Chronic pancreatitis leads to severe abdominal pain in up to 70% of patients, and several studies have proposed it has a neuropathic component. Current treatments often fail to provide adequate pain relief, necessitating new innovations for management. Spinal cord stimulation has been proposed to treat severe neuropathic pain refractory to conventional treatment, but sham-controlled trials have not previously been done in patients with visceral pain. This study will test the effect of spinal cord stimulation in chronic pancreatitis patients with insufficient pain relief from standard therapies.
Chronic pancreatitis (CP) is a condition causing considerable morbidity, with nearly 0.5 million new cases emerging in Europe every year. It is characterized by a fibro-inflammatory process that progressively damages the pancreas. As the disease advances, most patients experience exocrine pancreatic insufficiency and diabetes, but the most debilitating aspect is severe abdominal pain, which affects about 70% of patients. The pain's origins in CP are complex, typically associated with pancreatic inflammation, ductal obstruction, damage to pancreatic nerves due to inflammation and fibrosis, and resulting neuropathy that triggers sensitization in the pain pathways. This may lead to self-perpetuating pain independent of its initial cause. Current CP pain management involves conventional analgesics, neuromodulators, and specific endoscopic or surgical interventions for selected cases. However, a substantial number of patients still struggle with inadequate pain relief despite these treatments, necessitating innovative approaches to address CP-associated pain effectively. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a reversible invasive technique that involves stimulating spinal cord neurons and axons using low-voltage electrical current through leads placed in the epidural space behind the spinal cord dorsal columns. The mechanisms through which neurostimulation may alleviate pain and induce neuroplasticity are intricate and impact multiple neuronal and pain pathways. SCS has shown efficacy in managing neuropathic pain. However, there is a lack of sham-controlled research investigating SCS's effect on visceral pain conditions, including CP. Hypothesizing that SCS, when compared to sham stimulation, can offer clinically significant pain relief and enhance physical functioning and quality of life in CP patients, an investigator-led, randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled, cross-over study is initiated.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE
Enrollment
16
Stimulation electrode tip (Vectris™ SureScan MRI percutaneous lead, Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, US) External electrical pulse generator (Wireless External Neurostimulator System (WENS), Medtronic)
Stimulation electrode tip (Vectris™ SureScan MRI percutaneous lead, Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, US) with external stimulator turned off
Department of Gastroenterology, Aalborg University Hospital
Aalborg, Denmark
Pain relief
The difference in pain intensity scores between active and sham stimulations measured using a patient pain diary based on a numeric rating scale where a score of "0" indicated no pain and a score of "10" indicated worst pain imaginable. Pain scores are registered daily for one week prior to intervention and during the two periods of active and sham SCS stimulations.
Time frame: At baseline and days 7-10 in each stimulation period
Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC)
The Patient Global Impression of Change assessed after each stimulation period
Time frame: Immediately after the intervention
The modified Brief Pain Inventory short-form (mBPI-sf)
Differences in the pain and functioning composite scores of the modified Brief Pain Inventory short-form between stimulation period (SCS vs sham)
Time frame: At baseline an immediately after the intervention
Comprehensive Pain Assessment Tool short-form (COMPAT-sf)
Differences in the Comprehensive Pain Assessment Tool short-form (COMPAT-sf) total score and subscroes between stimulation periods (SCS vs sham)
Time frame: At baseline an immediately after the intervention
Quality of life using SF 36 (short form 36 health survey)
Differences in the SF 36 (short form 36 health survey) total score and subscores between stimulation periods (SCS vs sham)
Time frame: At baseline an immediately after the intervention
Symptoms of depression and anxiety as documented by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)
Differences in the depression and anxiety scores of Symptoms of depression and anxiety as documented by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) between stimulation periods (SCS vs sham)
Time frame: At baseline an immediately after the intervention
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.