Chronic neuropathic pain is a debilitating ordeal for patients worldwide and pharmacological treatment efficacy is still limited. As many pharmacological interventions for neuropathic pain often fail, insights into the underlying mechanism and role of identified receptors is of utmost importance. An important target for improving treatment of neuropathic pain is the descending serotonergic system as these projections modulate nociceptive signaling in the dorsal horn. Also with use of last resort treatments like spinal cord stimulation (SCS), the descending serotonergic projections are known to be involved in the pain relieving effect. This systematic review summarizes the involvement of the serotonergic system on nociceptive modulation in the healthy adult rodent and the chronic neuropathic rodent and summarizes all available literature on the serotonergic system in the SCS-treated neuropathic rodent. Medline, Embase and Pubmed databases were used in the search for articles. Descending serotonergic modulation of nociceptive signaling in spinal dorsal horn in normal adult rat is mainly inhibitory and mediated by 5-HT1a, 5-HT1b, 5-HT2c, 5-HT3 and 5-HT4 receptors. Upon injury and in the neuropathic rat, this descending serotonergic modulation becomes facilitatory via activation of the 5-HT2a, 5-HT2b and 5-HT3 receptors. Analgesia due to neuromodulatory intervention like SCS restores the inhibitory function of the descending serotonergic system and involves 5-HT2, 5-HT3 and 5-HT4 receptors. The results of this systematic review provide insights and suggestions for further pharmacological and or neuromodulatory treatment of neuropathic pain based on targeting selected serotonergic receptors related to descending modulation of nociceptive signaling in spinal dorsal horn. With the novel developed SCS paradigms, the descending serotonergic system will be an important target for mechanism-based stimulation induced analgesia.
Introduction Chronic discogenic low back pain (CD‐LBP) is caused by degeneration of the disc due to trauma to the annulus or by unprovoked degeneration, resulting in chronic pain. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) employing the BurstDR™ waveform has been shown to be an effective treatment in a variety of chronic pain conditions. The aim of this prospective case study was to determine the effect of BurstDR™ SCS on pain relief, disability, and patient satisfaction in a population with CD‐LBP. Methods Seventeen subjects with CD‐LBP received a SCS trial with BurstDR™ stimulation. Patients with >50% pain relief after a trial period of 2 weeks were permanently implanted (n = 15). Patients then rated LBP and leg pain using the numeric rating scale (NRS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), patient global impression of change (PGIC), EQ‐5D quality of life, and painDETECT for neuropathic pain at baseline following trial, 3, 6, and 12 months after permanent implantation. Results Treatment with BurstDR™ SCS resulted in significant reduction of LBP as the NRS was reduced from 71.7 ± 7.3 at baseline to 42.5 ± 18.1 at 12 months. Average pain relief at 12 months was 42.5%. In patients with leg pain (n = 8), pain was significantly reduced from 66.9 ± 8.2 to 11.7 ± 10.4 at 12 months. PainDETECT scores for neuropathic pain significantly reduced from 18.9 ± 4.8 at baseline, and 14.8 ± 3.2 at 12 months. Baseline ODI score significantly reduced from 41.2 ± 12.8 to 25.8 ± 8.6 at 12 months. PGIC scores remained low from 2.6 ± 1.6 at 3 months, 2.5 ± 1.0 at 6 months, and 2.5 ± 1.3 at 12 months. EQ‐5D‐5L rates remained constant from baseline 56.10 ± 23.9 to 68.6 ± 12.9 at 12 months. Conclusion BurstDR™ SCS resulted in significant reduction of back pain, leg pain, and quality of life in patients with CD‐LBP and decreased the level of disability and generated positive patient satisfaction scores.
Background Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has shown to be an effective treatment for patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2 (PSPS Type 2). The method used to deliver electrical charge in SCS is important. One such method is burst stimulation. Within burst stimulation, a recharge pattern is used to prevent buildup of charge in stimulated tissues. Two variations of burst waveforms are currently in use: one that employs active recharge and one that uses passive recharge. It has been suggested that differences exist between active and passive recharge paradigms related to both efficacy of pain relief and their underlying mechanism of action. Active recharge has been shown to activate both the medial spinal pathway, engaging cortical sensorimotor areas involved in location and intensity of pain, and lateral pathway, reaching brain areas involved with cognitive-emotional aspects of pain. Passive recharge has been suggested to act via modulation of thalamic neurons, which fire in a similar electrical pattern, and thereby modulate activity in various cortical areas including those related to motivational and emotional aspects of pain. The objective of this randomized clinical trial is to assess and compare the effect of active versus passive recharge Burst SCS on a wide spectrum of pain in PSPS Type 2 patients. Methods This multicentre randomized clinical trial will take place in 6 Dutch hospitals. PSPS Type 2 patients (n=94) will be randomized into a group receiving either active or passive recharge burst. Following a successful trial period, patients are permanently implanted. Patients complete the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) (primary outcome at 6 months), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NRS), Patient Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire (PVAQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Quality of Life (EQ-5D), Oswestery Disability Index (ODI), Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) and painDETECT questionnaires (secondary outcomes) at baseline, after trial, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months following implantation. Discussion The BURST-RAP trial protocol will shed light on possible clinical differences and effectivity of pain relief, including emotional-motivational aspects between active and passive burst SCS in PSPS Type 2 patients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05421273. Registered on 16 June 2022. Netherlands Trial Register NL9194. Registered on 23 January 2021.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.