Retrospective Case Series on the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy With Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation

Eldabe, Sam; Espinet, Anthony; Wåhlstedt, Anders; Kang, Porhan; Liem, Liong; Patel, Nikunj; Vesper, Jan; Kimber, Alicia; Cusack, William F.; Kramer, Jeffery M.

doi:10.1111/ner.12767

Cited by 59 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Morgalla et al reported 63.5% overall pain relief and improvement in BPI scores under DRGS in patients with post-herniorraphy inguinal pain, which was sustained even after three years of observation (14). These successful rates of pain relief have been replicated in other more recent smaller case series (11,55,56) as well as in some case reports (13,16,18,19,26). In our study, we had 74% mean pain reduction at one month and 70% at six-month postsurgery.…”

Section: Drg Stimulationsupporting

confidence: 75%

Neurophysiological Effects of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation (DRGS) in Pain Processing at the Cortical Level

Morgalla

Filho

Chander

et al. 2019

Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Drg Stimulationsupporting

confidence: 75%

Neurophysiological Effects of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation (DRGS) in Pain Processing at the Cortical Level

Morgalla

Filho

Chander

et al. 2019

Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This disease entity is commonly observed in the elderly population and it has been well‐characterized in the literature . Compared to the DRG stimulation study on painful DPN , the average age of subjects in this study is much younger (53 years old vs. 62 years old). The successfully implanted subjects have an average age of 47 years ago.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 56%

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation as a Potentially Effective Treatment for Painful Hereditary and Idiopathic Axonal Polyneuropathy: A Retrospective Case Series

Rempe

Jerath

et al. 2020

Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Also clinically, the effectiveness of Con-DRGS and the superiority of Con-DRGS over Con-SCS for the treatment of chronic intractable pain of the lower limbs attributed to complex regional pain syndrome and causalgia has been published in a RCT (10). Additionally, the first retrospective study to assess the effect of Con-DRGS for refractory PDPN patients was recently published by Eldabe et al (11). Despite the retrospective nature and small sample size (ten patients) of this study, the authors concluded that Con-DRGS is a safe and effective neuromodulation modality to improve painful symptoms in PDPN patients (11).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in Experimental Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: Burst vs. Conventional Stimulation Paradigm

Franken

Debets

Joosten

2019

Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) is a long‐term complication of diabetes mellitus (DM). Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation (DRGS) has recently emerged as a neuromodulation modality in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of burst DRGS (Burst‐DRGS) and conventional DRGS (Con‐DRGS) in an experimental model of PDPN. Materials and Methods DM was induced in female Sprague–Dawley rats by intraperitoneal injection of streptozotocin (STZ, n = 48). Animals were tested for mechanical hypersensitivity (50% hind paw withdrawal threshold on Von Frey test) before, and 4 weeks after STZ injection. PDPN rats were then implanted with a unilateral bipolar lead at the L5 DRG (n = 22) and were stimulated for 30 min at days 2 and 3 postimplantation. Animals received Con‐DRGS and Burst‐DRGS in a randomized crossover design (n = 10), or received Sham‐DRGS (n = 7) for 30 min, and were tested for mechanical hypersensitivity at baseline, 15 and 30 min during DRGS, and 15 and 30 min following DRGS. Five animals were withdrawn from the study due to electrode‐related technical problems. Results Con‐DRGS and Burst‐DRGS normalized STZ‐induced mechanical hypersensitivity at 15 and 30 min during stimulation. A significant difference in terms of mechanical hypersensitivity was observed between both of the stimulated groups and the Sham‐DRGS group at 15 and 30 min during stimulation. Interestingly, Burst‐DRGS showed signs of a residual effect at 15 min after cessation of stimulation, while this was not the case for Con‐DRGS. Conclusions Under the conditions tested, Con‐DRGS and Burst‐DRGS are equally effective in attenuating STZ‐induced mechanical hypersensitivity in an animal model of PDPN. Burst‐DRGS showed signs of a residual effect at 15 min after cessation of stimulation, which requires further investigation.

show abstract

Retrospective Case Series on the Treatment of Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy With Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation

Cited by 59 publications

References 39 publications

Neurophysiological Effects of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation (DRGS) in Pain Processing at the Cortical Level

Neurophysiological Effects of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation (DRGS) in Pain Processing at the Cortical Level

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation as a Potentially Effective Treatment for Painful Hereditary and Idiopathic Axonal Polyneuropathy: A Retrospective Case Series

Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation in Experimental Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: Burst vs. Conventional Stimulation Paradigm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About