Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT00462566
NCT00462566CompletedNot Applicable

The Efficacy of Motor Cortex Stimulation for Pain Control

Nova Scotia Health Authority1 site in 1 country12 target enrollmentStarted: October 1, 2005Last updated:
Conditions

Trial Snapshot

Phase
Not Applicable
Status
Completed
Enrollment
12
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Global impression of change

Study Overview

Brief Summary

The objective is to determine if motor cortex stimulation works for the following conditions:

  1. Deafferentation facial pain,
  2. Upper extremity complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) and
  3. Brachial plexus avulsion or phantom limb pain.

Each of these groups of 6 patients (total of 18) will be studied independently and all patients will be implanted with a motor cortex stimulation system. They will be randomised to either a regular or low stimulation setting in the two arms of the study. Each arm will last 3 months.

Detailed Description

This is a prospective, blinded randomized crossover study comparing two stimulation paradigms in three different groups of patients receiving motor cortex stimulation. The aim of this study is to examine the effectiveness of this modality in a controlled blinded manner, which has not been done in previous studies. There are two primary purposes of this study. The first is to compare two different stimulation paradigms: "high" level stimulation (i.e. stimulator activated 'on' for 10 minutes, 'off' for 2 hours; presumed therapeutic dose); versus "low" stimulation ('on' for 1 minute, 'off' for 6 hours; presumed subtherapeutic dose), in a prospective blinded crossover study design.

The second purpose of this study, is to examine the outcome of MCS in three different pain groups. These are:

  1. Unilateral upper extremity neuropathic pain such as brachial plexus avulsion, stump pain or phantom limb pain
  2. Neuropathic deafferentation facial pain
  3. Upper extremity complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS)

Measurements of the effects of motor cortex stimulation will include a visual analogue scale (VAS) of perceived pain, the McGill Pain Questionnaire, SF-36 quality of life questionnaire, Beck Depression Inventory-II, the standard 7-point patient global impression of change (PGIC), medications log (verified by pharmacy records) and an employment status questionnaire. Adverse events will be recorded at each visit.

Table 1:

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Crossover
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Masking
Single (Investigator)

Eligibility Criteria

Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No

Inclusion Criteria

  • •Diagnosis in one of the following three categories:
  • •Unilateral upper extremity neuropathic pain such as phantom limb pain, stump pain or brachial plexus avulsion
  • •Neuropathic deafferentation facial pain
  • •Upper extremity complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS)
  • •Pain is refractory to conservative methods (e.g. medications, regional blocks) as reviewed by a chronic pain clinical physician
  • •Patient is considered a good candidate for neurosurgery, i.e. no other medical problems that would preclude surgery
  • •Patients who are willing to provide informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria

  • •Patients who are not considered medically fit for neurosurgery.
  • •Patients who have not exhausted conservative methods of pain control, prior to considering motor cortex stimulation.
  • •Patients who are not able to provide informed consent.
  • •Patients unable to have magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Global impression of change

Time Frame: at 12 and 24 weeks postop

Visual Analog scale

Time Frame: 1 month preop, at 12 and 24 weeks postop

Beck II depression

Time Frame: 1 month preop, at 12 and 24 weeks postop

McGill Pain questionnaire

Time Frame: 1 month preop, at 12 and 24 weeks postop

Employment status

Time Frame: 1 month preop, at 12 and 24 weeks postop

SF-36

Time Frame: 1 month preop, at 12 and 24 weeks postop

Medications log

Time Frame: 1 month preop, at 12 and 24 weeks postop

Secondary Outcomes

No secondary outcomes reported

Investigators

Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Sponsor

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials