Why Intrathecal Pain Pumps Get Removed: A Summary of a Long-Term Study
An intrathecal pain pump is an implanted device that delivers small doses of pain medicine directly into the fluid around the spinal cord. It is often used for severe chronic pain that has not responded to other treatments, especially ongoing low back pain after spine surgery. Like any implant, a pump can develop problems that lead to its removal (explant). A study in Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine looked at how often that happens in patients with chronic non-cancer pain, and why.
This summary is based on the published abstract; the full paper may include additional detail. Read the abstract on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42710947/
What was studied
The authors set out to describe the complications that led to pump removal in a large group of adults with chronic non-cancer pain treated with intrathecal drug delivery.
How it was done
- Design: a retrospective review at a single US academic pain practice.
- Patients: 215 adults with chronic non-cancer pain who had a pump implanted by pain medicine physicians between 2009 and 2022.
- Typical patient: average age about 63; most (184 patients) had persistent low back pain after prior lumbar spine surgery.
- Follow-up: an average of about 80 months (more than 6 years).
- Data collected: demographics, other health conditions, and the reason for each removal.
Key findings
- About 1 in 4 pumps were removed: the overall explant rate was 26.1%.
- Infection was the top reason: device-related infection led to removal in 9.3% of patients (5.9% of device surgeries).
- Infections came early: infection-related removals happened much sooner after implant than removals for other reasons.
- Loss of pain relief was less common: 5.6% of patients had the pump removed because it stopped helping, a lower rate than the authors had seen for spinal cord stimulators in a similar group.
- No clear risk factors: no demographic or health factors were linked to removal.
Limitations
- It was a retrospective review, so it depends on what was recorded in the chart.
- It came from one practice; results may differ elsewhere.
- The comparison with spinal cord stimulators was not a head-to-head trial.
- The abstract does not break down every removal reason or describe how infections were treated.
Safety takeaways
- Infection prevention matters most early. Careful sterile technique and close wound checks in the first weeks after implant are key.
- Teach warning signs. Patients should know to report fever, redness, swelling, or drainage at the pump or incision right away.
- Set realistic expectations. A meaningful share of pumps are eventually removed; this belongs in the consent discussion.
- Keep following up. Long-term monitoring helps catch both device problems and loss of pain relief.
- Document. Record the indication, implant details, refills, and any signs of infection or declining benefit.
Reference
- Hayek SM, Shahrestani S, Blank J, Feijo B, Reyes J, Duong P, Sidhu M, Li Q, Shaner R, Murphy J, Staudt MD. Complications leading to device explant in patients with chronic non-cancer pain receiving intrathecal drug delivery. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2026;51(9):1048-1054. DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2025-107223. PMID: 42710947. Abstract: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42710947/
Related: Intrathecal Drug Delivery Cases
This article is educational information, not legal or medical advice.
Back to Blog