2014
DOI: 10.1177/0333102414534082
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Occipital nerve stimulation for chronic migraine: A randomized trial on subthreshold stimulation

Abstract: Paresthesia is not required to achieve pain reduction but suprathreshold stimulation yields better results, underlining the significance of stimulation parameter customization.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
43
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
43
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The suprathreshold stimulation was found to be more effective than the subthreshold one, but the latter was also superior to no stimulation (42).…”
Section: Migrainementioning
confidence: 84%
“…The suprathreshold stimulation was found to be more effective than the subthreshold one, but the latter was also superior to no stimulation (42).…”
Section: Migrainementioning
confidence: 84%
“…However, use of this technology is limited given the risk of skin burning, and the inability to use TENS through bandages or clothing. Sub-threshold neuromodulation therapy, whether used transcutaneously or invasively, has already shown its potential in modulating a variety of nerves: the occipital nerve for treating migraines [14], sacral nerve for treating bowel incontinence [3] and vagal sympathetic complex to treat heart failure [15]. Correspondingly, the ability to modulate nerve activity without invasive procedures/skin contact would have significant advantages for those capable of benefiting from traditional neurostimulation therapies.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients were blinded to the intervention between the subthreshold and sham stimulations phase. The mean VAS was 8.45 ± 0.99 in the sham stimulation group, 5.65 ± 2.11 in the subthreshold stimulation group, and 1.98 ± 1.56 in the effective stimulation group at a 7‐day follow‐up ( P < 0.01). In the RCOT by Serra et al., 29 patients cycled through treatment and control groups, and there was a significant difference in pain severity between these 2 groups at the 1‐year follow‐up…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%