Subcutaneous Stimulation as an Additional Therapy to Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Low Back Pain and Leg Pain in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: Four-Year Follow-Up

Long-Term Effect of Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation as Add-On Therapy to Spinal Cord Stimulation to Treat Low Back Pain in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome Patients: A 12-Month Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Study

“…More than 40% of the patients in our study reported a reduction of back pain 50%. These results are consistent with the results of the four-year follow-up of a previous feasibility study (28) and with the long-term results of the study by Reverberi et al (29) with this hybrid SCS-PNFS therapy. This finding supports the conclusion that adding PNFS to SCS provides an effective treatment in this highly prevalent medical condition of combined chronic low back and leg pain.…”

“…Because of the expected higher energy consumption of SCS in combination with PNFS a rechargeable IPG is strongly advised. Another reason to use PNFS as an add‐on is the very long‐term and stable effect that is reached in relieving low back pain . Looking to the outcome of our study, further research should be initiated to evaluate only subcutaneous stimulation leads as a stand‐alone therapy in patients only suffering from intractable CLBP without neuropathic leg pain whether this is related to lumbar spine surgery or not.…”

A Novel Minimally Invasive Wireless Technology for Neuromodulation via Percutaneous Intercostal Nerve Stimulation for Post‐Herpetic Neuralgia: A Case Report with Short‐Term Follow‐up

“…They also had connector problems between the lead and extension cable in 1 patient (9%). 16 IPG-related complications were also reported in 3/7 cases (42.8%) in a series reported by Buiten et al 17 where a conventional PNS implant system was utilized for control of refractory angina. We can conclude that complications such as pain related to the bulk and shape of the IPGs are common and significant.…”

“…Hamm‐Faber et al reported implanted pulse generator (IPG) problems in 27% of cases (3/11) and repositioning of the IPG due to pain caused by tilting of the battery in 27% (3/11). They also had connector problems between the lead and extension cable in 1 patient (9%) . IPG‐related complications were also reported in 3/7 cases (42.8%) in a series reported by Buiten et al where a conventional PNS implant system was utilized for control of refractory angina.…”

“…In a recently completed 2‐year study, HF 10 (High Frequency, 10 kHz) SCS therapy had incidence rates of implant site pain (12.9%) and lead migration requiring surgical revision (3%) similar to those of traditional SCS (13.4% and 5.2%, respectively) . High energy consumption with the conventional devices used for PNS was also reported to be an important concern in these patients …”