Comparison Between Surgical and Percutaneous Paddles in Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Neuropathic Pain

This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.

Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-established treatment for chronic neuropathic pain, offering a safe procedure with low complication rates. Both surgical and percutaneous leads can be effective, with similar complication rates. Methods: We analyzed all patients implanted at a reference center since 1996 to compare pain control and complications and determine whether one system was more effective than the other in patients who had experienced both systems. A retrospective observational study was designed. Results: A total of 188 SCS systems were implanted, with a follow-up period of 79.71 ± 60.39 months (mean ± SD). We analyzed data from 106 males (56.38%) and 82 females (43.62%), ranging from 15 to 76 years old. A total of 68 (36.17%) surgical leads and 120 (63.83%) percutaneous leads were implanted for failed back syndrome (120, 63.83%), complex regional pain syndrome (56, 29.79%), and other conditions (12, 6.38%). No statistically significant differences were found in any variables except for lead migration (p = 0.05). In patients who initially had a percutaneous system and later received a surgical system, we found a statistically significant difference in pain relief percentage (p = 0.03) and a trend toward statistical significance in the PGI-C score (p = 0.08). Conclusions: Both surgical and percutaneous leads have demonstrated similar pain control rates, but percutaneous leads have a higher migration rate. Complications can be minimized by performing the procedure in specialized centers with extensive experience. Further studies comparing both systems should be conducted to determine if one type of lead is superior.