Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2021
Motor Cortex Stimulation for Pain: A Narrative Review of Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ramos-Fresnedo Andres, Perez-Vega Carlos, Domingo Ricardo A, Cheshire William P, Middlebrooks Erik H, Grewal Sanjeet S
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Motor cortex stimulation (MCS) was introduced in 1985 and has been tested extensively for different types of peripheral and central neuropathic pain syndromes (eg, central poststroke pain, phantom limb pain, trigeminal neuropathic pain, migraines, etc). The motor cortex can be stimulated through different routes, including subdural, epidural, and transcranial.
OBJECTIVES: In this review, we discuss the current uses, surgical techniques, localization techniques, stimulation parameters, and clinical outcomes of patients who underwent chronic MCS for treatment-resistant pain syndromes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A broad literature search was conducted through PubMed to include all articles focusing on MCS for pain relief (keywords: subdural, epidural, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, motor cortex stimulation, pain).
LITERATURE REVIEW: Epidural MCS was the most widely used technique and had varying response rates across studies. Long-term efficacy was limited, and pain relief tended to decrease over time. Subdural MCS using similar stimulation parameters demonstrated similar efficacy to epidural stimulation and less invasive methods, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), which have been shown to provide adequate pain relief. rTMS and certain medications (ketamine and morphine) have been shown to predict the long-term response to epidural MCS. Complications tend to be rare, the most reported being seizures during subdural or epidural stimulation or hardware infection.
CONCLUSIONS: Scientific evidence supports the use of MCS for treatment of refractory neuropathic pain syndromes. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the specific indications and stimulation protocols that are most amenable to the different types of MCS.
OBJECTIVES: In this review, we discuss the current uses, surgical techniques, localization techniques, stimulation parameters, and clinical outcomes of patients who underwent chronic MCS for treatment-resistant pain syndromes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A broad literature search was conducted through PubMed to include all articles focusing on MCS for pain relief (keywords: subdural, epidural, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, motor cortex stimulation, pain).
LITERATURE REVIEW: Epidural MCS was the most widely used technique and had varying response rates across studies. Long-term efficacy was limited, and pain relief tended to decrease over time. Subdural MCS using similar stimulation parameters demonstrated similar efficacy to epidural stimulation and less invasive methods, such as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), which have been shown to provide adequate pain relief. rTMS and certain medications (ketamine and morphine) have been shown to predict the long-term response to epidural MCS. Complications tend to be rare, the most reported being seizures during subdural or epidural stimulation or hardware infection.
CONCLUSIONS: Scientific evidence supports the use of MCS for treatment of refractory neuropathic pain syndromes. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the specific indications and stimulation protocols that are most amenable to the different types of MCS.