High-Frequency 10-kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation Improves Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Refractory Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: 12-Month Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial

Erika A Petersen, Thomas G Stauss, James A Scowcroft, Elizabeth S Brooks, Judith L White, Shawn M Sills, Kasra Amirdelfan, Maged N Guirguis, Jijun Xu, Cong Yu, Ali Nairizi, Denis G Patterson, Kostandinos C Tsoulfas, Michael J Creamer, Vincent Galan, Richard H Bundschu, Neel D Mehta, Dawood Sayed, Shivanand P Lad, David J DiBenedetto, Khalid A Sethi, Johnathan H Goree, Matthew T Bennett, Nathan J Harrison, Atef F Israel, Paul Chang, Paul W Wu, Charles E Argoff, Christian E Nasr, Rod S Taylor, David L Caraway, Nagy A Mekhail, Erika A Petersen, Thomas G Stauss, James A Scowcroft, Elizabeth S Brooks, Judith L White, Shawn M Sills, Kasra Amirdelfan, Maged N Guirguis, Jijun Xu, Cong Yu, Ali Nairizi, Denis G Patterson, Kostandinos C Tsoulfas, Michael J Creamer, Vincent Galan, Richard H Bundschu, Neel D Mehta, Dawood Sayed, Shivanand P Lad, David J DiBenedetto, Khalid A Sethi, Johnathan H Goree, Matthew T Bennett, Nathan J Harrison, Atef F Israel, Paul Chang, Paul W Wu, Charles E Argoff, Christian E Nasr, Rod S Taylor, David L Caraway, Nagy A Mekhail

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate high-frequency (10-kHz) spinal cord stimulation (SCS) treatment in refractory painful diabetic neuropathy.

Patients and methods: A prospective, multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted between Aug 28, 2017 and March 16, 2021, comparing conventional medical management (CMM) with 10-kHz SCS+CMM. The participants had hemoglobin A1c level of less than or equal to 10% and pain greater than or equal to 5 of 10 cm on visual analog scale, with painful diabetic neuropathy symptoms 12 months or more refractory to gabapentinoids and at least 1 other analgesic class. Assessments included measures of pain, neurologic function, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) over 12 months with optional crossover at 6 months.

Results: The participants were randomized 1:1 to CMM (n=103) or 10-kHz SCS+CMM (n=113). At 6 months, 77 of 95 (81%) CMM group participants opted for crossover, whereas none of the 10-kHz SCS group participants did so. At 12 months, the mean pain relief from baseline among participants implanted with 10-kHz SCS was 74.3% (95% CI, 70.1-78.5), and 121 of 142 (85%) participants were treatment responders (≥50% pain relief). Treatment with 10-kHz SCS improved HRQoL, including a mean improvement in the EuroQol 5-dimensional questionnaire index score of 0.136 (95% CI, 0.104-0.169). The participants also reported significantly less pain interference with sleep, mood, and daily activities. At 12 months, 131 of 142 (92%) participants were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the 10-kHz SCS treatment.

Conclusion: The 10-kHz SCS treatment resulted in substantial pain relief and improvement in overall HRQoL 2.5- to 4.5-fold higher than the minimal clinically important difference. The outcomes were durable over 12 months and support 10-kHz SCS treatment in patients with refractory painful diabetic neuropathy.

Trial registration: clincaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03228420.

Keywords: CMM, conventional medical management; DN4, Douleur Neuropathique; DSPN, diabetic sensorimotor peripheral neuropathy; EQ-5D-5L, EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level questionnaire; HRQoL, health-related quality of life; HbA1c, hemoglobin A1c; IPG, implantable pulse generator; NNT, number needed to treat; PDN, painful diabetic neuropathy; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SCS, spinal cord stimulation; VAS, visual analog scale.

