32 Clinical Trials for Various Conditions
During the typical SCS trial the leads remain outside of the skin and can be prone to migration. The leads are typically secured in place with suture, tape, or a combination of both. This study will evaluate the amount of movement based on the method of being secured at the time of placement
Medtronic, Inc. is sponsoring the SENSE SCS clinical study, a prospective, multi-center, post-market, non-randomized, observational study with a hybrid decentralized model of execution, utilizing a mobile application for the collection of patient reported outcomes (PROs). The purpose of the study is to evaluate workflow of a mobile application for collection of PROs and to gather data on patient experience with spinal cord stimulation therapy.
The purpose of this feasibility study is to compare the impact of Spinal cord stimulation \[SCS\] for Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) pain and rehabilitation. SCS, also known as Epidural Electrical Stimulation (EES), will be utilized along with conventional medical management (CMM) or CMM alone. Participation in this research study is expected to last approximately 12 months. All subjects will be evaluated and proceed with implantation of two SCS devices- one tailored based on the individual's SCI for the treatment of neuropathic pain of trunk and limb and a second near the bottom of the spinal cord (conus region) to study the impact on motor, sensory, bowel/bladder outcomes. All patients will also continue receiving CMM, such as medications and physical therapy. Participating subjects will be randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: 1. Placebo arm: SCS OFF + CMM. Under the direction of the study physician, the patient may receive a variety of treatments, such as medications and various forms of rehabilitation. 2. Treatment arm: SCS ON + CMM. The study treatment Spinal Cord Stimulation \[SCS\]: the study physician will perform a trial procedure to see if the study procedure works for the patient and may implant a permanent device if it is successful. There is a temporary trial procedure, or a "test drive," which usually lasts 5-7 days. If this is successful, patients will discuss a more permanent implant. This study involves the concurrent placement of two SCS devices (one focused on pain and the second for rehabilitation). For three months, treatment group subjects will have the SCS turned on and will have rehabilitation as part of their CMM. Participants in the placebo arm will have their SCS remain off and will undergo CMM with rehabilitation therapy similar to the treatment group. Neither the subjects nor the treatment team will know which patients are in the treatment or placebo arm. At the end of three months, the study group will be revealed and the placebo group subjects will be allowed to crossover and have their SCS turned on. Rehabilitation visits may be remote and the study duration is approximately 12 months. There may be additional blood tests and clinical exams to collect data on the effectiveness of the therapy. Data at follow-up visits will be compared to the subjects' baseline data and that of the control group at the respective visits.
Prospective, multi-center, open-label, post-market study to evaluate the efficacy and energy use of a low energy DTM™ (DTM-LE) SCS therapy for pain relief.
A BIOTRONIK wearable stimulator will be utilized in order to investigate the effects of two study spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapies on subject reported pain and paresthesia perception observed over 12 days of study stimulation testing following the conclusion of a successful SCS commercial trial.
This study characterized the effects of amplitude on subject satisfaction and pain relief in subjects being treated by SCS.
A study for patients who have chronic postoperative pain who had knee replacement surgery. If qualified, a 14 day trial and an implantation of spinal cord stimulator for control of pain will be administered. This study will evaluate effectiveness of pain control. Subjects will be followed for one year post implantation.
To determine the effects of varying spinal cord stimulation programming parameters, including stimulation rate, on pain intensity.
The objective of this study is to evaluate extent, location, and perception of paresthesia as a function of anode/cathode configuration.
The primary objective of this study is to compare the efficacy and patient preference for spinal cord stimulation (SCS) using the Precision device with the electrode array placed at T7 versus placement at T8. Eligible patients will have chronic intractable pain in the back or lower extremities and will have independently elected SCS as the next line of therapy. There is some anecdotal evidence that the coverage of the paresthesia resulting from T7 placement is preferable to that obtained by the more commonly used T8 placement but there has been no study to support this observation.
This study evaluates the effectiveness of Abbott's Proclaim™ and Eterna™ Spinal Cord Stimulator (SCS) systems, along with the Neurosphere™ virtual clinic platform, in managing chronic pain. The goal is to assess how remote monitoring and virtual care can improve pain relief and reduce healthcare costs compared to traditional in-person care. Adults with chronic pain will either receive treatment through in-person visits or remotely using Neurosphere™. The study will measure pain relief, quality of life, and healthcare expenses over six months, aiming to improve access to pain management, especially for patients in rural areas.
Spinal Cord Stimulation Trial to Permanent Prediction is a prospective, longitudinal, multi-center, non-randomized, multi-arm, open-label, clinical feasibility study designed to investigate whether objective data collected from chronic pain patients is predictive of subjective patient-reported outcomes and of adjustments to patient programming parameters.
