Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Saluda Medical Pty Ltd | INDUSTRY |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This observational, prospective data collection is designed to evaluate the effectiveness and stimulation coverage of closed-loop spinal cord stimulation (CL-SCS) therapy in patients with cervical lead placement.
Title Assessment of effectiveness and stimulation coverage of closed-loop spinal cord stimulation (CL-SCS) therapy in patients with cervical lead placement.
Device used in the study The Saluda Medical EvokeTM Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulator (CL-SCS) System (Evoke System). The CE marked Evoke System will be used within its licensed use and manuals. The Evoke System measures and records spinal cord (SC) activation resulting from stimulation via evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs). The Evoke System can be programmed to provide ECAP-controlled, closed-loop SCS or open-loop, fixed-output (traditional) SCS; ECAPs may be measured and recorded in either stimulation mode.
Indication for use The Evoke SCS System is indicated as an aid in the management of chronic intractable pain of the trunk and/or limbs and will be used within its licensed indication during this study.
Rational This observational, prospective data collection is designed to evaluate the effectiveness and stimulation coverage of closed-loop spinal cord stimulation (CL-SCS) therapy in patients with cervical lead placement.
Study design An observational, prospective, multi-center, single-arm study. Study population Up to 40 subjects eligible for SCS trial and permanent implant with a minimum of pain intensity of 5/10 on NRS at baseline will be enrolled.
Objectives
Inclusion criteria
Burden and Risk
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| single arm | Up to 40 subjects eligible for SCS trial and permanent implant with a minimum of pain intensity of 5/10 on NRS at baseline will be enrolled. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| cervical lead placement | Device | implant of cervical lead neurostimulation, using saluda medical devices |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Pain intensity in pain region(s) of pain using the 11-box pain numeric rating scale (NRS) | NRS scoring: 0 no pain, 10 worst imaginable pain | baseline, 3months, 6 months, 12 months |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Pain distribution using Patient Reported Dermatomal Coverage Map | Subjects will be asked to map and track pain distribution (extent and location) by shading in the areas where they typically experience pain on a body map drawing. "Shade in the areas where you typically experience "study pain" on the pain map below. If the pain goes from front to back, then shade in those areas on each side of the picture." |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Subjects eligible for SCS trial and permanent implant will be recruited to participate in the study. Subjects will read and sign an informed consent prior to study participation. Subjects meeting all the inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria and receiving a permanent implant with cervical lead placement will be considered enrolled. Up to 40 subjects receiving a permanent implant will be enrolled.
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rijnstate Hospital | Arnhem | Gelderland | 6815AD | Netherlands |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16095934 | Background | Breivik H, Collett B, Ventafridda V, Cohen R, Gallacher D. Survey of chronic pain in Europe: prevalence, impact on daily life, and treatment. Eur J Pain. 2006 May;10(4):287-333. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2005.06.009. Epub 2005 Aug 10. | |
| 15029914 | Background | Cameron T. Safety and efficacy of spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of chronic pain: a 20-year literature review. J Neurosurg. 2004 Mar;100(3 Suppl Spine):254-67. doi: 10.3171/spi.2004.100.3.0254. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| baseline, 3months, 6 months, 12 months |
| Assessment of holistic outcomes: quality of life in seven domains (physical function, fatigue, pain interference, depression, anxiety, ability to participate in social roles and activities, and sleep disturbance) assessed by the PROMIS-29 questionnaire | The PROMIS 29+2 Profile v2.1 is a 29-item profile instrument that assesses 8 universal domains (not disease-specific): Physical Function, Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, Sleep Disturbance, Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities, Pain Interference, and Pain Intensity. The first seven domains are assessed with 4 questions each. High scores represent more of the domain being measured. Thus, on symptom-oriented (negatively worded) domains of PROMIS 29+2 Profile v2.1 (anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain interference, and sleep disturbance), higher scores represent worse symptomatology. On the function-oriented (positively worded) domains (physical functioning and social role) higher scores represent better functioning. Pain Intensity is measured with a single 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). | baseline, 3months, 6 months, 12 months |
| Pain-related medication intake. | baseline, 3months, 6 months, 12 months |
| Programming parameters. | Program parameters (e.g., leads programmed: configuration ) will be collected. This data is automatically recorded on the SCS-device. | 3months, 6 months, 12 months |
| Programming parameters. | Program parameters (e.g., pulsed width recorded in unit: micro seconds) will be collected. This data is automatically recorded on the SCS-device. | 3months, 6 months, 12 months |
| Evaluate stimulation sensation (awareness and quality) | Subject will be asked how aware he/she is of the stimulation sensation and is presented with a 5-point rating scale containing the options "Always aware of stimulation sensation", "Usually aware of stimulation sensation", "Sometimes aware of stimulation sensation", "Rarely aware of stimulation sensation", and "Never aware of stimulation sensation". Subjects will be asked a question about stimulation sensation quality and can rate from "Unpleasant", "Neither pleasant nor unpleasant", "Pleasant" to "No sensation". | 3months, 6 months, 12 months |
| Evaluate stimulation coverage in pain region(s) | Subjects will be asked to map and track stimulation distribution (extent and location) by shading in the areas where they typically experience stimulation sensation on a body map drawing. "Shade in the areas where you typically experience stimulation on the body map below. If the stimulation goes from front to back, then shade in those areas on each side of the picture." | 3months, 6 months, 12 months |
| Posture Change Measurements | Data on stimulation intensity and ECAP amplitude at various stimulation levels (i.e., activation plot) and in different postures will be collected in both stimulation modes. Subjects will rate the stimulation intensity on an 11-point numeric rating scale (0 equals "no feeling" and 10 equals "very intense"). All these measurements are automatically recorded on the device except subject ratings, which will be recorded on the CRF. | 6 months, 12 months |
| 25112889 | Background | Deer TR, Mekhail N, Provenzano D, Pope J, Krames E, Leong M, Levy RM, Abejon D, Buchser E, Burton A, Buvanendran A, Candido K, Caraway D, Cousins M, DeJongste M, Diwan S, Eldabe S, Gatzinsky K, Foreman RD, Hayek S, Kim P, Kinfe T, Kloth D, Kumar K, Rizvi S, Lad SP, Liem L, Linderoth B, Mackey S, McDowell G, McRoberts P, Poree L, Prager J, Raso L, Rauck R, Russo M, Simpson B, Slavin K, Staats P, Stanton-Hicks M, Verrills P, Wellington J, Williams K, North R; Neuromodulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee. The appropriate use of neurostimulation of the spinal cord and peripheral nervous system for the treatment of chronic pain and ischemic diseases: the Neuromodulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee. Neuromodulation. 2014 Aug;17(6):515-50; discussion 550. doi: 10.1111/ner.12208. |
| 15109517 | Background | Turner JA, Loeser JD, Deyo RA, Sanders SB. Spinal cord stimulation for patients with failed back surgery syndrome or complex regional pain syndrome: a systematic review of effectiveness and complications. Pain. 2004 Mar;108(1-2):137-47. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2003.12.016. |
| 34236671 | Background | Surges G, Paulus J, Blass T, Mendryscha K, Bettag M, Rotte A. Efficacy and Safety of 10 kHz Spinal Cord Stimulation Using Cervical and Thoracic Leads: A Single-Center Retrospective Experience. Pain Ther. 2021 Dec;10(2):1255-1268. doi: 10.1007/s40122-021-00287-4. Epub 2021 Jul 8. |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D011115 | Polyneuropathies |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010523 | Peripheral Nervous System Diseases |
| D009468 | Neuromuscular Diseases |
| D009422 | Nervous System Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided