Spinal Cord Stimulator Removal Complications [2026 Guide]

Complication rates after spinal cord stimulator removal vary depending on the type of lead being removed, whether other spinal surgery is performed at the same time, the amount of scar tissue surrounding the device, and the patient’s surgical history.

Published studies have reported different complication rates depending on the type and complexity of the removal procedure:

• A 2025 study of 139 patients found postoperative complications in 6.5% of patients overall. Among patients who underwent spinal cord stimulator electrode removal as a standalone procedure, the complication rate was 2.4%.
• A Cleveland Clinic study of paddle electrode removal found postoperative complications in 11.75% of patients. Major complications occurred in 2.94%, while minor complications occurred in 8.82%.
• A separate study of 131 paddle electrode explantations reported complications after 18.3% of procedures, although major complications occurred in 3.8% and no permanent neurological deficits were reported.

These findings show why there is not one complication rate that applies to every spinal cord stimulator removal.

Standalone electrode removal may carry a relatively low complication rate, while paddle lead removal can be more complex because scar tissue may form around the electrode near the spinal cord and dura.

Potential complications of removal can include infection, bleeding, hematoma, cerebrospinal fluid leaks, wound complications, retained lead fragments, worsening pain, and neurological injury.

Complications associated with the original spinal cord stimulator implantation are generally more common than complications from removal alone.

Research has reported:

• Overall device-related complication rates of approximately 30% to 40% following spinal cord stimulation treatment.
• Lead migration rates of approximately 13.2% to 22.6% in earlier studies of permanently implanted spinal cord stimulators.
• Infection rates of approximately 2% to 10% following implantation, although a large multicenter study reported an overall infection rate of 2.45%.
• Epidural hematoma rates of approximately 0.25% to 0.3% following spinal cord stimulator implantation.
• Neurological injury is considered uncommon, but reported rates vary considerably depending on the type of injury studied and how researchers collected the data.

Lead migration, infection, device failure, and other implantation complications can eventually result in revision surgery or complete removal of the spinal cord stimulator.

Patients who undergo repeated procedures or more complex paddle lead removal may face additional surgical risks because of scar tissue and changes to the tissue surrounding the spinal cord.

Spinal cord stimulators may be removed when they no longer provide meaningful pain relief, develop hardware problems, cause infection, or create new symptoms that outweigh the benefits of continued spinal cord stimulation.

Loss of pain relief is one of the most common reasons for removal.

A 2025 systematic review of spinal cord stimulator explantation found that lack of efficacy or inadequate pain relief accounted for approximately 38% of explantations studied.

Patients generally undergo a trial period before permanent implantation, and a successful trial typically requires at least a 50% reduction in pain.

However, successful short-term stimulation does not guarantee that an implanted device will continue controlling chronic pain or failed back surgery syndrome over the long term.

Pain relief may decline as the patient’s underlying condition changes, the body adjusts to stimulation, leads move from their intended position, or the device develops mechanical or electrical problems.

Lead migration can interfere with the electrical impulses intended to modify pain signals near the spinal cord and nearby nerves.

Although anchoring techniques are used to reduce lead movement, migration can still require reprogramming, lead revision, or complete removal.

Common reasons why a spinal cord stimulator may be removed include:

• Loss of pain relief or inadequate pain control
• Lead migration, fracture, or other problems involving implanted leads
• Infection involving the generator pocket, leads, or surrounding tissue
• Painful stimulation, shocking sensations, or new neurological symptoms
• Hardware malfunction or failure of the implanted pulse generator
• Charging problems or declining battery life
• Persistent pain at the generator or implant site
• Skin erosion, wound problems, or device exposure
• Need for magnetic resonance imaging when an older or non-MRI-compatible system prevents the necessary imaging
• Complications following spinal cord stimulator surgery that require revision or explantation
• Repeated device problems that make continued use of the spinal cord stimulator unsafe or ineffective

A healthcare provider may first attempt reprogramming, medication changes, or other measures when the problem can be corrected without additional surgery.

Hardware problems may sometimes be addressed through revision rather than complete explantation.

However, serious infection, persistent device failure, neurological complications, or continued loss of therapeutic benefit may make complete spinal cord stimulator removal necessary.

Spinal cord stimulator removal is a surgical procedure used to remove part or all of an implanted spinal cord stimulation system.

The procedure generally involves removing the implantable pulse generator and the leads that carry electrical stimulation to the epidural space near the spinal cord.

Anchors, connecting wires, scar tissue, or infected or damaged tissue may also need to be addressed during spinal cord stimulator explantation.

How the device is removed depends largely on whether the spinal cord stimulator implant uses percutaneous leads or paddle leads.

The procedure may also vary based on where the generator is located, how the leads were anchored during SCS implantation, and whether the device has been implanted for a few weeks or several years.

Percutaneous lead removal is generally less involved than paddle lead removal.

Paddle leads are larger, may be anchored beneath part of the spinal column, and can become surrounded by scar tissue over time.

