Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 5, 2025
Author Spotlight: Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interface (RPNI) Surgery in Postamputation Pain Management
Published on: March 15, 2024
Intermittent Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation Is as Efficacious as Standard Continuous Dosing in Treating Chronic
Kenneth B Chapman1, Connor Tupper2, Ajax Yang3
1The Spine & Pain Institute of New York, New York City, NY, USA; Department of Anesthesiology, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York City, NY, USA; Department of Anesthesiology, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, New York City, NY, USA.
Introduction:
Dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S) is a form of neuromodulation used to treat chronic pain. A spinal cord stimulation (SCS) method with paresthesia-free waveform used in the dorsal columns, burst-SCS, recently demonstrated efficacy using intermittent stimulation, where stimulation is cycled on and off for set durations. Tonic SCS is a paresthesia-based therapy that is ineffective at sub-perception levels and when delivered in a cycled manner. DRG-S also uses a tonic waveform, yet unlike tonic SCS, it is effective at sub-perception levels. This study aimed to determine whether the cycling of stimulation at the DRG could maintain DRG-S efficacy.
Materials And Methods:
This study followed a prospective, randomized, and balanced, double-blinded (assessor) protocol. Twenty DRG-S responders were randomized to a sequence of three programs for consecutive two-week intervals: continuous stimulation; 1 minute on:1 minute off; or 1 minute on:2 minutes off. The primary outcome of this study was change in pain ratings with the cycled programs compared with continuous stimulation. Secondary outcomes included changes in function and scores for quality of life, and stimulation program preference.
Results:
Mean scores were similar at the end of each two-week stimulation program for Numerical Rating Scale pain (continuous = 2.9 ± 0.8, 1:1 on-off = 2.6 ± 0.7, and 1:2 on-off = 2.7 ± 0.7 cm, p = 0.39), disability (p = 0.72), and general health (p = 0.95). No clinically significant differences were found from the upper boundaries of the 95% confidence intervals of the mean difference in pain, disability, and general health for each intermittent stimulation program vs the continuous program. At the end of the study, the continuous stimulation, 1:1 on-off dosing, and 1:2 on-off dosing programs were preferred by a similar number of patients.
Conclusions:
Intermittent DRG-S produces comparable results to continuous stimulation over a two-week period. Intermittent delivery may extend battery life and facilitate a smaller implantable pulse generator.
