TY - JOUR
T1 - An implantable restorative-neurostimulator for refractory mechanical chronic low back pain
T2 - a randomized sham-controlled clinical trial
AU - ReActiv8-B investigators
AU - Gilligan, Christopher
AU - Volschenk, Willem
AU - Russo, Marc
AU - Green, Matthew
AU - Gilmore, Christopher
AU - Mehta, Vivek
AU - Deckers, Kristiaan
AU - De Smedt, Kris
AU - Latif, Usman
AU - Georgius, Peter
AU - Gentile, Jonathan
AU - Mitchell, Bruce
AU - Langhorst, Meredith
AU - Huygen, Frank
AU - Baranidharan, Ganesan
AU - Patel, Vikas
AU - Mironer, Eugene
AU - Ross, Edgar
AU - Carayannopoulos, Alexios
AU - Hayek, Salim
AU - Gulve, Ashish
AU - Van Buyten, Jean Pierre
AU - Tohmeh, Antoine
AU - Fischgrund, Jeffrey
AU - Lad, Shivanand
AU - Ahadian, Farshad
AU - Deer, Timothy
AU - Klemme, William
AU - Rauck, Richard
AU - Rathmell, James
AU - Levy, Robert
AU - Heemels, Jan Pieter
AU - Eldabe, Sam
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the International Association for the Study of Pain.
PY - 2021/10/1
Y1 - 2021/10/1
N2 - ABSTRACT: Chronic low back pain can be caused by impaired control and degeneration of the multifidus muscles and consequent functional instability of the lumbar spine. Available treatment options have limited effectiveness and prognosis is unfavorable. We conducted an international randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial at 26 multidisciplinary centers to determine safety and efficacy of an implantable, restorative neurostimulator designed to restore multifidus neuromuscular control and facilitate relief of symptoms (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02577354). Two hundred four eligible participants with refractory mechanical (musculoskeletal) chronic LBP and a positive prone instability test indicating impaired multifidus control were implanted and randomized to therapeutic (N = 102) or low-level sham (N = 102) stimulation of the medial branch of the dorsal ramus nerve (multifidus nerve supply) for 30 minutes twice daily. The primary endpoint was the comparison of responder proportions (≥30% relief on the LBP visual analogue scale without analgesics increase) at 120 days. After the primary endpoint assessment, participants in the sham-control group switched to therapeutic stimulation and the combined cohort was assessed through 1 year for long-term outcomes and adverse events. The primary endpoint was inconclusive in terms of treatment superiority (57.1% vs 46.6%; difference: 10.4%; 95% confidence interval, -3.3% to 24.1%, P = 0.138). Prespecified secondary outcomes and analyses were consistent with a modest but clinically meaningful treatment benefit at 120 days. Improvements from baseline, which continued to accrue in all outcome measures after conclusion of the double-blind phase, were clinically important at 1 year. The incidence of serious procedure- or device-related adverse events (3.9%) compared favorably with other neuromodulation therapies for chronic pain.
AB - ABSTRACT: Chronic low back pain can be caused by impaired control and degeneration of the multifidus muscles and consequent functional instability of the lumbar spine. Available treatment options have limited effectiveness and prognosis is unfavorable. We conducted an international randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial at 26 multidisciplinary centers to determine safety and efficacy of an implantable, restorative neurostimulator designed to restore multifidus neuromuscular control and facilitate relief of symptoms (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02577354). Two hundred four eligible participants with refractory mechanical (musculoskeletal) chronic LBP and a positive prone instability test indicating impaired multifidus control were implanted and randomized to therapeutic (N = 102) or low-level sham (N = 102) stimulation of the medial branch of the dorsal ramus nerve (multifidus nerve supply) for 30 minutes twice daily. The primary endpoint was the comparison of responder proportions (≥30% relief on the LBP visual analogue scale without analgesics increase) at 120 days. After the primary endpoint assessment, participants in the sham-control group switched to therapeutic stimulation and the combined cohort was assessed through 1 year for long-term outcomes and adverse events. The primary endpoint was inconclusive in terms of treatment superiority (57.1% vs 46.6%; difference: 10.4%; 95% confidence interval, -3.3% to 24.1%, P = 0.138). Prespecified secondary outcomes and analyses were consistent with a modest but clinically meaningful treatment benefit at 120 days. Improvements from baseline, which continued to accrue in all outcome measures after conclusion of the double-blind phase, were clinically important at 1 year. The incidence of serious procedure- or device-related adverse events (3.9%) compared favorably with other neuromodulation therapies for chronic pain.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85116959125
U2 - 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002258
DO - 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002258
M3 - Article
C2 - 34534176
AN - SCOPUS:85116959125
SN - 0304-3959
VL - 162
SP - 2486
EP - 2498
JO - Pain
JF - Pain
IS - 10
ER -