Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W220112480> ?p ?o ?g. }
- W220112480 endingPage "160" @default.
- W220112480 startingPage "152" @default.
- W220112480 abstract "In Brief Study Design. Systematic review. Objectives. To assess efficacy and safety of spinal cord stimulation in patients with chronic leg and back pain and failed back surgery syndrome and to examine prognostic factors that predict spinal cord stimulation outcome. Summary of Background Data. A previous systematic review of spinal cord stimulation in patients with chronic back and leg pain and failed back surgery syndrome by Turner et al in 1995 identified 39 case studies and no controlled studies. Methods. A number of electronic databases were searched through January 2002. Citation searching of included papers was undertaken, and gray literature was sought through contact with clinical experts. No language restrictions were applied. All controlled and noncontrolled study designs were included. Study selection was carried out independently by two reviewers. Prognostic factors (age, sex, duration of pain, time post surgery, follow-up duration, publication year, data collection year, indication, data collection country, study setting, and quality score) responsible for pain relief outcome across case series were examined using univariate and multivariate metaregression. Results. One randomized controlled trial, one cohort study, and 72 case studies were included. The randomized controlled trial reported a significant benefit (P = 0.047) in the proportion of patients with failed back surgery syndrome reporting 50% or more pain relief with spinal cord stimulation (37.5%) compared with patients undergoing back reoperation (11.5%). There was evidence of substantial statistical heterogeneity (P < 0.0001) in the level of pain relief following spinal cord stimulation reported across case series studies. The four principal prognostic factors found to be predictive of increased level of pain relief with spinal cord stimulation were poor study quality score, short follow-up duration, multicenter (versus single center) studies, and the inclusion of patients with failed back surgery syndrome (versus chronic back and leg pain). Overall, 43% of patients with chronic back and leg pain/failed back surgery syndrome experienced one or more complications following a spinal cord stimulation implant, although no major adverse events were reported. Conclusions. Despite an increase in the number of studies over the last 10 years, the level of evidence for the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation in chronic back and leg pain/failed back surgery syndrome remains “moderate.” Prognostic factors found to be predictive of the level of pain relief following spinal cord stimulation were study quality, follow-up duration, study setting, and patient indication. Over the last decade, there has been a substantial increase in the number of studies that have assessed the impact spinal cord stimulation in patients with chronic back and leg pain and failed back surgery syndrome. Nevertheless, as the majority of these studies are uncontrolled, with only one randomized controlled trial, the level of evidence for spinal cord stimulation for chronic back and leg pain is “moderate.” Four prognostic factors were found to be predictive of the level of pain relief following spinal cord stimulation: study quality, duration of follow-up review, study setting, and patient indication." @default.
- W220112480 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W220112480 creator A5004556710 @default.
- W220112480 creator A5043944967 @default.
- W220112480 creator A5044304643 @default.
- W220112480 date "2005-01-01" @default.
- W220112480 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
- W220112480 title "Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Back and Leg Pain and Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Analysis of Prognostic Factors" @default.
- W220112480 cites W143591334 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1497603043 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1550464544 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1600362391 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1770248573 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1772279749 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1868117632 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1962268728 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1963624625 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1965035943 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1968612606 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1969456897 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1970453192 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1970735973 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1971968408 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1976481912 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1981531564 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1982130175 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1986655266 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1987901930 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1992636898 @default.
- W220112480 cites W1996371941 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2004644954 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2006507104 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2010202190 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2015365804 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2019392738 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2020141140 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2021967871 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2022516246 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2022686354 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2029369233 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2030743971 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2038652353 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2046151745 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2066559380 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2069843708 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2072166419 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2073631327 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2079664707 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2081320515 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2085986891 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2086248758 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2089483668 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2090174301 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2103735212 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2106564152 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2107328434 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2142124375 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2155132414 @default.
- W220112480 cites W22028299 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2317614695 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2334066723 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2621023542 @default.
- W220112480 cites W2764918430 @default.
- W220112480 cites W4252252848 @default.
- W220112480 cites W4297923235 @default.
- W220112480 cites W4322700696 @default.
- W220112480 cites W48985091 @default.
- W220112480 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000149199.68381.fe" @default.
- W220112480 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15626996" @default.
- W220112480 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
- W220112480 type Work @default.
- W220112480 sameAs 220112480 @default.
- W220112480 citedByCount "257" @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802012 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802013 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802014 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802015 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802016 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802017 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802018 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802019 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802020 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802021 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802022 @default.
- W220112480 countsByYear W2201124802023 @default.
- W220112480 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W220112480 hasAuthorship W220112480A5004556710 @default.
- W220112480 hasAuthorship W220112480A5043944967 @default.
- W220112480 hasAuthorship W220112480A5044304643 @default.
- W220112480 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
- W220112480 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
- W220112480 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
- W220112480 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
- W220112480 hasConcept C144301174 @default.
- W220112480 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
- W220112480 hasConcept C1862650 @default.
- W220112480 hasConcept C201903717 @default.
- W220112480 hasConcept C204787440 @default.