Source for SCS system comparison

IPSIS: Formerly the Spine Intervention Society
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
N

NJPAIN

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
2,722
Reaction score
1,748
Points
6,761
Location
New Jersey
  1. Attending Physician
Members do not see this ad.
Does anyone know of an updated document that lists the features of all of the SCS systems made by the various manufacturers? I’m having a hard time keeping up with who has a primary cell, rechargeable cell, full MRI compatibility, etc.
 
The only primary cell worth using is ABT but there is an old MDT and a not mri compatible bsx system still available.
 
MRI: the beat remains MDT with the BSX Montage system nearly equal. Nevro require impedance checks with the two but is compatible with both cervical and thoracic leads. ABT is only with leads t7 and below. It does have a MRI mode on the controller which is an automated impedance check which is handier than the rep required visit required with Nevro. BSX Wavewriter and Novi Is head only. ABT DRG is head and extremities only.
 
Rechargeable: MDT Intellis is the smallest by far. It has very good life with regular MDT programming but will require daily charging with DTM. It can charge from 0 to 100% in one hour. ABT’s is the old protege system which is 10 year old technology. Not worth using.
nevro continues to shrink their batteries or improve programming every 18m or so. Recharging seems to get easier with every generation change. BSX no recent experience but recharged fine and worked well when we had good rep support.
 
Regardless of the Abbott mri comparability, my hospital radiology department refuses to scan them with mri because of the very narrow parameters and how long it takes to scan within those parameters. Every Abbott patient that I have had that went into implant has issues with getting MrI down the road in my system.

Maybe it’s different elsewhere
 
myrandom2003 said:
Regardless of the Abbott mri comparability, my hospital radiology department refuses to scan them with mri because of the very narrow parameters and how long it takes to scan within those parameters. Every Abbott patient that I have had that went into implant has issues with getting MrI down the road in my system.

Maybe it’s different elsewhere
Click to expand...

It’s not. The reps will lie. “We’re mri compatible”. Nothing further than the truth. You want mri? Use Medtronic or Boston with montage and evista (sp?) leads.
 
I’m sorry to say that I have to agree about poor MRI compatibility with Abbott. We have implanted a bunch of them in our practice and have had many instances where the impedance is not within parameters for MRI or facilities saying they’re conditions were too restrictive and refusing to do it. Medtronic definitely has the best MRI compatibility. Nevro has to have impedance check but we have not had any patient not able to have MRI due to problems.
 
I will have to admit my ABT rep is more attentive than most and my small facility wants to get the study done more than most. The ABT rep sends patients from outside to our facility for MRI’s. So probably not the same situation most have.
 
All of our problems have been impedances not being within the strict narrow window required for the Abbott system to be considered MRI compatible. Nothing anyone can do about that.
 
You have to make the patient move around in certain positions and keep trying.
 
I appreciate all of the great information and additional debate. Getting back to the original question, has anyone done the work to develop a grid that has all of features of all the various systems side by side? I thought that I had something I had discovered a while back saved in my Dropbox but I can’t find it. Even if I could find it, it’s probably outdated.
It’s easy to pick one or two systems you favor for trialing and implanting. However, I occasionally see patients implanted elsewhere that are not happy. Then it would be helpful to know if that company makes a more suitable IPG, can their leads be used with another manufacturer’s IPG. Not all of us have BobBarker’s encyclopedic memory of implantable devices.
 
NJPAIN said:
I appreciate all of the great information and additional debate. Getting back to the original question, has anyone done the work to develop a grid that has all of features of all the various systems side by side? I thought that I had something I had discovered a while back saved in my Dropbox but I can’t find it. Even if I could find it, it’s probably outdated.
It’s easy to pick one or two systems you favor for trialing and implanting. However, I occasionally see patients implanted elsewhere that are not happy. Then it would be helpful to know if that company makes a more suitable IPG, can their leads be used with another manufacturer’s IPG. Not all of us have BobBarker’s encyclopedic memory of implantable devices.
Click to expand...

Agree. I would love to see and save a grid chart comparing the features of the major SCS companies side by side.
 
Ur Nevro rep has a new handout that shows them all side by side
 
bedrock said:
I wonder if that is completely accurate or designed to Steer you to Nevro......
Click to expand...
Ofc towards Nevro bc it’s the best! Hah jk. But I mean on paper Nevro has the mri compatibility and can do all the modes...so they checked every box while others (boston) couldn’t bc of mri
 
The key benefit Medtronic allows over the other big three is that you just have to have a lead in the epidural space. Turn the thing off and you can scan.

The others are technically off label if they're fractured, disconnected, impedances are out of spec, and they won't go into "MRI mode." I think only MDT and Stimwave have that feature. I think the BSx leads are the only ones that might be dangerous if they're messed up though, because their MRI conditionality was based off the shielding on the lead with the Avista.

The other detail is that Specific Absorption Rate(SAR) spec that is limiting due to tissue heating. It makes techs do more for some non-MDT scans.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    83.6 KB · Views: 124
Come on. That is ridiculous.

Just consult the forum encyclopedia. He promises to keep updated and maintain impartiality.
 
myrandom2003 said:
Regardless of the Abbott mri comparability, my hospital radiology department refuses to scan them with mri because of the very narrow parameters and how long it takes to scan within those parameters. Every Abbott patient that I have had that went into implant has issues with getting MrI down the road in my system.

Maybe it’s different elsewhere
Click to expand...
Same here. I like the Abbott system a lot, but they definitely oversold the MRI compatibility. I practice, it's turned out to be only theoretical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Y
SCS Anchoring
Replies
6
Views
1K
Asclepius186
A
M
SCS trial aborted - billing?
Replies
13
Views
2K
Drd105
D
P
SCS Removal
Replies
7
Views
1K
BobBarker
BobBarker
T
United SCS criteria, InterQual?
Replies
1
Views
626
BobBarker
BobBarker
P
SCS positioning
Replies
4
Views
997
callmeanesthesia
C
Top Bottom