Rates and Predictors of Pain Reduction With Intracranial Stimulation for Intractable Pain Disorders

Yuhao Huang; Sina Sadeghzadeh; Alice Huai-Yu Li; Ethan Schonfeld; Ashwin G Ramayya; Vivek P Buch

doi:10.1227/neu.0000000000003006

Rates and Predictors of Pain Reduction With Intracranial Stimulation for Intractable Pain Disorders

Neurosurgery. 2024 Jun 5. doi: 10.1227/neu.0000000000003006. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Yuhao Huang¹, Sina Sadeghzadeh¹, Alice Huai-Yu Li², Ethan Schonfeld¹, Ashwin G Ramayya¹, Vivek P Buch¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.
² Department of Anesthesia, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA.

PMID: 38836613
DOI: 10.1227/neu.0000000000003006

Abstract

Background and objectives: Intracranial modulation paradigms, namely deep brain stimulation (DBS) and motor cortex stimulation (MCS), have been used to treat intractable pain disorders. However, treatment efficacy remains heterogeneous, and factors associated with pain reduction are not completely understood.

Methods: We performed an individual patient review of pain outcomes (visual analog scale, quality-of-life measures, complications, pulse generator implant rate, cessation of stimulation) after implantation of DBS or MCS devices. We evaluated 663 patients from 36 study groups and stratified outcomes by pain etiology and implantation targets.

Results: Included studies comprised primarily retrospective cohort studies. MCS patients had a similar externalized trial success rate compared with DBS patients (86% vs 81%; P = .16), whereas patients with peripheral pain had a higher trial success rate compared with patients with central pain (88% vs 79%; P = .004). Complication rates were similar for MCS and DBS patients (12% vs 15%; P = .79). Patients with peripheral pain had lower likelihood of device cessation compared with those with central pain (5.7% vs 10%; P = .03). Of all implanted patients, mean pain reduction at last follow-up was 45.8% (95% CI: 40.3-51.2) with a 31.2% (95% CI: 12.4-50.1) improvement in quality of life. No difference was seen between MCS patients (43.8%; 95% CI: 36.7-58.2) and DBS patients (48.6%; 95% CI: 39.2-58) or central (41.5%; 95% CI: 34.8-48.2) and peripheral (46.7%; 95% CI: 38.9-54.5) etiologies. Multivariate analysis identified the anterior cingulate cortex target to be associated with worse pain reduction, while postherpetic neuralgia was a positive prognostic factor.

Conclusion: Both DBS and MCS have similar efficacy and complication rates in the treatment of intractable pain. Patients with central pain disorders tended to have lower trial success and higher rates of device cessation. Additional prognostic factors include anterior cingulate cortex targeting and postherpetic neuralgia diagnosis. These findings underscore intracranial neurostimulation as an important modality for treatment of intractable pain disorders.