Here’s the proof it works
Boston Scientific chronic pain solutions are backed by solid clinical evidence.
Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS)
Getting You Back to Everyday Activities
In a major clinical study, patients using Boston Scientific's SCS therapies reported a greater improvement in their ability to do everyday activities* than patients reported in other studies using non-Boston Scientific SCS systems.1, 2, 3
Significant Long-Term Relief
In another major clinical study, patients with severe low-back pain (8 or above on a 0-10 scale) reported a nearly 6-point drop in pain score at two years.4
Tens of thousands of people across the globe look to Boston Scientific SCS therapy for long-term, drug-free, FDA-approved pain relief.
More than 90% of Boston Scientific SCS trial participants reported a successful experience and opted to get the permanent implant.5
9 out of 10 Boston Scientific SCS patients said they were satisfied with their therapy and 95% would recommend it to others.5
The minimally invasive Vertiflex Procedure is FDA approved and backed by a long-term clinical study.
Over 20,000 patients have received pain relief from the Vertiflex Procedure since FDA approval.
In the clinical study, most patients on opioids stopped using them after the Vertiflex Procedure.6**
Nine out of ten patients in the clinical study were satisfied with their pain relief and increase in physical activity.7‡
Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA)
Studies show that more than 70% of patients treated with RFA experience relief—lasting anywhere from six to 12 months, and in some cases, years.8-10
Let’s find your relief
Wondering if these solutions may be right for you? Take this quick quiz and find out.
Get started. ⟶
Question 1 / 8
Have you been suffering from pain
for more than 6 months?
*As measured by the Oswestry Disability Index at 3 months post implant.
†Superion™ Indirect Decompression System.
**Decrease in the proportion of patients using opioids compared to baseline at five years.
References: 1. Wallace M. et al. Outcomes of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Utilizing a Spinal Cord System Capable of Multiple Neurostimulation Modalities (COMBO). NANS Annual Meeting. January 2020 (N=41) 2. Kapural, Cong Yu, et al. Novel 10-kHz High-frequency Therapy (HF10 Therapy) Is Superior to Traditional Low-frequency Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Chronic Back and Leg Pain: The SENZA-RCT Randomized Controlled Trial. Anesthesiology 2015; 123:851 -860 3. Deer, Timothy, et al. Success Using Neuromodulation With BURST (SUNBURST) Study: Results From a Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial Using a Novel Burst Waveform. Neuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interface. 21. 10.1111/ner.12698 4. Veizi E, Hayek SM, North J, et al. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) with anatomically guided (3D) neural targeting shows superior chronic axial low back pain relief compared to traditional SCS—LUMINA Study. Pain Med. 2017;18(8):1534-1548. 5. Thomson SJ, Kruglov D, Duarte RV. A spinal cord stimulation service review from a single centre using a single manufacturer over a 7.5 year follow-up period. Neuromodulation. 2017;20(6):589-599. N=321 6. Nunley PD, Deer TR, Benyamin RM, Staats PS, Block JE. Interspinous process decompression is associated with a reduction in opioid analgesia in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. J Pain Res. 2018;11:2943-2948. 7. Nunley PD, Patel VV, Orndorff DG, Lavelle WF, Block JE, Geisler FH. Five-year durability of stand-alone interspinous process decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Interv Aging. 2017;12:1409-1417. N=88 8. MacVicar J, Borowczyk JM, MacVicar AM, Loughnan BM, Bogduk N. Cervical medial branch radiofrequency neurotomy in New Zealand. Pain Med. 2012;13(5):647-654. 9. Dreyfuss P, Halbrook B, Pauza K, Joshi A, McLarty J, Bogduk N. Efficacy and validity of radiofrequency neurotomy for chronic lumbar zygapophysial joint pain. Spine. 2000;25(10):1270-1277. 10. Govind J, King W, Bailey B, Bogduk N. Radiofrequency neurotomy for the treatment of third occipital headache. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2003;74(1):88-93.
Results from clinical studies are not predictive of results in other studies. Results in other studies may vary.