© 2022 The Authors.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Disposition of all participants through 12 months. ∗Trial SCS was discontinued for 2 patients: 1 patient removed trial leads at home, whereas the other patient had a significant lead migration. †Participants without the 3-month primary end point assessment were included only in the SG for AE reporting for the remainder of the study; other outcomes were not aggregated for analysis. AE, adverse event; CMM, conventional medical management; f/u, follow-up; SCS, spinal cord stimulation; SG, safety group; WC, withdrew consent.
Figure 2
Figure 2
A, Individual pain responses among all 10-kHz SCS implanted participants (n=142) at 12 months. Each line represents the improvement in a single participant’s lower limb pain score relative to the baseline. Treatment responders (n=121) are those with at least 50% pain relief, shown in blue, with nonresponders (n=21) shown in orange. The average pain relief among all implanted participants at 12 months was 74%. B, The 5-level EQ-5D-5L measures health-related quality of life. Participants rate 5 items each with 5 levels of response that are converted to an index value on the basis of the US population norms, ranging from −0.109 (a state worse than death) to 1.000 (perfect health). The average scores are plotted over time for the 10-kHz SCS+CMM group participants (n=84, blue line, open squares) and CMM group participants who crossover after 6 months (n=57, orange line preimplant, blue line postimplant, open circles). C, The PSQ-3 evaluates the impact of pain on falling asleep and staying asleep with three 10-cm VASs, where 0 cm means “never” and 10 cm means “always.” The average scores are plotted over time for the 10-kHz SCS+CMM group participants (n=84, blue line, open squares) and CMM group participants who crossover after 6 months (n=58, orange line preimplant, blue line postimplant, open circles). D, The BPI-DPN scale has been validated in patients with PDN and assesses pain interference with activity, mood, and activities of daily living via 7 items on a scale of 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes). The average scores are plotted over time for the 10-kHz SCS+CMM group participants (n=84, blue line, open squares) and CMM group participants who crossover after 6 months (n=57, orange line preimplant, blue line postimplant, open circles). E, The GAF scale requires clinician assessment of the patient’s mental health and well-being on a scale of 1 (persistent danger to oneself or others OR unable to maintain personal hygiene OR serious suicidality) to 100 (superior functioning in a wide range of activities/no symptoms). The average scores are shown over time for the 10-kHz SCS+CMM group participants (n=80, orange bar preimplant, blue bars postimplant) and CMM group participants who crossover after 6 months (n=56, orange bars preimplant, blue bars postimplant). F, The participants rated their satisfaction with treatment on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied” at 12 months. Proportions are shown for all implanted participants (n=142). Error bars: 95% CI, ∗P<.05, ∗∗P<.01, ∗∗∗P<.001. BPI-DPN, Brief Pain Inventory for Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy; CMM, conventional medical management; EQ-5D-5L, EuroQol 5-dimensional questionnaire; GAF, Global Assessment of Functioning; PDN, painful diabetic neuropathy; PSQ-3, Pain and Sleep Questionnaire 3-Item Index; SCS, spinal cord stimulation; VAS, visual analog scale.

