Advertisement

Acta Neurochirurgica

, Volume 158, Issue 9, pp 1767–1774 | Cite as

Subcutaneous trigeminal nerve field stimulation for refractory trigeminal pain: a cohort analysis

  • Martin JakobsEmail author
  • Andreas Unterberg
  • Rolf-Detlef Treede
  • Sigrid Schuh-Hofer
  • Rezvan AhmadiEmail author
Experimental Research - Functional

Abstract

Background

Neurosurgical pain management of drug-resistant trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is highly challenging. Microvascular decompression is a first-line neurosurgical approach for classical TN with neurovascular conflict, but can show clinical relapse despite proper decompression. Second-line destructive techniques like radiofrequency thermocoagulation have become reluctantly used due to their potential for irreversible side effects. Subcutaneous peripheral nerve field stimulation (sPNFS) is a minimally invasive neuromodulatory technique which has been shown to be effective for chronic localised pain conditions. Reports on sPNFS for the treatment of trigeminal pain (sTNFS) are still sparse and primarily focused on pain intensity as outcome measure. Detailed data on the impact of sTNFS on attack frequency are currently not available.

Methods

Patients were classified according to the International Headache Society classification (ICHD-3-beta). Three patients had classical TN without (n = 3) and another three TN with concomitant persistent facial pain (n = 3). Two patients suffered from post-herpetic trigeminal neuropathy (n = 2). All eight patients underwent a trial stimulation of at least 7 days with subcutaneous leads in the affected trigeminal area connected to an external neurostimulator. Of those, six patients received permanent implantation of a neurostimulator. During the follow-up (6–29 months, mean 15.2), VAS-scores, attack frequencies, oral drug intake, complications and side effects were documented.

Results

Seven out of eight patients responded to sTNFS (i.e. ≥50 % pain reduction) during the test trial. The pain intensity (according to VAS) was reduced by 83 ± 16 % (mean ± SD) and the number of attacks decreased by 73 ± 26 % (mean ± SD). Five out of six patients were able to reduce or stop pain medication. One patient developed device infection. Two patients developed stimulation-related side effects which could be resolved by reprogramming.

Conclusions

Treatment by sTNFS is a beneficial option for patients with refractory trigeminal pain. Prospective randomised trials are required to systematically evaluate efficacy rates and safety of this low-invasive neurosurgical technique.

Keywords

Peripheral nerve field stimulation Trigeminal neuralgia Neuromodulation Post-herpetic trigeminal neuropathy Chronic neuropathic pain 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

No funding was received for this research. This work was partly supported by the Collaborative Research Centre 1158 (SFB1158: From nociception to chronic pain: Structure-function properties of neural pathways and their reorganization), funded by DFG (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft).

Conflict of Interest

None.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Amin S, Buvanendran A, Park KS, Kroin JS, Moric M (2008) Peripheral nerve stimulator for the treatment of supraorbital neuralgia: a retrospective case series. Cephalalgia 28:355–359CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bartsch T, Goadsby PJ (2003) Increased responses in trigeminocervical nociceptive neurons to cervical input after stimulation of the dura mater. Brain 126(8):1801–1813CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bocchard S, Pereira E, Moir L, Aziz TZ, Green AL (2013) Long-term outcomes of deep brain stimulation for neuropathic pain. Neurosurgery 72:221–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cheng JS, Lim DA, Chang EF, Barbaro NM (2014) A review of percutaneous treatments for trigeminal neuralgia. Neurosurg Suppl 10:25–33Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cordella R, Franzini A, Mantia LL, Marras C, Erbetta A, Broggi G (2009) Hypothalamic stimulation for trigeminal neuralgia in multiple sclerosis patients: efficacy on the paroxysmal ophthalmic pain. Mult Scler 15:1322–1328CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ellis JA, Meija Munne JC, Winfree CJ (2015) Trigeminal branch stimulation for the treatment of intractable craniofacial pain. J Neurosurg 123(1):283–288CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fontaine D, Bozzolo E, Chivonet N, Paguis P, Lanteri-Minet M (2014) Salvage treatment of trigeminal neuralgia by occipital nerve stimulation. Cephalalgia 34(4):307–310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hamani C, Schwab JM, Rezai AR, Dostrovsyk JO, Davis KD, Lozano AM (2006) Deep brain stimulation for chronic neuropathic pain: long-term outcome and the incidence of insertional effect. Pain 125:188–196CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Headache classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS) (2013) The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (beta version). Cephalalgia 33:629–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hong J, Ball PA, Fanciullo GJ (2014) Neurostimulation for neck pain and headache. Headache 54(3):430–444CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Klein J, Sahr S-G, Schackert G, Juratli TA (2016) Peripheral nerve field stimulation for trigeminal neuralgia, trigeminal neuropathic pain, and persistent idiopathic facial pain. Cephalalgia 36(5):445–453CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee P, Huh BK (2013) Peripheral nerve stimulation for the treatment of primary headache. Curr Pain Headache Rep 17:319CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Magis D, Bruno M, Fumal A, Gérardy PY, Hustinx R, Laureys S, Schoenen J (2011) Central modulation in cluster headache patients treated with occipital nerve stimulation: an FDG-PET study. BMC Neurol 11:25CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matharu M, Bartsch T, Ward N, Frackowiack RS, Weiner R, Goadsby PJ (2004) Central neuromodulation in chronic migraine patients with suboccipital stimulators: a PET study. Brain 127:220–230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Melzack R, Wall PD (1965) Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science 150:971–979CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rasche D, Ruppolt M, Stippich C, Unterberg A, Tronnier VM (2006) Motor cortex stimulation for long-term relief of chronic neuropathic pain: a 10 year experience. Pain 121:43–52CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sandel T, Eide PK (2013) Long-term results of microvascular decompression for trigeminal neuralgia and hemifacialspasm according to preoperative symptomatology. Acta Neurochir (Wein) 155:1681–1692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Slavin KV, Efkan Coplan M, Munawar N, Wess C, Nersesyan H (2006) Trigeminal and occipital peripheral nerve stimulation for craniofacial pain: a single-institution experience and review of the literature. Neurosurg Focus 21:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tyler-Kabara EC, Kassam AB, Horowitz MH, Urgo L, Hadjipanayis C, Levy EI, Chang YF (2002) Predictors of outcome in surgically managed patients with typical and atypical trigeminal neuralgia: comparison of results following microvascular-decompression. J Neurosurg 96:527–531CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Verrills P, Rose R, Mitchell B, Vivian D, Barnard A (2014) Peripheral nerve field stimulation for chronic headache: 60 cases and long-term follow-up. Neuromodulation 17:54–59CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of NeurosurgeryUniversity Hospital HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  2. 2.Centre for Biomedicine and Medical TechnologyMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations