Study Comparing Conventional, Burst and High Frequency (HF) Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) in Refractory Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS) Patients After a 32-contact Surgical Lead Implantation
NCT ID: NCT03014583
Last Updated: 2021-11-29
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
28 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-01-19
2021-09-21
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Many studies have demonstrated the efficacy and economic value of Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) for chronic neuropathic pain, and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown SCS to be a clinically effective adjunct to medical management. SCS has the advantages of being reversible and less invasive than surgery and may cause fewer issues over time than long-term pharmacological treatments.
Despite variable levels of success in the literature, approximately 30-55% of the patients treated with traditional SCS for neuropathic pain disorders will not receive adequate long term pain relief. Therefore, technical SCS system refinements, as well as new techniques have emerged.
Two new stimulation waveforms based on traditional SCS technology have appeared to further optimize the outcome for specific painful conditions;
* Burst stimulation mode: which generates constant-current stimuli with 5 spikes at 500 Hz per burst and pulse width and interspike intervals of 1 ms.
* High-frequency stimulation (from 1 to 10 kHz) mode.
Several studies have demonstrated the potential interest of these 2 new waveforms to treat FBSS patients compared to traditional SCS.
The Precision Spectra™ system allows MultiWave Technology by offering a broad spectrum of waveform options (from Tonic Conventional Stimulation (TCS), BURST stimulation to High Frequency stimulation (HF)).
To date, literature data comparing these 3 stimulation patterns is lacking but it is suggested the pain relief in some of non-responsive patients can be "recaptured" by increasing the SCS frequency to 500 Hz by BURST stimulation or beyond by HF stimulation. It seems important to conduct RCT in crossover, thanks to the new Precision SCS Stimulator, to compare the effects of these 3 different SCS modalities in FBSS patients and to determine which concept is the most effective in terms of pain reduction and energy consumption.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
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.
HF/TCS/BURST
HF/TCS/BURST
Precision Spectra™ system
Neurostimulation procedures
HF/BURST/TCS
HF/BURST/TCS
Precision Spectra™ system
Neurostimulation procedures
BURST/HF/TCS
BURST/HF/TCS
Precision Spectra™ system
Neurostimulation procedures
BURST/TCS/HF
BURST/TCS/HF
Precision Spectra™ system
Neurostimulation procedures
TCS/BURST/HF
TCS/BURST/HF
Precision Spectra™ system
Neurostimulation procedures
TCS/HF/BURST
TCS/HF/BURST
Precision Spectra™ system
Neurostimulation procedures
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Precision Spectra™ system
Neurostimulation procedures
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Subject has FBSS and does not require further surgery. For the purposes of this study, FBSS is defined as persistent or recurrent low back and leg pain of at least 6 months duration following at least one decompression and/or fusion procedure.
* Subject has persistent low back and leg pain despite other treatment modalities (pharmacological, surgical, physical, or psychological therapies) that have been tried and did not prove satisfactory or are unsuitable or contraindicated for the subject.
* Average global pain is ≥ 50 mm as assessed by the baseline VAS.
* With significant back, with mean intensity on a back pain VAS ≥ 50 mm (mean daily VAS score calculated on 5 consecutive days).
* Meeting the criteria for spinal cord stimulation test according to HAS guidelines (multidisciplinary consultation, psychological assessment, etc.).
* Subject is a candidate for SCS.
* Absence of active psychosis or history of serious psychotic illness requiring hospitalisation.
* Understands and accepts the constraints of the study.
* Free subject, not under temporary or permanent guardianship and not subject to subordination.
* Patients covered by French national health insurance.
* Patients who have given their written consent to the study after having received clear information.
Exclusion Criteria
* Subject is or has been treated with SCS, subcutaneous or peripheral nerve stimulation, an intrathecal drug delivery system, requires back surgery at the location related to his/her original back pain complaint or experimental therapies.
* Cause of low back pain accessible to etiological "mechanical" surgical treatment (discogenic low back pain, vertebral instability, spinal deformity, etc.).
* Subject had most recent back surgery less than 6 months ago.
* Presenting a surgical, anaesthetic or psychiatric contraindication to implantation of a spinal cord stimulation system.
* Based on the opinion of the principal or sub-investigator, the subject is unable to operate the SCS equipment.
* Subject has a life expectancy of less than 24 months beyond study enrolment.
* Absence of signature of the informed consent form.
* Patients not covered by French national health insurance.
* Subjects requiring closer protection, i.e. minors, pregnant women, nursing mothers, subjects deprived of their freedom by a court or administrative decision, subjects admitted to a health or social welfare establishment, major subjects under legal protection, and finally patients in an emergency setting.
* Pregnant women, nursing mothers, women of childbearing potential not using effective contraception (hormonal/barrier: oral, parenteral, percutaneous, implantable, intrauterine device, or surgical: tubal ligation, hysterectomy, total ovariectomy).
18 Years
80 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Poitiers University Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Poitiers University Hospital
Poitiers, , France
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.
Billot M, Naiditch N, Brandet C, Lorgeoux B, Baron S, Ounajim A, Roulaud M, Roy-Moreau A, de Montgazon G, Charrier E, Misbert L, Maillard B, Vendeuvre T, Rigoard P. Comparison of conventional, burst and high-frequency spinal cord stimulation on pain relief in refractory failed back surgery syndrome patients: study protocol for a prospective randomized double-blinded cross-over trial (MULTIWAVE study). Trials. 2020 Aug 3;21(1):696. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04587-6.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2016-A01145-46
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id