alexa Decreased Radiation Exposure with Percutaneous Shielded Lead Compared to Unshielded Implant for Spinal Cord Stimulation | OMICS International | Abstract
ISSN: 2167-0846

Journal of Pain & Relief
Open Access

Our Group organises 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events every year across USA, Europe & Asia with support from 1000 more scientific Societies and Publishes 700+ Open Access Journals which contains over 50000 eminent personalities, reputed scientists as editorial board members.

Open Access Journals gaining more Readers and Citations
700 Journals and 15,000,000 Readers Each Journal is getting 25,000+ Readers

This Readership is 10 times more when compared to other Subscription Journals (Source: Google Analytics)

Research Article

Decreased Radiation Exposure with Percutaneous Shielded Lead Compared to Unshielded Implant for Spinal Cord Stimulation

Nathalie Zaidman1, Brice Constant2, Cristo Chaskis1 and Laurence Abeloos1,2*
1Department of Neurosurgery, CHU Charleroi, Belgium
2Pain Clinic, CHU Charleroi, Belgium
Corresponding Author : Laurence A
Department of Neurosurgery, CHU Charleroi
Chaussée de Bruxelles 140 6042 Charleroi, Belgium
Tel: +32.71.92.23.63
Fax: +32.71.92.23.67
E-mail: [email protected]
Received November 11, 2014; Accepted December 22, 2014;; Published December 24, 2014
Citation:Zaidman N, Constant B, Chaskis C, Abeloos L (2014) Decreased Radiation Exposure with Percutaneous Shielded Lead Compared to Unshielded Implant for Spinal Cord Stimulation. J Pain Relief 3: 166. doi: 10.4172/2167-0846.1000166
Copyright: ©2014 Zaidman N, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Abstract

Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a safe and effective treatment for refractory failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). Two implantation procedures exist depending on the use of a surgical versus percutaneous lead. Percutaneous leads implantation is less invasive but the placement procedure requires a higher X-ray exposure. The new MRI compatible shielded percutaneous leads (Vectris®) appear to be stiffer and therefore seem to be easier to implant compared to unshielded percutaneous electrodes (Octad®). The aim of this study is to compare the radiation exposure between percutaneous shielded leads and percutaneous unshielded leads in SCS implantation.

Setting: Retrospective study.

Material and methods: 20 patients successively underwent SCS for FBSS. The first 10 patients were implanted with an Octad ® lead and the 10 following with a shielded Vectris ® lead. All patients were operated on by the same surgical team. In all cases, the same intra-operative X-rays device (Ziehm Vision 8000®) was used, with identical parameters aiming at a minimal X-rays exposure (pulse mode with 2 impulses/sec, and automatic mode for kVp and mAs).

Results: Fluoroscopy time was significantly lower in patients implanted with the Vectris® lead (mean: 99 seconds) compared to the Octad® lead (mean: 291 seconds) (p=0.0035). Subsequently, total patient X-rays exposure in the Vectris group (mean 592 cGycm2) was significantly lower than in the Octad® group (mean: 1899 cGycm2) (p=0.0005).

Conclusion: The use of MRI compatible shielded percutaneous leads significantly reduces the fluoroscopy time and the total X-ray exposure in SCS implantation.

Recommended Conferences
Share This Page
Top