Change in opioid use following spinal cord stimulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE: Chronic pain is a leading cause of disability, and many affected patients rely on long-term opioid therapy despite its unfavorable adverse effect profile. Spinal cord stimulation is an established therapy for chronic pain that may secondarily reduce opioid consumption by providing sustained analgesia. OBJECTIVE: To quantify changes in opioid use following spinal cord stimulation implantation for the treatment of chronic pain through a systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus from each database's inception to July 1, 2024. STUDY SELECTION: We included studies describing patients who underwent spinal cord stimulator implantation for the treatment of chronic pain. A total of 2,784 potential studies were identified and screened by multiple independent reviewers, yielding a final total of 43 studies included in the systematic review. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction was completed by multiple independent reviewers following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. A random effects model with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustment was used to estimate pooled estimates. Certainty assessment was performed following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcomes were change in continuous opioid use (ie, morphine milligram equivalent (MME)) and categorical opioid use (yes/no) from preimplantation to 12 months following spinal cord stimulator implantation. RESULTS: Meta-analysis of 12 month continuous MME use comprising 22 study comparisons (1,666 individuals) revealed a weighted mean difference of -18.06 MME (95% CI -24.41 to -11.70; 95% prediction interval -38.29 to 2.17; p<0.001). Meta-analysis of categorical opioid use at 12 months comprising 24 study comparisons (1,527 individuals) revealed an OR of 0.47 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.75; 95% prediction interval 0.10 to 2.11; p=0.003), signifying lower odds of opioid continuation. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Spinal cord stimulation is associated with reduced opioid dose consumption and increased odds of opioid cessation at 12 months postimplantation compared with baseline in patients with chronic pain; however, both of these conclusions are supported by evidence of very low GRADE certainty. RATINGS OF THE QUALITY OF THE EVIDENCE: Properly powered and conducted randomized clinical trial; systematic review with meta-analysis. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024574921.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine
Published
2026-05-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2026-107603
Primary Topic
Pain Management and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Change in opioid use following spinal cord stimulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Mahmoud Morsi, Kira Kopacz, Lisa Goudman, Hunter Soleymani et al.
Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine
Pain Management and Treatment
article

Change in opioid use following spinal cord stimulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Mahmoud Morsi, Kira Kopacz, Lisa Goudman, Hunter Soleymani, Nasir Hussain, Ryan D’Souza, Jay Karri, Saba Javed
article en

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Chronic pain is a leading cause of disability, and many affected patients rely on long-term opioid therapy despite its unfavorable adverse effect profile. Spinal cord stimulation is an established therapy for chronic pain that may secondarily reduce opioid consumption by providing sustained analgesia. OBJECTIVE: To quantify changes in opioid use following spinal cord stimulation implantation for the treatment of chronic pain through a systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus from each database's inception to July 1, 2024. STUDY SELECTION: We included studies describing patients who underwent spinal cord stimulator implantation for the treatment of chronic pain. A total of 2,784 potential studies were identified and screened by multiple independent reviewers, yielding a final total of 43 studies included in the systematic review. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction was completed by multiple independent reviewers following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. A random effects model with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustment was used to estimate pooled estimates. Certainty assessment was performed following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcomes were change in continuous opioid use (ie, morphine milligram equivalent (MME)) and categorical opioid use (yes/no) from preimplantation to 12 months following spinal cord stimulator implantation. RESULTS: Meta-analysis of 12 month continuous MME use comprising 22 study comparisons (1,666 individuals) revealed a weighted mean difference of -18.06 MME (95% CI -24.41 to -11.70; 95% prediction interval -38.29 to 2.17; p<0.001). Meta-analysis of categorical opioid use at 12 months comprising 24 study comparisons (1,527 individuals) revealed an OR of 0.47 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.75; 95% prediction interval 0.10 to 2.11; p=0.003), signifying lower odds of opioid continuation. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Spinal cord stimulation is associated with reduced opioid dose consumption and increased odds of opioid cessation at 12 months postimplantation compared with baseline in patients with chronic pain; however, both of these conclusions are supported by evidence of very low GRADE certainty. RATINGS OF THE QUALITY OF THE EVIDENCE: Properly powered and conducted randomized clinical trial; systematic review with meta-analysis. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024574921.

Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine
University of Maryland, Baltimore (US), Mayo Clinic (US), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE), John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County (US), The Ohio State University (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Pain Management and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.