Spinal cord stimulator removal may be performed under general anesthesia, although the anesthesia plan depends on the type of leads, the complexity of the procedure, and the patient’s medical condition.

Patients should discuss with their healthcare provider which components will be removed and what complications may occur during or after surgery.

Removing the Implantable Pulse Generator and Leads

A permanent spinal cord stimulator system generally includes an implantable pulse generator, one or more leads containing electrodes, and connecting components.

The pulse generator is commonly positioned beneath the skin in the buttock or lower back, while the leads extend toward the spinal cord and deliver stimulation from within the epidural space.

During removal, the surgeon typically makes an incision over the generator pocket, disconnects the pulse generator from the leads, and removes the generator.

A separate incision may be required near the spine to locate and remove the implanted leads.

The process differs depending on the type of lead:

• Percutaneous leads: These smaller leads are placed through an epidural needle and are generally held in position with anchors. During removal, the surgeon locates the anchors and carefully withdraws the leads from the epidural space.
• Paddle leads: These larger leads are generally placed through a more invasive procedure and may be positioned beneath part of the spinal column. Removing them can require reopening the area where the paddle was implanted and carefully separating the lead from surrounding scar tissue.
• Temporary leads: Leads used during the trial phase are designed for short-term use and are generally easier to remove than permanent leads. Removal of temporary leads is different from explantation of a permanently implanted spinal cord stimulator.

According to Johns Hopkins, removal of percutaneous leads generally takes about an hour, while paddle lead removal may take approximately two and a half hours and is typically performed under general anesthesia.

Why Paddle Leads and Scar Tissue May Make Removal More Complex

Paddle leads can make spinal cord stimulator explantation more involved because they are larger and are commonly placed through a surgical opening near the spinal column rather than through an epidural needle.

After SCS implantation, the body forms scar tissue around implanted components.

With paddle leads, this scar tissue can form a capsule around the electrode near the spinal cord and dura.

During removal, the surgeon may need to open this scar capsule and carefully separate the paddle lead from the surrounding tissue.

In some cases, a small amount of bone may also need to be removed to access the lead.

Working near the dura and other structures of the nervous system creates risks that are less prominent during routine removal of temporary leads.

Potential complications can include:

• Dural tear or puncture
• Cerebrospinal fluid leak
• Bleeding or hematoma
• Infection
• Injury to nearby nerves or the spinal cord
• Wound complications
• Incomplete removal or retained lead fragments

Percutaneous leads are usually easier to remove, but complications may still arise if a lead has migrated, fractured, become embedded in scar tissue, or cannot be removed intact.

The complexity of removal therefore depends not only on how long the spinal cord stimulator implant has been in place, but also on the type of lead, prior revision procedures, scar tissue formation, and the location of the implanted components.

Spinal cord stimulator explantation is generally considered a low-risk procedure, but complications can occur during surgery or while the patient is recovering.

The risks depend partly on the type of lead being removed, the amount of scar tissue surrounding the device, prior spinal procedures, and whether additional surgery is performed at the same time.

Potential complications after spinal cord stimulator removal may include:

• Infection at the surgical site
• Bleeding or hematoma
• Epidural hematoma
• Dural tear or puncture
• Cerebrospinal fluid leak
• Wound dehiscence or delayed wound healing
• Retained or fractured lead components
• New or worsening pain
• Numbness, weakness, or other neurological symptoms
• Nerve or spinal cord injury
• Loss of function or, in severe cases, paralysis
• Additional surgery to treat a serious complication

Nerve damage or other neurological injury may occur when spinal cord stimulator leads and surrounding scar tissue are manipulated during removal.

Paddle lead explantation can be particularly complex because scar tissue may form near the dura and spinal cord, requiring careful dissection to remove the implanted electrode.

A cerebrospinal fluid leak can occur if the dura is unintentionally opened during lead removal. Some CSF leaks can be managed without another operation, but more serious or persistent leaks may require secondary repair surgery.

Other risk factors may include previous infection, repeated revision procedures, extensive scar tissue, lead type and location, anticoagulant use, smoking, diabetes, and other conditions that can affect bleeding or wound healing.

Most patients do not experience major complications after spinal cord stimulator removal.

However, new weakness, severe or rapidly worsening pain, fever, wound drainage, severe headache, loss of sensation, or loss of bladder or bowel control after surgery should receive prompt medical evaluation.

When Removal Complications May Support a Lawsuit

A complication after spinal cord stimulator removal does not automatically mean that a product liability claim exists.

A lawsuit may warrant investigation when evidence suggests that a defective spinal cord stimulator, inadequate warning, or device malfunction contributed to the need for removal or caused additional harm.

For example, a patient may have required explant surgery after lead migration, hardware failure, painful stimulation, battery problems, device malfunction, infection associated with the device, or another problem involving the spinal cord stimulation system.

