoracic (n = 1899) neurophysiology, the relationship between stimulation current and neural activation was analyzed. Additionally, neural activation stability was evaluated in both in-clinic and out-of-clinic settings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The cervical spinal cord demonstrated significantly lower ECAP thresholds (p < 0.001) and > 100% higher spinal cord sensitivity compared to the thoracic region (p < 0.001). Cervical therapeutic dosing range was ≥ 48% narrower (p < 0.001), increasing the risk of overstimulation with OL-SCS. CL-SCS significantly improved dose accuracy in both regions (p < 0.001) during postural changes simulating activities of daily living. These findings highlight the superior precision and consistency in neural dosing with ECAP-controlled CL systems.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This is the first study to objectively characterize differences in cervical and thoracic spinal neurophysiology using SCS. ECAP-controlled CL-SCS maintains consistent neural activation in both cervical and thoracic regions. Given the heightened sensitivity and narrow dosing range in the cervical region, ECAP-controlled CL-SCS may enhance therapeutic outcomes through more precise and consistent neural dosing compared to OL systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":19908,"journal":{"name":"Pain and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"First Objective Evidence Characterizing Differences in Cervical and Thoracic Spinal Cord Neurophysiology Using ECAP-Controlled Closed-Loop Technology.\",\"authors\":\"Johnathan H Goree, Harold Nijhuis, Gregory L Smith, Erika A Petersen, Jason E Pope, Ajay B Antony, Chau M Vu, Dawood Sayed, Christopher M Lam, Usman Latif, Shrif J Costandi, Paul Verrills, Lalit Venkatesan, Weirong Ge, Ian Gould, Jan Willem Kallewaard\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40122-025-00782-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a widely accepted therapy in patients with chronic intractable neuropathic pain in the trunk and limbs. However, open-loop (OL) SCS systems, which rely on fixed stimulation parameters and subjective feedback, face limitations in delivering consistent neural activation and durable pain relief. Anatomical and physiological characteristics of the cervical spinal cord, such as decreased cerebrospinal fluid thickness and increased mobility, exacerbate these challenges. Limited evidence exists on differences in cervical and thoracic neurophysiology, and the corresponding impact on neural activation in SCS. This post hoc analysis characterizes neurophysiological differences between the cervical and thoracic regions using evoked compound action potential (ECAP)-controlled closed-loop (CL) technology to assess implications for SCS dosing and therapy optimization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Global study and real-world chronic pain patients implanted with ECAP-controlled CL-SCS systems were included. To identify differences between cervical (n = 187) and thoracic (n = 1899) neurophysiology, the relationship between stimulation current and neural activation was analyzed. Additionally, neural activation stability was evaluated in both in-clinic and out-of-clinic settings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The cervical spinal cord demonstrated significantly lower ECAP thresholds (p < 0.001) and > 100% higher spinal cord sensitivity compared to the thoracic region (p < 0.001). Cervical therapeutic dosing range was ≥ 48% narrower (p < 0.001), increasing the risk of overstimulation with OL-SCS. CL-SCS significantly improved dose accuracy in both regions (p < 0.001) during postural changes simulating activities of daily living. These findings highlight the superior precision and consistency in neural dosing with ECAP-controlled CL systems.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This is the first study to objectively characterize differences in cervical and thoracic spinal neurophysiology using SCS. ECAP-controlled CL-SCS maintains consistent neural activation in both cervical and thoracic regions. Given the heightened sensitivity and narrow dosing range in the cervical region, ECAP-controlled CL-SCS may enhance therapeutic outcomes through more precise and consistent neural dosing compared to OL systems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain and Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pain and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-025-00782-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-025-00782-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
First Objective Evidence Characterizing Differences in Cervical and Thoracic Spinal Cord Neurophysiology Using ECAP-Controlled Closed-Loop Technology.
Introduction: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a widely accepted therapy in patients with chronic intractable neuropathic pain in the trunk and limbs. However, open-loop (OL) SCS systems, which rely on fixed stimulation parameters and subjective feedback, face limitations in delivering consistent neural activation and durable pain relief. Anatomical and physiological characteristics of the cervical spinal cord, such as decreased cerebrospinal fluid thickness and increased mobility, exacerbate these challenges. Limited evidence exists on differences in cervical and thoracic neurophysiology, and the corresponding impact on neural activation in SCS. This post hoc analysis characterizes neurophysiological differences between the cervical and thoracic regions using evoked compound action potential (ECAP)-controlled closed-loop (CL) technology to assess implications for SCS dosing and therapy optimization.
Methods: Global study and real-world chronic pain patients implanted with ECAP-controlled CL-SCS systems were included. To identify differences between cervical (n = 187) and thoracic (n = 1899) neurophysiology, the relationship between stimulation current and neural activation was analyzed. Additionally, neural activation stability was evaluated in both in-clinic and out-of-clinic settings.
Results: The cervical spinal cord demonstrated significantly lower ECAP thresholds (p < 0.001) and > 100% higher spinal cord sensitivity compared to the thoracic region (p < 0.001). Cervical therapeutic dosing range was ≥ 48% narrower (p < 0.001), increasing the risk of overstimulation with OL-SCS. CL-SCS significantly improved dose accuracy in both regions (p < 0.001) during postural changes simulating activities of daily living. These findings highlight the superior precision and consistency in neural dosing with ECAP-controlled CL systems.
Conclusions: This is the first study to objectively characterize differences in cervical and thoracic spinal neurophysiology using SCS. ECAP-controlled CL-SCS maintains consistent neural activation in both cervical and thoracic regions. Given the heightened sensitivity and narrow dosing range in the cervical region, ECAP-controlled CL-SCS may enhance therapeutic outcomes through more precise and consistent neural dosing compared to OL systems.
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.