Improving Spinal Cord Stimulation With ECAPS

January 24, 2024 updated by: University of Minnesota
The purpose of this study will be to investigate the optimization of spinal cord stimulation with ECAPs in patients with spinal cord implants.

Study Overview

Status

Recruiting

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) or electrical stimulation in the epidural space of the spinal canal has been used for more than 50 years to treat chronic pain by modulating the activity of the spinal cord or spinal cord roots. While originally conceived out of gate theory, the precise effects of spinal cord stimulation are still an active area of research. Certainly there are multiple factors contributing to this unchanged responder rate including diagnosis, psychosocial factors, comorbidities, and implementation gaps, but a major technical hurdle remains personalizing therapy to engage in the precise pain circuits for each individual patient in anatomic location and over time. The delivery of spinal cord stimulation varies significantly with changes in position due to the movement of the spinal cord and its associated nerve roots. Existing spinal cord stimulation platforms rely on tonic stimulation with minimal adjustment with movements of the spinal cord or any adjustment due to changing physiology. Tonic stimulation assumes a stationary system that does not account for short or long-term effects of plasticity or movement. However, the effect of stimulation on the circuits of the spinal cord as with all stimulation of the nervous system can be measured through an event-related potential (ERP) synchronized to stimulation pulses, called the evoked compound action potential (ECAP). As an evoked-response, it is clear that ECAPs may provide a more dynamic insight into the underlying electrophysiologic system underlying the anatomic pathways of chronic pain, and some reports have correlated ECAPs to measures of pain relief, which is difficult to disassociate in patients with stable patterns of pain. The spatial variance of ECAP may imply that spinal cord stimulation for the purposes of pain relief is not homologous to features available in the ECAP signal but could be accessible in the variability of ECAP signal. Similarly, very little experimental evidence exists to incorporate the complex role of pain processing and valuation systems into a model of ECAP electrophysiology. Namely, the correlation between top-down control and higher-order (cognitive/mood) circuit interactions with ECAP features and chronic pain. Understanding the electrophysiology of evoked responses in the spinal cord in the competitive market of non-opioid pain relief should be grounded in basic pain phenotype modeling. This proposal represents the first step in that pathway by studying the feasibility of capturing ECAPs during clinical externalization while collecting the necessary data for behavioral modeling for future causal analysis with ECAP features. This protocol establishes the first step towards closed-loop stimulation through open-loop measurement and stimulation during an existing clinical paradigm. This study aims to understand the feasibility of implementing ECAP during the externalization period of a clinical trial while simultaneously providing clinical feedback for optimal settings discovered during testing.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Estimated)

15

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

  • Name: David Darrow, MD, MPH
  • Phone Number: (612)-634-6666
  • Email: darro015@umn.edu

Study Contact Backup

  • Name: Alexander Herman, MD, PhD
  • Phone Number: 612-625-1194
  • Email: herma686@umn.edu

Study Locations

    • Minnesota
      • Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States, 55455
        • Recruiting
        • University of Minnesota

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

22 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Adults scheduled to undergo externalization of spinal cord stimulation.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Medically stable as determined by the principal investigator
  • Scheduled to undergo externalization of spinal cord stimulation
  • English-speaking

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Scheduled for permanent implantation only without trial
  • Have pacemakers or other neurostimulators
  • Pregnancy

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Observational Models: Cohort
  • Time Perspectives: Prospective

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
Observed Cohort
Participants with chronic pain scheduled to undergo externalized trial for assessment of spinal cord stimulation will undergo intraoperative stimulation and up to three postoperative visits where already externalized electrodes (used clinically for stimulation) will be used to record and stimulate using evoked complex action potentials (ECAPs) while also measuring other electrophysiological responses.

Intraoperatively, stimulation at 12 Hz will be performed as the leads are moved into the targeted position. Amplitude will be increased to 15 mA maximum total until a response is seen on any electrode and held for 10 seconds. Stimulation and recording will be performed using the Neuralynx stim/record system.

Post-operatively, the electrodes will be tested for impedance by the clinical system and then they will be connected to the Neuralynx stim/record system. Electrode stimulation patterns will be applied with increasing amplitude until ECAPs responses are seen on recording electrodes. 42 Hz stimulation will be performed with an amplitude sweep of 0mA-10mA. At each amplitude, stimulation will be applied for 4 seconds followed by 2 seconds of rest. Pulse width will be varied from 30-450 microseconds to test effective amplitude. Bursting stimulation will be applied to detect differences in ECAPs as above.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Feasibility Assessed by Enrollment
Time Frame: 2 weeks
Feasibility will be measured as a number of the number of enrolled participants who complete at least 80% of the planned assessments.
2 weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Acceptability Assessed by Survey
Time Frame: 2 weeks
Acceptability will be measured as the average rating of a five-point qualitative scale ranging from "Excellent" to "Very Poor." Scores range with 1-5 with lower scores indicating greater acceptability.
2 weeks

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Correlation of ECAP peak to peak signals to programming parameters
Time Frame: 2 weeks
2 weeks
Correlation of ECAP signals to pain relief
Time Frame: 2 weeks
2 weeks
Stability and reliability of ECAP sensing
Time Frame: 2 weeks
2 weeks
Reliability of ECAP across various levels intraoperatively
Time Frame: 2 weeks
2 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: David Darrow, MD, MPH, University of Minnesota Medical School Department of Neurosurgery
  • Principal Investigator: Alexander Herman, MD, PhD, University of Minnesota Medical School Department of Psychiatry
  • Principal Investigator: Tay Netoff, PhD, University of Minnesota Department of Biomedical Engineering

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

August 18, 2021

Primary Completion (Estimated)

December 31, 2024

Study Completion (Estimated)

December 31, 2024

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

June 16, 2021

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 16, 2021

First Posted (Actual)

June 24, 2021

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimated)

January 25, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 24, 2024

Last Verified

January 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • NEUROSURG-2021-29717

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

In line with recent requirements of scientific journals, preprocessed and anonymized data will be made available for the research community.

It will be deposited on the public repository Zenodo (or equivalent) for 5 years.

IPD Sharing Time Frame

5 years

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

Yes

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Chronic Pain

Clinical Trials on Spinal Cord Stimulation

3
Subscribe