The purpose of this post-market study is to evaluate the real-world experience of Nevro's Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) therapy in patients with chronic, intractable leg pain due to painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). This is a multicenter, prospective, observational global study, that will partner diabetes management teams with pain physicians to provide an interdisciplinary treatment regimen for PDN patients. Outcomes will be assessed via standardized assessments.
This observational, prospective data collection is designed to evaluate the efficacy of CL-SCS therapy in real-world patients suffering from chronic pain.
The UPGRADE registry will capture long-term, real-world outcomes to understand the effect of Differential Target Multiplexed (DTM®) programming in the Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) implanted population on the management of chronic pain, primarily on its use for trunk and/or limb pain. The clinical study is sponsored by Celéri Health and is funded through a financial grant from Medtronic's External Research Program. The registry study will be conducted across approximately 25 centers in the United States with up to 600 participants enrolled.
Recently a new form of spinal cord stimulation therapy called burst spinal cord stimulation (Burst-SCS) is available to treat chronic pain. The goal of this study is to learn more about how Burst-SCS works to reduce chronic pain. The study will examine chronic pain patients who have been deemed candidates for Burst-SCS therapy, and who have already been selected to receive a temporary externalized trial of Burst-SCS from their own doctors as part of their standard clinical care for chronic pain management. During the study, participants will be asked to complete a variety of evaluations at certain time points. In addition, there will be a randomized, double blind, crossover phase, where the particular effects of Burst-SCS and sham SCS will be evaluated. The device used to deliver Burst-SCS and sham SCS is the St. Jude Medical Invisible Trial System.
The goal is to document efficacy of PF-SCS therapy in a blinded fashion and better understand how SCS therapy works in the clinical setting. Overall the investigators hope to improve patient care and selection of candidates who have the best potential for effective pain relief from an expensive and invasive therapy.
Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) affects over 230 million adults worldwide and is a highly morbid, costly, and disabling condition. Ischemic leg pain drives disability in PAD patients and results from oxygen supply-demand mismatch, autonomic dysfunction, and muscle breakdown. This leg pain, which is unresponsive to traditional pharmacotherapy, limits the patient's tolerance to exercise, which is an important disease-modifying intervention. Spinal cord stimulation is a well-established therapy for medically intractable pain, including painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) and ischemic pain, but is not part of the standard-of-care for PAD despite limited promising clinical data. Early studies used first-generation, tonic stimulation devices, but with these it was impossible to perform sham-controlled trials to test the treatment. Since then, new types of waveform treatments, including high-frequency spinal cord stimulation (SCS), have been shown to be more effective in the treatment of intractable pain. While high-frequency SCS is approved for PDN treatment, it has never been tested in the treatment of claudication pain from PAD. This study will enroll up to 15 participants between the ages of 19 and 89 who have PAD and PDN and are successfully implanted with a permanent SCS. Twelve weeks after SCS implantation, participants will receive two weeks of stimulation and two weeks of sham intervention, in random starting order. Blood flow, blood pressure, skin oxygen levels, and participant reported pain int the lower extremities will be assessed before SCS implantation, 12 weeks after SCS implantation and during each of the treatment periods. Participants will also complete a quality of life survey at the same time points. Comparisons of these measurements with the baseline and post-implantation measurements to determine the effects of SCS.
Spasticity is characterized by increased muscle tension and is a classic consequence of upper motor neuron (UMN) damage in the central nervous system, such as from stroke or trauma. Clinically, it presents as muscle resistance to passive stretching, along with clasp-knife rigidity, clonus, increased tendon reflexes, and muscle spasms. An imbalance of the descending inhibitory and muscle stretch reflexes is thought to be the cause of spasticity. Post-stroke spasticity is a common condition that occurs in 37.5-45% of cases in the acute stage and 19-57.4% in the subacute stage after a stroke. At 6 months post-stroke, spasticity develops in 42.6-49.5% of cases, and at one year, it affects 35-57.4% of individuals. In patients with cerebral palsy (CP), incidence is almost 80% while in those living with spinal cord injury the number approaches up to 93%. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients have a higher prevalence on initial admission to neurorehabilitation but one in three patients will have chronic spasticity. However, the Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center report a rate of TBIs amongst deployed veterans to be around 11-23% mostly from blast and explosive trauma. There have been studies as early as the 1980s exploring the efficacy of SCS for spasticity control, however, the credibility of many of these studies is constrained due to an incomplete comprehension of spasticity's underlying mechanisms, outdated research methods, and early limitations in implantable device technology. Intrathecal pumps for baclofen have remained as the mainstay for refractory spasticity, however, it comes with associated risks such as chemical dependence leading to acute baclofen withdrawal and requiring frequent refill requirement. Most importantly, it does not yield functional improvement of muscle activity, just suppression of spasticity. Botox is also routinely used but due to heterogeneity in muscle involvement as well as variability in provider skill, results may be inconsistent and short-lasting, requiring frequent clinic visits for repeat injections to the affected muscle groups. SCS may be able to address that gap in spasticity management.
