PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 12, 2026Frontiers in Neurology0 citationsOpen Access

Neurostimulation device infection control in China and the United States: a comparative analysis using the MCS framework

XQXiaohan QinLCLanfang Chen

Key Points

  • The aim is to evaluate infection control practices for neurostimulation devices in China and the US using the MCS framework.
  • Conducted a narrative review of evidence from 2020 to 2025.
  • Analyzed sterilization technologies and antibiotic use in both countries.
  • Compared clinical outcomes, including infection rates and antibiotic protocols.
  • Assessed regulatory frameworks affecting practice variability.
  • Device-related infection rates are comparable in both countries.
  • Significant differences exist in sterilization methods and antibiotic consumption.
  • China has a higher prevalence of antimicrobial resistance compared to the US.
  • Prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis is more common in China despite evidence favoring shorter protocols.

Abstract

Neurostimulation devices, including deep brain stimulation (DBS) and spinal cord stimulation (SCS) systems, have transformed treatment for neurological disorders and chronic pain. However, device-related infections remain a critical challenge with global incidence rates of 3–7%. This narrative review introduces the Mechanism-Clinical-System (MCS) framework to comprehensively evaluate infection control practices in China and the United States, integrating evidence from 2020 to 2025. At the mechanism level, fundamental differences in sterilization technologies—ethylene oxide dominance in the US versus hydrogen peroxide plasma preference in China—create distinct operational profiles, though clinical outcomes appear equivalent. China’s 10-fold higher antibiotic consumption drives elevated antimicrobial resistance (MRSA: 60–75% vs. 40–55%). Clinically, DBS infection rates remain comparable between countries (US: 3.5–6.5%; China: 5.7%), while prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis (5–14 days) persists in China despite evidence supporting 24-h protocols. At the system level, divergent regulatory frameworks—FDA mandatory compliance versus NMPA’s tiered implementation—create fundamental practice variability. Neither healthcare system demonstrates uniform superiority. The US achieves greater standardization through regulatory stringency, while China demonstrates remarkable adaptability and innovation velocity. Evidence-based harmonization strategies—including international registries, standardized surveillance, and antimicrobial stewardship—offer substantial potential to optimize patient safety globally.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Qin et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698d6d445be6419ac0d52284https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2025.1755822
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper