Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 22, 2025

Treating Low Back Pain in Failed Back Surgery Patients with Multicolumn-lead Spinal Cord Stimulation
Published on: June 26, 2018
Should we Oppose or Combine Waveforms for Spinal Cord Stimulation in PSPS-T2 Patients? A Prospective Randomized
Philippe Rigoard1, Amine Ounajim2, Maarten Moens3
1PRISMATICS Lab (Predictive Research in Spine/Neuromodulation Management and Thoracic Innovation/Cardiac Surgery), Poitiers University Hospital, Poitiers, France; Department of Neuro-Spine & Neuromodulation, Poitiers University Hospital, Poitiers, France; Pprime Institute UPR 3346, CNRS, ISAE-ENSMA, University of Poitiers, Chasseneuil-du-Poitou, France.
Abstract:
Refractory persistent spinal pain syndrome after surgery (PSPS-T2) can be successfully addressed by spinal cord stimulation (SCS). While conventional stimulation generates paresthesia, recent systems enable the delivery of paresthesia-free stimulation. Studies have claimed non-inferiority/superiority of selected paresthesia-free stimulation compared with paresthesia-based stimulation, but the comparative efficacy between different waveforms still needs to be determined in a given patient. We designed a randomized controlled 3-month crossover trial to compare pain relief of paresthesia-based stimulation versus high frequency versus burst in 28 PSPS-T2 patients implanted with multiwave SCS systems. Our secondary objectives were to determine the efficacy of these 3 waveforms on pain surface, quality of life, functional capacity, psychological distress, and validated composite multidimensional clinical response index to provide holistic comparisons at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 15-month post-randomization. The preferred stimulation modality was documented during the follow-up periods. No difference between the waveforms was observed in this study (P = .08). SCS led to significant pain relief, quality of life improvement, improvement of multidimensional clinical response index, and of all other clinical outcomes at all follow-up visits. Forty-four percent of the patients chose to keep the paresthesia-based stimulation modality after the 15-month follow-up period. By giving the possibility to switch and/or to combine several waveforms, the overall rate of SCS responders further increased with 25%. In this study, high frequency or burst do not appear superior to paresthesia-based stimulation, wherefore paresthesia-based stimulation should still be considered as a valid option. However, combining paresthesia-based stimulation with paresthesia-free stimulation, through personalized multiwave therapy, might significantly improve SCS responses. PERSPECTIVE: This article assesses clinical SCS efficacy on pain relief, by comparing paresthesia-based stimulation and paresthesia-free stimulation (including high frequency and burst) modalities in patient presenting with PSPS-T2. Switching and/or combining waveforms contribute to increasing the global SCS responders rate.
More Related Videos
14:47Author Spotlight: Combined Peripheral Nerve Stimulation and Controllable Pulse Parameter Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation to Probe Sensorimotor Control and Learning
Published on: April 21, 2023
08:22Remotely Supervised Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: An Update on Safety and Tolerability
Published on: October 7, 2017