The goal of this clinical trial is to compare lead migration distance and therapeutic response for participants receiving a spinal cord stimulator during the trial period. Of note- scs trial period is a procedure name, not to be confused with this clinical trial study. The main question\[s\] it aims to answer are: * Is there a difference in migration distance and/or rate for those with external leads secured by an anchor device versus and anchor device with suture? * How does participant activity levels during the trial period compare to migration rates? ° Does the temperature, heat index, and humidity during the trial period impact migration rates? Participants will come in for the scs trial procedure as normal. They will be asked to complete an activity survey upon return to the clinic for lead pull after the scs trial. They will also have an additional image upon return to the clinic to document lead position prior to lead pull. Researchers will compare two groups- those with securement via anchor and those with securement via anchor and suture to see if there is an impact on therapeutic effect (percentage of pain relief) form the scs trial.
The purpose of this study in patients undergoing routine care epidural spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is to determine 1) whether SCS reduces arterial blood pressure (BP) in patients which chronic low back pain and hypertension, 2) whether higher baseline BP (i.e., hypertension) predicts reductions in pain following SCS, and finally 3) whether different SCS waveforms elicits stimulus-evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) in spinal cord and at the cortex (electroencephalography, and magnetoenchphalography).
The purpose of this study is to demonstrate safety and efficacy of a new spinal cord stimulation paddle electrode which is able to target the dorsal horns, dorsal nerve roots, and dorsal columns. The research electrode ("Study Electrode") is designed to answer basic physiological clinical research questions. It may inform future device therapy development, but the Study Electrode is not a product that will be marketed or sold. The Investigators believe the protocol is a Non-Significant Risk study answering basic physiological research questions, which may be performed under hospital IRB approval.
The purpose of this study is to demonstrate safety and efficacy of a new spinal cord stimulation paddle electrode which is able to target the dorsal horns, dorsal nerve roots, and dorsal columns. The research electrode ("Study Electrode") is designed to answer basic physiological clinical research questions. It may inform future device therapy development, but the Study Electrode is not a product that will be marketed or sold. The Investigators believe the protocol is a Non-Significant Risk study answering basic physiological research questions, which may be performed under hospital IRB approval.
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is indicated for selected patients with chronic pain who have not responded to conventional medical management. Forty (40) patients indicated for SCS placement and presenting to the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) Interventional Pain Management Clinic in Little Rock, Arkansas will be recruited for this study. Prior to temporary stimulator placement, patients will complete symptom-related questionnaires and provide a blood sample. Demographic and clinical characteristics will be obtained through medical record review. Patients will complete the same questionnaires and provide a blood sample at each of the routine clinical care follow-up visits.
The purpose of this study (PASSION study) is to monitor symptoms of chronic pain before and after 2 weeks of a standard drug commonly used to treat elevated blood pressure compared with 2 weeks of placebo (crossover design) so that we may better understand how blood pressure affects your level of pain. This study is not testing an experimental drug.
To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) with multiple modalities compared to Conventional Medical Management (CMM) in patients with chronic low back and/or leg pain who have not undergone spinal surgery when using the Boston Scientific WaveWriter SCS Systems.
Researchers are evaluating if subjects who have already experienced tonic spinal cord stimulation would have a better pain relief status with burst spinal cord stimulation.
To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Precision Spinal Cord Stimulator Systems Adapted for High-Rate Spinal Cord Stimulation as an aid in the management of chronic intractable pain
The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) using the Medtronic Specify® 5-6-5 multicolumn surgical lead plus optimal medical management (OMM) versus OMM alone in patients suffering from predominant low back pain due to failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS).
To demonstrate that spinal cord stimulator has an effect on sympathetic function (the one that give us the fight and flight response). Therefore, if the spinal cord stimulator has an effect on sympathetic function, the responses from CRPS patients to different stimuli will differ significantly pre and post SCS implant. If CRPS patients exhibit autonomic, CRPS patients could be stratified according to their sympathetic function pre-implant. It is expected that patients with a moderate/mild form of autonomic dysfunction will have better outcomes with the SCS.