Latent infection after spinal cord stimulation device implantation for complex regional pain syndrome: A case report

Yu Min Ki, Hue Jung Park, Seung Hyun Yi, Woo Seog Sim, Jin Young Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Rationale: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is one of the invasive treatments of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). The positive effect has been observed for several years after implantation. However, infection is a common cause of SCS failure and device removal. Patient concerns: Here we describe a case of latent infection at the implantable generator pocket site 9 years after SCS implantation in a patient with CRPS. Diagnoses: A 52-year-old patient was diagnosed with type 1 CRPS. The right foot pain was intractable with standard treatments. SCS implantation was performed and SCS worked well without complication. Nine years later, the patient revisited due to pain, tenderness, and redness at the abdominal wall for 2 weeks. The right foot pain was maintained with NRS 4 for 8 years, and the stimulation stopped 1 year back. SCS infection was diagnosed. Interventions: The patient underwent SCS removal surgery. Outcomes: All SCS devices were removed successfully. The patient was discharged without any complications. Conclusions: While uncommon, infection after SCS implantation can occur even 9 years later. Immediate diagnosis, proper antibiotics, and surgical removal could be needed to prevent further spread of infection and better prognosis.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)E33750
JournalMedicine (United States)
Volume102
Issue number19
DOIs
StatePublished - 12 May 2023

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.

Keywords

  • complex regional pain syndrome
  • infection
  • latent
  • spinal cord stimulation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Latent infection after spinal cord stimulation device implantation for complex regional pain syndrome: A case report'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this