Spinal Cord Stimulation for Heart Failure and Arrhythmias
Spinal Cord Stimulation: Background and Current Clinical Uses
Treatment of Chronic Pain Syndromes
Spinal cord stimulation was first used clinically to treat complex pain syndromes refractory to medical therapy. It is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and is used widely for the treatment of complex regional pain syndromes in the cervical and lumbar distributions and the extremities. A recent metaanalysis found that SCS is a cost-effective and acceptable therapy in patients who have persistent neuropathic pain despite adequate conventional medical therapy.1 Randomized studies have found that SCS provides additional benefits over conventional medical therapy for treatment of chronic pain.2 The mechanism by which it treats chronic pain is widely thought to be due to interruption of the ascending pain signals within the spinal cord, although efficacy is also linked to placement of the electrodes in a position that produces mild paresthesia in the dermatomal location of the chronic pain. This finding suggests that the mechanism of pain suppression is highly complex and involves efferent and afferent limbs of the nervous system.
Treatment of Cardiac Angina
Spinal cord stimulation was first used in the late 1980s for the treatment of chronic angina refractory to medical or revascularization therapy. It is an approved therapy for this condition in many European countries. Many case reports and two randomized studies have reported that SCS is more efficacious than medical therapy alone in this population that is difficult to treat.3 The placement of the SCS electrode is usually at spinal segments C8 to T1 and slightly left of midline. In this location, SCS output settings are generally set to produce a slight paresthesia over the left precordium, which somehow blunts the chronic angina symptoms.4 The mechanism by which SCS produces analgesia and antiischemia effects is not clear, but some evidence suggests it is a vagal-dependent process.5 Others have theorized that it produces direct effects on the coronary vasculature by promoting vasodilatation.3,6
Treatment of Peripheral Vascular Disease
Spinal cord stimulation is also approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of limb pain resulting from peripheral vascular disease refractory to standard therapies. Many patients experience significant relief with SCS, showing improvement in symptoms and decreased claudication.6 The epidural stimulation site is often in the lumbar region for the more common lower extremity symptoms. The beneficial effect is thought to be manifest via improved peripheral blood flow.
Spinal Cord Stimulation: Cardiac Effects from Preclinical Studies in Animal Models
Modulation of Cardiac Autonomic Nerve Activity
In anesthetized canines, Foreman et al.7 demonstrated that provocative coronary artery occlusion was associated with increased intracardiac nerve firing. Interestingly, this nerve activity was suppressed by active SCS at spinal segment T1, with no change in other cardiac parameters such as heart rate or blood pressure.7 They concluded that this finding could provide insight into the beneficial effect of SCS in patients with chronic angina pectoris. In another study in a rabbit cardiac ischemia model, preemptive SCS delivered at spinal segment C8-T2 (delivered before and during coronary artery occlusion) reduced subsequent cardiac infarct size. In this study, SCS initiated after the onset of coronary artery occlusion had no effect on subsequent infarct size. The reduction in infarct size by preemptive SCS was blocked by treatment with α- or β-adrenergic receptor blockers, leading the authors to conclude that this cardioprotective effect was mediated by adrenergic neurons of the ANS.8
Effects on Cardiac Electrophysiology and Electrical Conduction
Olgin et al.9 examined the effects of SCS on cardiac electrophysiology in anesthetized normal canines. In this work, acute epidural spinal cord stimulation at segment T1 significantly increased spontaneous sinus cycle length and the AH interval. Vagal nerve transection, but not ansae subclaviae transection, eliminated the effects of SCS on sinus rate and AH interval. The authors concluded that SCS enhanced parasympathetic activity via a vagus nerve–dependent mechanism.9 In a canine model of established postinfarction heart failure, subsequent coronary artery balloon occlusion produced ventricular arrhythmias.10