Diaphragm pacing in spinal cord injury can significantly decrease mechanical ventilation in multicenter prospective evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) can lead to dependence on mechanical ventilation (MV) with significant morbidity and mortality. The diaphragm pacing system (DPS) was developed as an alternative to MV. METHODS: We conducted a prospective single-arm study of DPS in MV-dependent patients with high SCI and intact phrenic nerves. Following device acclimation, pacing effectiveness to provide ventilation was evaluated. The primary endpoint was the number who could use DPS to breathe for 4 continuous hours without MV. Secondary endpoints included the number of patients that could use DPS 24 h/day free of MV and the ability of DPS to maintain clinically acceptable tidal volume (Vt). In addition, we conducted a meta-analysis that included the prospective study along with data from four recently published studies to evaluate DPS hourly use. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were implanted in the prospective study. Most were male (77.4%) with a median time from injury to treatment of 28.3 (IQR: 12.1, 83.3) months. Four- and 24-h use occurred in 96.2% (95% CI: 87.0%, 99.5%) and 58.5% (95% CI: 44.1%, 74.9%), respectively. Four and 24-h results in the meta-analysis cohort (n = 196) exhibited similar results 92.2% (95% CI: 82.6%, 96.7%) and 52.7% (95% CI: 36.2%, 68.6%) using DPS for 4 and 24 h, respectively. DPS use significantly exceeded the calculated basal tidal volume requirements by a mean of 48.4% (95% CI: 37.0, 59.9%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that in most ventilator-dependent patients, diaphragm pacing can effectively supplement or completely replace the need for MV and support basal metabolic requirements.

Multicenter review of diaphragm pacing in spinal cord injury: successful not only in weaning from ventilators but also in bridging to independent respiration.

BACKGROUND: Ventilator-dependent spinal cord-injured (SCI) patients require significant resources related to ventilator dependence. Diaphragm pacing (DP) has been shown to successfully replace mechanical ventilators for chronic ventilator-dependent tetraplegics. Early use of DP following SCI has not been described. Here, we report our multicenter review experience with the use of DP in the initial hospitalization after SCI. METHODS: Under institutional review board approval for humanitarian use device, we retrospectively reviewed our multicenter nonrandomized interventional protocol of laparoscopic diaphragm motor point mapping with electrode implantation and subsequent diaphragm conditioning and ventilator weaning. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients with an average age of 31 years (range, 17-65 years) with only two females were identified. Mechanism of injury included motor vehicle collision (7), diving (6), gunshot wounds (4), falls (4), athletic injuries (3), bicycle collision (2), heavy object falling on spine (2), and motorcycle collision (1). Elapsed time from injury to surgery was 40 days (range, 3-112 days). Seven (24%) of the 29 patients who were evaluated for the DP placement had nonstimulatable diaphragms from either phrenic nerve damage or infarction of the involved phrenic motor neurons and were not implanted. Of the stimulatable patients undergoing DP, 72% (16 of 22) were completely free of ventilator support in an average of 10.2 days. For the remaining six DP patients, two had delayed weans of 180 days, three had partial weans using DP at times during the day, and one patient successfully implanted went to a long-term acute care hospital and subsequently had life-prolonging measures withdrawn. Eight patients (36%) had complete recovery of respiration, and DP wires were removed. CONCLUSION: Early laparoscopic diaphragm mapping and DP implantation can successfully wean traumatic cervical SCI patients from ventilator support. Early laparoscopic mapping is also diagnostic in that a nonstimulatable diaphragm is a convincing evidence of an inability to wean from ventilator support, and long-term ventilator management can be immediately instituted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level V.

Multicenter analysis of diaphragm pacing in tetraplegics with cardiac pacemakers: positive implications for ventilator weaning in intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: Diaphragm pacing (DP) can replace mechanical ventilation in tetraplegics and in trials has assisted respiration in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients. This report describes results of DP in patients with cardiac pacemakers. METHODS: Prospective, single-center and multicenter, nonrandomized, controlled, interventional protocols under U.S. Food and Drug Administration and/or institutional review board approval were evaluated. Patients underwent laparoscopic diaphragm motor point mapping to identify optimal electrode site for implantation. With diaphragm conditioning, patients were weaned from their ventilator. Perioperative and long-term assessments between the cardiac pacemakers and DP were analyzed for any device-to-device interactions. RESULTS: Over 300 subjects were implanted from 2000 to 2010. Twenty tetraplegics with cardiac pacemakers and DP were analyzed from 6 sites. Subjects ranged from 19 to 61 years old with DP implantation 6 months to 24 years postinjury. There were no immediate or long-term device to device interactions. All patients achieved diaphragm-paced tidal volumes exceeding their basal requirements and, after conditioning, all patients could go >4 hours without mechanical ventilators; 71% could go 24 hours continuously. CONCLUSION: DP can be safely implanted in tetraplegics having cardiac pacemakers. Applications for temporary use of DP to maintain diaphragm type 1 muscle fiber and improve posterior lobe ventilation may benefit complex critical care patients.

Complete worldwide operative experience in laparoscopic diaphragm pacing: results and differences in spinal cord injured patients and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients.

BACKGROUND: Diaphragm movement is essential for adequate ventilation, and when the diaphragm is adversely affected patients face lifelong positive-pressure mechanical ventilation or death. This report summarizes the complete worldwide multicenter experience with diaphragm pacing stimulation (DPS) to maintain and provide diaphragm function in ventilator-dependent spinal cord injury (SCI) patients and respiratory-compromised patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). It will highlight the surgical experiences and the differences in diaphragm function in these two groups of patients. METHODS: In prospective Food and Drug Administration (FDA) trials, patients underwent laparoscopic diaphragm motor point mapping with intramuscular electrode implantation. Stimulation of the electrodes ensued to condition and strengthen the diaphragm. RESULTS: From March of 2000 to September of 2007, a total of 88 patients (50 SCI and 38 ALS) were implanted with DPS at five sites. Patient age ranged from 18 to 74 years. Time from SCI to implantation ranged from 3 months to 27 years. In 87 patients the diaphragm motor point was mapped with successful implantation of electrodes with the only failure the second SCI patient who had a false-positive phrenic nerve study. Patients with ALS had much weaker diaphragms identified surgically, requiring trains of stimulation during mapping to identify the motor point at times. There was no perioperative mortality even in ALS patients with forced vital capacity (FVC) below 50% predicted. There was no cardiac involvement from diaphragm pacing even when analyzed in ten patients who had pre-existing cardiac pacemakers. No infections occurred even with simultaneous gastrostomy tube placements for ALS patients. In the SCI patients 96% were able to use DPS to provide ventilation replacing their mechanical ventilators and in the ALS studies patients have been able to delay the need for mechanical ventilation up to 24 months. CONCLUSION: This multicenter experience has shown that laparoscopic diaphragm motor point mapping, electrode implantation, and pacing can be safely performed both in SCI and in ALS. In SCI patients it allows freedom from ventilator and in ALS patients it delays the need for ventilators, increasing survival.