The Pain Suppressive Effect of Alternative Spinal Cord Stimulation Frequencies
NCT ID: NCT02112474
Last Updated: 2020-11-30
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
30 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2014-11-13
2018-11-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Electrical stimulation of the dorsal columns of the spinal cord (Spinal Cord Stimulation or SCS) for pain relief has been used in humans for several decades. The most common indication for SCS is the treatment of refractory neuropathic leg pain, particularly when these symptoms persist after an anatomically successful operation (Failed Back Surgery Syndrome or FBSS).
Low frequency - conventional - SCS (LF-SCS) is applied in frequencies ranging from 30 to 60 Hertz (Hz) and the subject feels paraesthesias in the painful area, which is considered the ideal situation. Recently, LF-SCS has been challenged by the development of stimulation modes at higher frequencies which provide pain relief at sub-perception threshold, i.e. without paraesthesias. A recent case series reported that High Frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation (HF-SCS) appears to show better pain relief for both back and limb pain in comparison to LF-SCS, and also to be effective in some subjects who did not respond to LF-SCS.
Objective:
The primary objective of this trial is to compare pain suppression in two groups of subjects with chronic unilateral limb pain as a result of FBSS .
Study design:
A prospective, double blind (subject, physician, statistician), multi-centre, randomized, crossover trial of SCS in the treatment of subjects with refractory neuropathic leg pain after back surgery.
Study population:
Patients with chronic neuropathic refractory unilateral leg pain
Intervention:
Patients will undergo neurostimulation with low and high frequency parameters, the order in which they receive treatment will be randomized
Main study endpoint:
Pain suppression in the short and long-term (24 days and 12 months)
Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness:
Both methods of stimulation are standard clinical practice performed routinely in the study centres, both groups will receive this standard care. The only difference is change of stimulation frequency and the order in which it is applied.
Possible benefit to the subject is that both forms of stimulation will be evaluated. This may lead to a better quality of life in the HF-SCS Group as result of pain relief without paraesthesias. Furthermore, non-responders to LF-SCS may benefit from HF-SCS.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
CROSSOVER
TREATMENT
TRIPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Spinal Cord Stimulation Group 1
9 days of spinal cord stimulation at 30 Hertz and perceptible paraesthesias
Spinal Cord Stimulation
Crossover design whereby subjects will undergo Spinal Cord Stimulation in two arms: low frequency stimulation and high frequency stimulation
Group 1
9 days of spinal cord stimulation at 30 Hertz and perceptible paraesthesias
Spinal Cord Stimulation Group 2
9 days of spinal cord stimulation with 1000 Hertz and sub-perception paraesthesias
Spinal Cord Stimulation
Crossover design whereby subjects will undergo Spinal Cord Stimulation in two arms: low frequency stimulation and high frequency stimulation
Group 2
9 days of spinal cord stimulation with 1000 Hertz and sub-perception paraesthesias
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Spinal Cord Stimulation
Crossover design whereby subjects will undergo Spinal Cord Stimulation in two arms: low frequency stimulation and high frequency stimulation
Group 1
9 days of spinal cord stimulation at 30 Hertz and perceptible paraesthesias
Group 2
9 days of spinal cord stimulation with 1000 Hertz and sub-perception paraesthesias
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Chronic, persistent, refractory, unilateral neuropathic limb pain, as a result of spinal surgery
* Failed conservative treatments for chronic pain including but not limited to pharmacological therapy, physical therapy and minimally interventional pain procedures for chronic pain
* Pain radiating in the leg, following segments L4 and/or L5 and/or S1 for at least 6 months
* Minimum baseline pain intensity as assessed by VAS of ≥ 50mm on 100mm scale in the primary pain area
* Subject is able and willing to provide informed consent
* Subject is able and willing to comply with the protocol and follow-up schedule
* Subject has been included for implantation according to standard criteria from the Dutch Neuromodulation Society
Exclusion Criteria
* Bilateral limb pain
* Subjects with a previous SCS implantation.
* Changes in pain medication in the 2 months preceding the trial period;
* Expected inability of subjects to correctly operate the neurostimulation system
* Presence of any other clinically significant or disabling chronic pain condition -eg. hip arthrosis, rheumatoid arthritis, fibromyalgia, etc.
* History of coagulation disorders, lupus erythematosus, diabetes mellitus, or morbus Bechterew
* Symptoms or proof of any malignant disease
* Current use of medicines affecting coagulation which cannot be temporarily stopped
* Evidence of an active disruptive psychiatric disorder or other known condition significant enough to impact the perception of pain, compliance to intervention and/or ability to evaluate treatment outcome as determined by the investigator
* Life expectancy of less than 1 year
* Existing or planned pregnancy in the trial period
* BMI \>20 and \<35 - a minimum and maximum BMI limit are imposed due to the technical difficulties and risk of complications in underweight or morbidly obese subjects.
18 Years
70 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht
OTHER
Rijnstate Hospital
OTHER
Alrijne Hospital
OTHER
Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep
OTHER
Jennifer Breel
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Jennifer Breel
Study Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Markus W Hollmann, MD, PhD
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
Frank Wille, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
Jennifer S Breel, MPA,MSc.
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Rijnstate Hospital
Velp, Gelderland, Netherlands
Medisch Centrum Alkmaar
Alkmaar, North Holland, Netherlands
Academic Medical Center
Amsterdam, North Holland, Netherlands
Alrijne Hospital
Leiderdorp, South Holland, Netherlands
Diakonessenhuis
Zeist, Utrecht, Netherlands
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Breel J, Wille F, Wensing AGCL, Kallewaard JW, Pelleboer H, Zuidema X, Burger K, de Graaf S, Hollmann MW. A Comparison of 1000 Hz to 30 Hz Spinal Cord Stimulation Strategies in Patients with Unilateral Neuropathic Leg Pain Due to Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Crossover Clinical Study (HALO). Pain Ther. 2021 Dec;10(2):1189-1202. doi: 10.1007/s40122-021-00268-7. Epub 2021 Jun 6.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
NL43067.018.13
Identifier Type: OTHER
Identifier Source: secondary_id
2013_281
Identifier Type: OTHER
Identifier Source: secondary_id
MDT-HF-2013
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id