Evaluating the incidence of spinal cord injury after spinal cord stimulator implant: an updated retrospective review

被引:11
|
作者
Hussain, Nasir [1 ,2 ]
Gill, Jatinder [2 ]
Speer, Jarod [1 ]
Abdel-Rasoul, Mahmoud [3 ]
Abd-Elsayed, Alaa [4 ]
Khan, Safdar [5 ]
Nguyen, Anthony [1 ]
Simopoulos, Thomas [2 ]
Weaver, Tristan [1 ]
机构
[1] Ohio State Univ, Anesthesiol, Wexner Med Ctr, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[2] Harvard Med Sch, Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr, Dept Anesthesiol Crit Care & Pain Med, Boston, MA USA
[3] Ohio State Univ, Ctr Biostat, Wexner Med Ctr, Columbus, OH USA
[4] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Anesthesiol, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Madison, WI USA
[5] Ohio State Univ, Orthoped, Wexner Med Ctr, Columbus, OH USA
关键词
Pain Management; CHRONIC PAIN; Spinal Cord Stimulation; BACK SURGERY SYNDROME; NEUROLOGIC COMPLICATIONS; EPIDURAL HEMATOMA; NEUROPATHIC PAIN; COST-UTILITY; MANAGEMENT; TRIAL; RISK; NEUROMODULATION; ANESTHESIA;
D O I
10.1136/rapm-2021-103307
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Introduction While spinal cord stimulator implant is an increasingly safe procedure, one of the most feared complications is spinal cord injury. Still, literature regarding its incidence remains highly variable. This retrospective analysis aims to evaluate the incidence of spinal cord injury after spinal cord stimulator implant using a large-scale claims database. Methods The PearlDiver-Mariner database of national all payer claims was used to identify patients who underwent spinal cord stimulator implant (percutaneous or paddle) and developed subsequent spinal cord injury within 45 days. The primary outcome was to determine the overall incidence of spinal cord injury after spinal cord stimulator implant. Secondary outcomes included an evaluation of potential factors associated with developing spinal cord injury using univariable and multivariable regression analysis. Results A total of 71,172 patients who underwent a spinal cord stimulator implant were included in the analysis, of which 52,070 underwent percutaneous and 19,102 underwent paddle spinal cord stimulator lead implant. The overall incidence of spinal cord injury after spinal cord stimulator implant (any lead type) was found to be 0.42% (302 patients). The incidence of spinal cord injury after percutaneous and paddle lead implants did not differ at 0.45% (233 patients) and 0.36% (69 patients)(p=0.12), respectively. Overall, variables associated with a significantly increased OR (95% confidence interval) of developing spinal cord injury included male gender by 1.31 times (1.04 to 1.65)(p=0.02); having a claim for low molecular weight heparin within 30 days by 3.99 times (1.47 to 10.82)(p<0.01); a diagnosis for osteoporosis within 1 year by 1.75 times (1.15 to 2.66)(p<0.01); and a diagnosis of cervical or thoracic spinal canal stenosis within 1 year by 1.99 (1.37 to 2.90)(p<0.001) and 4.00 (2.63 to 6.09)(p<0.0001) times, respectively. Conclusions Overall, our results support the notion that spinal cord stimulator implant continues to be a safe procedure for chronic pain patients. However, risk factor mitigation strategies for the prevention of spinal cord injury after spinal cord stimulator implant should be undertaken prior to performing the procedure.
引用
收藏
页码:401 / 407
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Management of cardiac pacemaker in a patient with spinal cord stimulator implant
    Iyer, R
    Gnanadurai, TV
    Forsey, P
    PAIN, 1998, 74 (2-3) : 333 - 335
  • [32] Incidence of traumatic spinal cord injury worldwide: a systematic review
    Seyed Behzad Jazayeri
    Sara Beygi
    Farhad Shokraneh
    Ellen Merete Hagen
    Vafa Rahimi-Movaghar
    European Spine Journal, 2015, 24 : 905 - 918
  • [33] Incidence of traumatic spinal cord injury worldwide: a systematic review
    Jazayeri, Seyed Behzad
    Beygi, Sara
    Shokraneh, Farhad
    Hagen, Ellen Merete
    Rahimi-Movaghar, Vafa
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 24 (05) : 905 - 918
  • [34] Incidence and severity of acute complications after spinal cord injury
    Grossman, Robert G.
    Frankowski, Ralph F.
    Burau, Keith D.
    Toups, Elizabeth G.
    Crommett, John W.
    Johnson, Michele M.
    Fehlings, Michael G.
    Tator, Charles H.
    Shaffrey, Christopher I.
    Harkema, Susan J.
    Hodes, Jonathan E.
    Aarabi, Bizhan
    Rosner, Michael K.
    Guest, James D.
    Harrop, James S.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2012, 17 : 119 - 128
  • [35] Resilience After Spinal Cord Injury A Scoping Review
    McDonald, Scott D.
    Pugh, Mickeal, Jr.
    Mickens, Melody N.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE & REHABILITATION, 2020, 99 (08) : 752 - 763
  • [36] Survival after Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review
    van den Berg, Maayken E. L.
    Castellote, Juan M.
    de Pedro-Cuesta, Jesus
    Mahillo-Fernandez, Ignacio
    JOURNAL OF NEUROTRAUMA, 2010, 27 (08) : 1517 - 1528
  • [37] Evaluating initial screening practices for calcium dysregulation after acute traumatic spinal cord injury: a retrospective review
    Chaggar, Rajbir
    Gill, Ranjodh
    SPINAL CORD SERIES AND CASES, 2024, 10 (01):
  • [38] An updated systematic review of neuroprotective agents in the treatment of spinal cord injury
    Serag, Ibrahim
    Abouzid, Mohamed
    Elmoghazy, Ahmed
    Sarhan, Khalid
    Alsaad, Saad Ashraf
    Mohamed, Rashad G.
    NEUROSURGICAL REVIEW, 2024, 47 (01)
  • [39] The Incidence of Spinal Cord Injury in Implantation of Percutaneous and Paddle Electrodes for Spinal Cord Stimulation
    Petraglia, Frank W., III
    Farber, S. Harrison
    Gramer, Robert
    Verla, Terence
    Wang, Frances
    Thomas, Steven
    Parente, Beth
    Lad, Shivanand P.
    NEUROMODULATION, 2016, 19 (01): : 85 - 89
  • [40] Preliminary study of a genetically engineered spinal cord implant on urinary bladder after experimental spinal cord injury in rats
    Sakamoto, K
    Uvelius, B
    Khan, T
    Damaser, MS
    JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, 2002, 39 (03): : 347 - 357