Comparing Long-term Effectiveness of High Frequency and Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation
NCT ID: NCT03681262
Last Updated: 2025-02-04
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
NA
7 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-08-01
2026-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
High Rate Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) for Chronic Pain
NCT01624740
Safety and Effectiveness of Spinal Cord Stimulation With Automatic Control to Treat Chronic Pain in an Extended Trial
NCT02161627
Management of Chronic Pain in Military Patients With Injuries Sustained During Active Duty
NCT01616342
Influence of Spinal Stimulation Frequency on Spasticity, Motor Control, and Pain After Spinal Cord Injury
NCT06214208
Spinal Cord Stimulation Efficacy Measures
NCT00351208
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The investigators are proposing to compare the effectiveness of high frequency and burst spinal cord stimulation in patients with chronic back and/or leg pain.
More than one hundred million Americans suffer from chronic pain with estimated annual cost of $635 billion.1 To better characterize these patients, Stanford Pain Management Center has implemented a patient reported registry, Collaborative Health Outcomes Information Registry (CHOIR), since 2012. CHOIR surveys include National Institute of Health (NIH) Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) item banks, a body map, questions about pain intensity, pain catastrophizing scale, and questions about patients' pain experience and healthcare utilization. This learning healthcare system also has the capability of point-of-care randomization.
Spinal cord stimulation is one of the most effective treatments for patients with intractable trunk and limb pain. Traditional tonic spinal cord stimulation resulted in at least 50% pain reduction in about half of the patients.2,3 Newer waveforms - high frequency and burst - achieve 50% pain reduction in 60-75% of the patients in comparison.4-6 However, more studies are needed to compare effectiveness of these two new waveforms.
The investigators are proposing to use patient reported outcomes to conduct a pragmatic clinical trial that integrates with patients' clinical care; thus, allowing faster recruitment of a larger patient cohort. The patient's provider will use CHOIR point-of-care randomization to randomly assign patients to either receive high frequency or burst spinal cord stimulation. The patients will then complete online CHOIR surveys sent out to them at baseline and then 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months after their device implant. These surveys will include PROMIS item banks for pain interference, function, depression and anxiety; questions about pain intensity; and questions about any potential side effects. The investigators will include patients with chronic (pain for at least 6 months) back and/or leg pain refractory to conventional management.
Specific Aim 1: Comparing effectiveness of high frequency and burst spinal cord stimulation in improving pain, function and pain interference in patients with chronic low back and/or leg pain persistent more than 6 months.
The investigators hypothesize that high frequency spinal cord stimulation is more effective than burst spinal cord stimulation in decreasing chronic low back and/or leg pain.
The investigators' primary outcome is change from baseline in pain intensity at 12 months. The investigators will also compare improvement in function and pain interreference at all follow up time points. The investigators will plot the trend of all these measures and study change from baseline at 12 months. The investigators will use repeated measure linear regression to compare these measures between the groups at follow up time points with time as the fixed effect and treatment as random effect.
Specific Aim 2: Comparing effectiveness of high frequency and burst spinal cord stimulation in improving depression and anxiety in patients with chronic low back and/or leg pain persistent more than 6 months.
The investigators hypothesize that high frequency spinal cord stimulation is more effective than burst spinal cord stimulation in decreasing stress and anxiety in patients with chronic low back and/or leg pain.
Burst stimulation modulates medial thalamic pathway, which attributes adverse emotions to pain. The investigators will therefore compare emotional response to these waveforms. The investigators will compare change from baseline of depression and anxiety at 12 months. The investigators will also plot depression and anxiety trend at all follow up time points between two groups using repeated measure linear regression. The investigators will then perform a similar stratified analysis in responders (patients with 50% or more pain reduction at 1 year) and non-responders to these treatments; this analysis is to asses if pain reduction is an effect measure modifier in this relationship.
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
PARALLEL
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
High frequency spinal cord stimulation
Implant of the device that can deliver high frequency waveform to spinal cord
High frequency spinal cord stimulation
We will use Senza® (Nevro Corp., Palo Alto, CA) trial and implant systems to deliver high frequency spinal cord stimulation. A trial system includes two trial leads, an external pulse generator, and a remote control. The permanent implant system includes two leads, an internal pulse generator, a remote control, and a charging device for internal pulse generator. We will use our routine process of trial and implant. High frequency waveform will be delivered with following parameters: frequency of 10,000 hertz, pulse width of 20 microseconds, and amplitude of 0-15 milliamperes.
Burst spinal cord stimulation
Implant of the device that can deliver burst waveform to spinal cord
Burst spinal cord stimulation
We will use BusrtDRTM (Abbott Saint Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN) trial and implant systems to deliver burst spinal cord stimulation. A trial system includes two trial leads, an external pulse generator, and a remote control. The permanent implant system includes two leads, an internal pulse generator, a remote control, and a charging device for internal pulse generator. We will use our routine process of trial and implant. The parameters of the stimulation are as below: each burst includes 5 pulses of electrical stimulation at intra-burst frequency of 500 hertz without time for discharge in between pulses. These bursts will be repeated at inter-burst frequency of 40-60 hertz. The amplitude will range between 0 and 15 milliamperes.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
High frequency spinal cord stimulation
We will use Senza® (Nevro Corp., Palo Alto, CA) trial and implant systems to deliver high frequency spinal cord stimulation. A trial system includes two trial leads, an external pulse generator, and a remote control. The permanent implant system includes two leads, an internal pulse generator, a remote control, and a charging device for internal pulse generator. We will use our routine process of trial and implant. High frequency waveform will be delivered with following parameters: frequency of 10,000 hertz, pulse width of 20 microseconds, and amplitude of 0-15 milliamperes.
Burst spinal cord stimulation
We will use BusrtDRTM (Abbott Saint Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN) trial and implant systems to deliver burst spinal cord stimulation. A trial system includes two trial leads, an external pulse generator, and a remote control. The permanent implant system includes two leads, an internal pulse generator, a remote control, and a charging device for internal pulse generator. We will use our routine process of trial and implant. The parameters of the stimulation are as below: each burst includes 5 pulses of electrical stimulation at intra-burst frequency of 500 hertz without time for discharge in between pulses. These bursts will be repeated at inter-burst frequency of 40-60 hertz. The amplitude will range between 0 and 15 milliamperes.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Persistent pain in lower back and/or leg for more than six months
3. Candidate for spinal cord stimulation (with either high frequency or burst waveforms) based on recommendations from Stanford Pain Management Center Neuromodulation Multidisciplinary Team Conference.
Exclusion Criteria
2. Previous failed spinal cord stimulation trial with either high frequency or burst waveforms
3. Patient refusal
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Stanford University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Vafi Salmasi
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Vafi Salmasi, MD.
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Stanford University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Stanford Pain Management Center
Redwood City, California, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
47965
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.