AzTrials
AzTrials

Pain, IntractableMCSNLNCT03189823

Long-term Effect of Motor Cortex Stimulation in Patients Suffering From Chronic Neuropathic Pain

An observational study of Pain, Intractable and Central Pain Syndrome, run by Radboud University Medical Center.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

In order to create insights in the effects of Motor cortex stimulation (MCS) on intractable pain, an open observational study was started in 2003. The aim of this research is to: 1. to determine the clinical effectivity of MCS on pain intensity after 1 month, 1 year and 3 years of stimulation 2. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 80 years
What is being tested?
Specify, model 3998, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA
Type of treatment
Medical device
How many people
17 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
1 Jan 2003to 31 Dec 2016
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 80 years
  • All sexes
  • Adult, Older adult

Study population: Dutch patients that suffered from chronic, intractable neuropathic pain

Who may be able to join

  • Patients were included between 2005 and 2013 when they suffered from chronic intractable pain and reported high levels of pain (VAS > 5, measured three times daily during four days) and when the chronic neuropathic pain had showed to be intractable. Furthermore, on radiographic imaging techniques performed less than three years before inclusion for the implantation of MCS should show a possible conflict that might contribute to the pain. A multidisciplinary approach by the anesthesiologist-pain specialists, neurosurgeons, and clinical psychologists was chosen for the selection of patients.

Who cannot join

  • Patients with severe, current psychological problems (e.g., depression, high anxiety) or substance-abuse were excluded. Other exclusion criteria were the use of therapeutic anticoagulants, cognitive and/or psychiatric disorders in the medical history, nociceptive pain, an expected life expectancy less than 3 years due to other diseases (e.g., cancer), contra- indications for general anesthesia (e.g., severe cardio-pulmonal diseases), convulsive disorders and the presence of other neuromodulation systems.

About this study

In order to create insights in the effects of Motor cortex stimulation (MCS) on intractable pain, an open observational study was started in 2003. The aim of this research is to:

  1. to determine the clinical effectivity of MCS on pain intensity after 1 month, 1 year and 3 years of stimulation
  2. to determine the clinical effectivity of MCS on QoL and daity medication intake after 3 years of MCS
Read the detailed description

2.1 Study protocol In 2003, an observational study protocol was set up in the university medical centers of Nijmegen and Groningen, the Netherlands, in order to study the effects of MCS in patients that suffered from chronic neuropathic pain. Patients were included between 2005 and 2013 when they suffered from chronic intractable pain and reported high levels of pain (VAS > 5, measured three times daily during four days) and when the chronic neuropathic pain had showed to be intractable. Furthermore, on radiographic imaging techniques performed less than three years before inclusion for the implantation of MCS should show a possible conflict that might contribute to the pain. A multidisciplinary approach by the anesthesiologist-pain specialists, neurosurgeons, and clinical psychologists was chosen for the selection of patients. Patients with severe, current psychological problems (e.g., depression, high anxiety) or substance-abuse were excluded. Other exclusion criteria were the use of therapeutic anticoagulants, cognitive and/or psychiatric disorders in the medical history, nociceptive pain, an expected life expectancy less than 3 years due to other diseases (e.g., cancer), contra- indications for general anesthesia (e.g., severe cardio-pulmonal diseases), convulsive disorders and the presence of other neuromodulation systems. All patients underwent preoperative somatosensory-evoked potential (SSEP) measurement to determine the integrity of the somatosensory system in order to facilitate intra-operative neurophysiological monitoring. A MRI-scan was used to determine any anatomical contra-indications (brain atrophy, pathological structures) for the operative procedure. All patients presented in this study had a follow up of three years.

2.2 Surgical technique The pre-operative fMRI was fused with the neuronavigation MRI. For this purpose, cortex surface rendering technique was performed using the Stealthviz software (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) to visualize the cortical areas and determine the central sulcus and the motor cortex, which then was marked on the skin by using neuronavigation. All patients were operated under general anesthesia without muscle relaxation. A small craniotomy (approximately 4 × 4 cm) was carried out over the central sulcus. An electrode was placed perpendicular to the central sulcus in the epidural space (Specify, model 3998, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA). A phase-reversal somatosensory-evoked potential was used to confirm the position of the central sulcus, thereafter cortical stimulation was performed to map functional motor areas. Following identification of the optimal target, the electrode was sutured to the dura mater. After placement of the electrode, the electrode was tunneled subcutaneously and connected with an internalized pulse generator (IPG) (Medtronic Versitrel and later Prime Advanced) that was implanted in the subclavian space or in a subcutaneous abdominal pocket.

2.3 Data-analysis An independent researcher, who was blinded to the stimulation conditions, investigated the patient records in this observational study. Only patients who were treated in accordance to the aforementioned treatment protocol and with a minimal follow-up of three years in whom the effect of MCS, occurrence of complications, daily intake of medication and change in quality of life was complete, were analyzed.