References

    1. Global report on diabetes. World Health Organization. 2016.
    1. Saeedi P., Petersohn I., Salpea P., et al. Global and regional diabetes prevalence estimates for 2019 and projections for 2030 and 2045: results from the International Diabetes Federation Diabetes Atlas, 9th edition. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2019;157
    1. Sloan G., Selvarajah D., Tesfaye S. Pathogenesis, diagnosis and clinical management of diabetic sensorimotor peripheral neuropathy. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2021;17(7):400–420.
    1. Boulton A.J., Armstrong D.G., Albert S.F., et al. Comprehensive foot examination and risk assessment: a report of the task force of the foot care interest group of the American Diabetes Association, with endorsement by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(8):1679–1685.
    1. Rastogi A., Goyal G., Kesavan R., et al. Long term outcomes after incident diabetic foot ulcer: multicenter large cohort prospective study (EDI-FOCUS investigators) epidemiology of diabetic foot complications study: epidemiology of diabetic foot complications study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2020;162
    1. Zelman D.C., Brandenburg N.A., Gore M. Sleep impairment in patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Clin J Pain. 2006;22(8):681–685.
    1. Abbott C.A., Malik R.A., van Ross E.R., Kulkarni J., Boulton A.J. Prevalence and characteristics of painful diabetic neuropathy in a large community-based diabetic population in the U.K. Diabetes Care. 2011;34(10):2220–2224.
    1. Pop-Busui R., Boulton A.J., Feldman E.L., et al. Diabetic neuropathy: a position statement by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(1):136–154.
    1. Sloan G., Alam U., Selvarajah D., Tesfaye S. The treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy. Curr Diabetes Rev. 2022;18(5):42–96.
    1. Ismail-Beigi F., Craven T., Banerji M.A., et al. Effect of intensive treatment of hyperglycaemia on microvascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: an analysis of the ACCORD randomised trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9739):419–430.
    1. Bril V., England J., Franklin G.M., et al. Evidence-based guideline: treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy: report of the American Academy of Neurology, the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Neurology. 2011;76(20):1758–1765.
    1. Finnerup N.B., Attal N., Haroutounian S., et al. Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14(2):162–173.
    1. Yang M., Qian C., Liu Y. Suboptimal treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain in the United States. Pain Med. 2015;16(11):2075–2083.
    1. Robinson-Papp J., Simpson D.M. Safety profile of treatment in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. Pain Med. 2007;8(suppl 2):S43–S49.
    1. Tesfaye S., Watt J., Benbow S.J., Pang K.A., Miles J., MacFarlane I.A. Electrical spinal-cord stimulation for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Lancet. 1996;348(9043):1698–1701.
    1. Pluijms W.A., Slangen R., Bakkers M., et al. Pain relief and quality-of-life improvement after spinal cord stimulation in painful diabetic polyneuropathy: a pilot study. Br J Anaesth. 2012;109(4):623–629.
    1. de Vos C.C., Meier K., Zaalberg P.B., et al. Spinal cord stimulation in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy: a multicentre randomized clinical trial. Pain. 2014;155(11):2426–2431.
    1. Slangen R., Schaper N.C., Faber C.G., et al. Spinal cord stimulation and pain relief in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a prospective two-center randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(11):3016–3024.
    1. van Beek M., Slangen R., Schaper N.C., et al. Sustained treatment effect of spinal cord stimulation in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: 24-month follow-up of a prospective two-center randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(9):e132–e134.
    1. van Beek M., Geurts J.W., Slangen R., et al. Severity of neuropathy is associated with long-term spinal cord stimulation outcome in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: five-year follow-up of a prospective two-center clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(1):32–38.
    1. North R.B., Ewend M.G., Lawton M.T., Piantadosi S. Spinal cord stimulation for chronic, intractable pain: superiority of “multi-channel” devices. Pain. 1991;44(2):119–130.
    1. De Carolis G., Paroli M., Tollapi L., et al. Paresthesia-independence: an assessment of technical factors related to 10 kHz paresthesia-free spinal cord stimulation. Pain Physician. 2017;20(4):331–341.
    1. Lee K.Y., Bae C., Lee D., et al. Low-intensity, kilohertz frequency spinal cord stimulation differently affects excitatory and inhibitory neurons in the rodent superficial dorsal horn. Neuroscience. 2020;428:132–139.
    1. Kapural L., Yu C., Doust M.W., et al. Novel 10-kHz high-frequency therapy (HF10 therapy) is superior to traditional low-frequency spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of chronic back and leg pain: the SENZA-RCT randomized controlled trial. Anesthesiology. 2015;123(4):851–860.
    1. Kapural L., Yu C., Doust M.W., et al. Comparison of 10-kHz high-frequency and traditional low-frequency spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of chronic back and leg pain: 24-month results from a multicenter, randomized, controlled pivotal trial. Neurosurgery. 2016;79(5):667–677.
    1. Galan V., Scowcroft J., Chang P., et al. 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation treatment for painful diabetic neuropathy: results from post-hoc analysis of the SENZA-PPN study. Pain Manag. 2020;10(5):291–300.
    1. Petersen E.A., Stauss T.G., Scowcroft J.A., et al. Effect of high-frequency (10-kHz) spinal cord stimulation in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. 2021;78(6):687–698.
