Premium
Use of Spinal Cord Stimulation in the Treatment of Phantom Limb Pain: Case Series and Review of the Literature
Author(s) -
Viswanathan Ashwin,
Phan Phillip Cuong,
Burton Allen Wade
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
pain practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.899
H-Index - 58
eISSN - 1533-2500
pISSN - 1530-7085
DOI - 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2010.00374.x
Subject(s) - medicine , phantom limb pain , phantom limb , spinal cord stimulation , phantom pain , spinal cord , physical medicine and rehabilitation , spinal cord stimulator , electric stimulation therapy , series (stratigraphy) , stimulation , physical therapy , surgery , amputation , paleontology , biology , psychiatry
Despite technical advances in spinal cord stimulation (SCS), there is a paucity of recent literature regarding SCS for phantom limb pain. Methods: Between January 2003 and May 2008, four patients at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center underwent SCS for intractable phantom limb pain. A retrospective chart review was performed to assess outcomes and complications. A PubMed search was performed to review previously published series regarding the efficacy of SCS for phantom limb pain. Results: Postoperatively, all patients subjectively reported excellent pain relief (>80%). Patients were all followed with the Brief Pain Inventory. Patients 1 to 3 each reported a two‐point decrease in their usual amount of pain using the numerical rating scale. Patient 4's numerical pain scale was unchanged. When using an 11‐point scale to assess other symptomology along 10 dimensions, patients 1 to 3 demonstrated a decrease in their total symptom score by 13, 14, and 4 points, respectively. Patient 4 reported an increase by 5 points in his total symptom score. With regard to complications, patient 2 developed an allergic dermatitis to the generator requiring revision with a polyfluoroethylene (GorTex) pouch. Patient 3 developed a surgical site infection after an implantable pulse generator change. Patients 2 to 4 were very satisfied with their stimulator and would choose to undergo implantation again, with patient 1 having an equivocal response. Conclusions: For selected patients who have not obtained adequate relief with medical management, SCS for phantom limb pain can prove an effective intervention. ▪