2.4 Ethical statement and registration of clinical trial This observational study was performed under the approval of the medical ethical committee of the region Arnhem-Nijmegen. All patients, after extensive pre-operative information, gave written informed consent due to the experimental nature of this treatment at that time. This clinical trial was not registered in 2003 due to the fact that, in The Netherlands, MCS was not an experimental method at that moment. The authors confirm that all ongoing and related trials for this intervention are registered

2.5 Assessment Pain is a complex, subjective and multidimensional phenomenon that is difficult to measure by unidimensional pain scores only. Apart from the visual analog scale (VAS), the intake of pain medication is thought to be a valid tool of measuring pain relief. Adding analgesic drug intake as an outcome parameter could provide a more realistic assessment of long-term benefits of MCS. Four outcome variables were examined: 1) the amount of pain relief, measured by the mean difference between VAS score pre-operatively and the VAS score during the follow-up (1 month, 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years after implantation of the MCS electrodes); 2) the change in the drug regimen of all patients per day; 3) adverse events (infection, bleeding, hardware removal, temporary seizures, and battery dysfunction); and 4) the correlation between stimulation parameters and the pain relief per patient. Pain relief was divided into three categories. A good pain relief, level 1, was defined as a VAS reduction of 70-100%. Reduction of pain according to a VAS scores change between 40% and 69% was defined as satisfactory (level 2), while a minimal pain relief was defined as a reduction of ≤ 40% on the VAS scores. An effective pain relief was defined as ≥ 40% reduction of pain (levels 1 and 2). The use of medication was monitored using the electronic patient record during follow-up. The medication quantification scale (MQS) was used in order to quantify medication use and was calculated for each drug by multiplying the dosage levels by their respective detriment weight. The dosage levels (0-6) were based on the recommended daily dosage range as described by Masters Steedman et al. These scores are summed to provide a quantitative index of total drug intake suitable for statistical analysis. The occurrence of complications was documented as well. Apart from biological complications (eg. bleeding, infection), the removal of the hardware due to a minimal effect was evaluated as well. To determine whether there was a correlation between the used stimulation parameters and the pain relief, the used stimulation parameters (intensities [V], pulse widths [µs], and frequencies [Hz]) were reviewed. Interference of pain with quality of life (QoL) was measured before and after (> 1 year) MCS with use of the Quality of Life Index (QLI), based on the Dutch version of the McGill pain questionnaire (MPQ-DLV).

2.6 Statistical analysis IBM SPSS Statistics version 22 was used for statistical analyses of the retrieved data (IBM Corp. Released 2013. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.). To analyze the differences in pain relief and MQS scores and QoL-indices per subgroup, the Mann-Whitney U test was used. In order to correlate the applied stimulation parameters, the Spearman rank correlation coefficient was conducted. Values are represented as mean ± standard deviation (minimum- maximum). Alterations in MQS scores and QoL-indices before and after MCS were calculated with use of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Statistical tests were two sided and with a significance level of P < 0.05.

Being tested
Specify, model 3998, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA
Medical subject headings
Pain, Intractable, Facial Pain

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Specify, model 3998, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USADevice

    Also called Motor cortex stimulation

    In MCS, an electrode is placed perpendicular to the central sulcus in the epidural space (Specify, model 3998, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) in order to obtain pain relief.

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Changes in pain intensity

    According to VAS scores

    Measured: 1month, 6months, 1 year and 3 years postoperative

Secondary outcomes (2)
  1. Changes in quality of life

    Interference of pain with quality of life (QoL) was measured before and after (> 1 year) MCS with use of the Quality of Life Index (QLI), based on the Dutch version of the McGill pain questionnaire (MPQ-DLV)

    Measured: 3 years postoperative

  2. Changes in daily medication intake

    The use of medication was monitored using the (electronic) patient record before MCS and during follow-up. The medication quantification scale (MQS) was used in order to quantify medication use and was calculated for each drug by multiplying the dosage levels by their respective detriment weight(21). The dosage levels (0-6) were based on the recommended daily dosage range as described by Masters Steedman et al.(22). These scores are summed to provide a quantitative index of total drug intake suitable for statistical analysis.

    Measured: 3 years postoperative

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted16 Jun 2017
  2. Study start1 Jan 2003
  3. Primary completion31 Dec 2016
  4. Study completion31 Dec 2016

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
17 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT03189823
Sponsor's protocol ID
HenssenD
Acronym
MCSNL
Status last verified
Jun 2017
First submitted
7 Jun 2017
Last updated
16 Jun 2017
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
Individual data sharing
Yes: An anominized excel file, compatible with SPSS will be attached to the submitted manuscript

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Pain, Intractable and Central Pain Syndrome, run by Radboud University Medical Center.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 16 Jun 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Changes in pain intensity (time frame: 1month, 6months, 1 year and 3 years postoperative). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 16 Jun 2017.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in