    1. Petersen E.A., Stauss T.G., Scowcroft J.A., et al. Durability of high-frequency 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation for patients with painful diabetic neuropathy refractory to conventional treatments: 12-month results from a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2022;45(1):e3–e6.
    1. Chen J.L., Hesseltine A.W., Nashi S.E., et al. A real-world analysis of high-frequency 10 kHz spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2022;16(2):282–288.
    1. Mekhail N.A., Argoff C.E., Taylor R.S., et al. High-frequency spinal cord stimulation at 10 kHz for the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy: design of a multicenter, randomized controlled trial (SENZA-PDN) Trials. 2020;21(1):87.
    1. Williams H.C., Burden-Teh E., Nunn A.J. What is a pragmatic clinical trial? J Invest Dermatol. 2015;135(6):1–3.
    1. McCormack H.M., Horne D.J., Sheather S. Clinical applications of visual analogue scales: a critical review. Psychol Med. 1988;18(4):1007–1019.
    1. Bouhassira D., Attal N., Alchaar H., et al. Comparison of pain syndromes associated with nervous or somatic lesions and development of a new neuropathic pain diagnostic questionnaire (DN4) Pain. 2005;114(1-2):29–36.
    1. Dworkin R.H., Turk D.C., Revicki D.A., et al. Development and initial validation of an expanded and revised version of the Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ-2) Pain. 2009;144(1-2):35–42.
    1. Zelman D.C., Gore M., Dukes E., Tai K.S., Brandenburg N. Validation of a modified version of the Brief Pain Inventory for Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005;29(4):401–410.
    1. Herdman M., Gudex C., Lloyd A., et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–1736.
    1. Reliability and validity of a diabetes quality-of-life measure for the diabetes control and complications trial (DCCT). The DCCT research group. Diabetes Care. 1988;11(9):725–732.
    1. Ayearst L., Harsanyi Z., Michalko K.J. The Pain and Sleep Questionnaire three-item index (PSQ-3): a reliable and valid measure of the impact of pain on sleep in chronic nonmalignant pain of various etiologies. Pain Res Manag. 2012;17(4):281–290.
    1. American Psychiatric Association . 4th ed. American Psychiatric Press Inc; 2000. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
    1. Booth J., Young M.J. Differences in the performance of commercially available 10-g monofilaments. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(7):984–988.
    1. England J.D., Gronseth G.S., Franklin G., et al. Distal symmetrical polyneuropathy: a definition for clinical research. A report of the American Academy of Neurology, the American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine, and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(1):167–174.
    1. Spallone V., Morganti R., D’Amato C., Greco C., Cacciotti L., Marfia G.A. Validation of DN4 as a screening tool for neuropathic pain in painful diabetic polyneuropathy. Diabet Med. 2012;29(5):578–585.
    1. Strand N.H., Burkey A.R. Neuromodulation in the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy: a review of evidence for spinal cord stimulation. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2022;16(2):332–340.
    1. McClure N.S., Sayah F.A., Ohinmaa A., Johnson J.A. Minimally important difference of the EQ-5D-5L index score in adults with type 2 diabetes. Value Health. 2018;21(9):1090–1097.
    1. Hayek S.M., Veizi E., Hanes M. Treatment-limiting complications of percutaneous spinal cord stimulator implants: a review of eight years of experience from an academic center database. Neuromodulation. 2015;18(7):603–608. discussion 608-609.
    1. Fishman M.A., Antony A., Esposito M., Deer T., Levy R. The evolution of neuromodulation in the treatment of chronic pain: forward-looking perspectives. Pain Med. 2019;20(suppl 1):S58–S68.
    1. Eldabe S., Buchser E., Duarte R.V. Complications of spinal cord stimulation and peripheral nerve stimulation techniques: a review of the literature. Pain Med. 2016;17(2):325–336.
    1. Van Buyten J.P., Wille F., Smet I., et al. Therapy-related explants after spinal cord stimulation: results of an international retrospective chart review study. Neuromodulation. 2017;20(7):642–649.
    1. Gupta M., Knezevic N.N., Abd-Elsayed A., Ray M., Patel K., Chowdhury B. Treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy-a narrative review of pharmacological and interventional approaches. Biomedicines. 2021;9(5):573.
    1. Verrills P., Salmon J., Russo M., Gliner B., Barnard A., Caraway D. 10 kHz spinal cord stimulation for chronic upper limb and neck pain: Australian experience. Eur Spine J. 2020;29(11):2786–2794.
    1. Amirdelfan K., Vallejo R., Benyamin R., et al. High-frequency spinal cord stimulation at 10 kHz for the treatment of combined neck and arm pain: results from a prospective multicenter study. Neurosurgery. 2020;87(2):176–185.
    1. Tate J.L., Stauss T., Li S., Rotte A., Subbaroyan J. A prospective, multi-center, clinical trial of a 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation system in the treatment of chronic pelvic pain. Pain Pract. 2021;21(1):45–53.
    1. Gupta M., Scowcroft J., Kloster D., et al. 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation for chronic postsurgical pain: results from a 12-month prospective, multicenter study. Pain Pract. 2020;20(8):908–918.
    1. Kapural L., Gupta M., Paicius R., et al. Treatment of chronic abdominal pain with 10-kHz spinal cord stimulation: safety and efficacy results from a 12-month prospective, multicenter, feasibility study. Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2020;11(2)
    1. Al-Kaisy A., Palmisani S., Smith T.E., et al. 10 kHz high-frequency spinal cord stimulation for chronic axial low back pain in patients with no history of spinal surgery: a preliminary, prospective, open label and proof-of-concept study. Neuromodulation. 2017;20(1):63–70.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj