ArticleBrain sciences2024
Spinal Cord Stimulation for Spinal Cord Injury-Related Pain: A Pilot Study.
Article in Brain sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative outcomes of spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain: peripheral nerve versus spinal cord lesions.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSpinal cord stimulation (SCS) has emerged as an effective treatment for managing chronic pain that is unresponsive to traditional therapies. While SCS is well documented for conditions like failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), its effectiveness in managing pain related to spinal cord injuries (SCI) is less studied. This study aims to assess the efficacy of SCS in alleviating SCI-related pain and improving patients' quality of life, filling a gap in the existing literature.
methodsThis cohort study included 15 adult patients with traumatic and non-traumatic SCIs, treated between 2016 and 2022. Patients received SCS implants after either a trial or direct implantation. Pain levels were assessed using visual analog scale (VAS) scores, while quality of life was evaluated using the EuroQol five-dimensional (EQ-5D) scale. The SCS devices were implanted at different spinal levels, with various stimulation protocols applied, including high-frequency stimulation (10 kHz).
resultsIn patients with traumatic SCI, the mean VAS score decreased from 8.6 to 4.5, with 71% reporting more than 50% pain relief. Non-traumatic SCI patients experienced a reduction from 8.5 to 2.5, with all showing more than 50% pain relief. EQ-5D scores improved in both groups. A 49% reduction in pain medication usage was also observed, though one patient required revision surgery due to an adverse event.
conclusionsSCS significantly reduces pain and improves quality of life for SCI patients, particularly with high-frequency protocols. While promising, further research is needed to optimize patient selection and stimulation parameters for better long-term outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.