Product liability claims may focus on whether the device had a design defect, manufacturing defect, or inadequate warnings about known risks.

Depending on the circumstances, a spinal cord stimulator removal lawsuit may involve:

• Defective leads, generators, batteries, or other device components
• Lead migration or fracture
• Electrical or programming problems that caused painful or unintended stimulation
• Device failure that resulted in loss of therapeutic benefit
• Inadequate warnings about known risks or complications
• Device-related injuries that required revision surgery or complete removal

An attorney may review implant and explant reports, imaging, device model and serial information, manufacturer warnings, recall or safety information, adverse event reports, and the timeline between implantation, device problems, revision procedures, and removal to determine whether the evidence supports a product liability claim.

Spinal cord stimulator lawsuits are being filed by patients who allege that implanted devices caused serious injuries, malfunctioned, or failed to provide the pain relief they were intended to deliver.

During a spinal cord stimulator trial, temporary leads are generally connected to an external generator before a patient proceeds to permanent implantation.

Some systems are designed to create a tingling sensation that replaces or masks pain signals, while newer stimulation methods may operate without noticeable paresthesia.

Patients involved in current lawsuits allege that spinal cord stimulators caused them to feel pain, electrical shocks, burning sensations, new or worsening nerve symptoms, loss of stimulation, or other complications.

Claims may involve lead migration or fracture, battery and charging problems, defective components, unintended stimulation, or problems involving rechargeable systems.

Manufacturers named in spinal cord stimulator product liability litigation include:

• Boston Scientific
• Abbott
• Nevro
• Medtronic

Plaintiffs generally allege that manufacturers sold defective spinal cord stimulation systems or failed to adequately warn patients and physicians about known risks.

These allegations remain subject to litigation, and the facts and legal theories can differ depending on the manufacturer and device involved.

Some patients undergo repeated reprogramming or revision procedures before the spinal cord stimulator is ultimately removed.

In those cases, explantation may become important evidence of the severity and progression of the alleged device problem, particularly when lead migration, hardware failure, painful stimulation, infection, or loss of therapeutic benefit led to additional surgery.

Federal lawsuits involving Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulators were centralized in June 2026 in MDL No. 3181 in the Central District of California.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation declined at that time to create one industry-wide proceeding covering devices made by Abbott, Nevro, Medtronic, and other manufacturers, meaning claims involving different manufacturers may proceed separately as the litigation develops.

TorHoerman Law is investigating spinal cord stimulator product liability claims involving serious injuries, device failures, revision procedures, and explant surgery.

Evidence That May Support a Spinal Cord Stimulator Removal Claim

Evidence is important because spinal cord stimulator removal claims often involve complicated medical and device issues.

A claim may require proof that the implanted device, the removal surgery, a manufacturer’s conduct, or a medical provider’s conduct caused serious harm.

Important evidence may include:

• Implant card, device model, and serial number
• Implantation, revision, and explant operative reports
• Imaging showing lead migration, fracture, or other device problems
• Programming records and stimulation settings
• Medical records documenting pain, neurological symptoms, infection, or other complications
• Photos of burns, swelling, drainage, or skin damage
• Manufacturer warnings, product manuals, recalls, and safety notices
• Adverse event reports
• Records of additional treatment, disability, or work restrictions
• Expert medical or device opinions

This evidence can help determine whether the spinal cord stimulator malfunctioned, whether known risks were adequately disclosed, and how the device-related complications affected the patient.

Potential Compensation for Spinal Cord Stimulator Removal Complications

Compensation for spinal cord stimulator removal complications may depend on the severity of the injury, the cost of medical treatment, the number of additional surgeries, and the impact on the patient’s daily life.

A patient who suffers permanent nerve damage, paralysis, or repeated corrective surgeries may have different damages than a patient who experiences temporary surgical pain.

Potential compensation may include:

• Medical bills
• Hospitalization costs
• Revision surgery costs
• Device removal costs
• Future medical treatment
• Pain management care
• Physical therapy
• Pain medications
• Lost wages
• Reduced earning capacity
• Disability
• Loss of mobility
• Loss of quality of life
• Home care or assistive devices
• Wrongful death damages in fatal cases

No attorney can guarantee compensation.

A lawyer can review the patient’s medical records, device information, removal timeline, and damages to determine what losses may be available in a claim.

Spinal cord stimulator injuries can involve device failure, lead migration, painful stimulation, neurological symptoms, infection, revision surgery, or complete device removal.

TorHoerman Law is reviewing product liability claims involving spinal cord stimulation systems manufactured by companies including Boston Scientific, Abbott, Nevro, and Medtronic.

An attorney can review medical records, device information, implant and explant reports, adverse event data, and manufacturer warnings to identify factors that may have contributed to the injury.

These cases may require a detailed investigation into whether the spinal cord stimulator was defectively designed or manufactured, whether the device malfunctioned, or whether patients and physicians received adequate warnings about known risks.

If you or a loved one suffered serious complications involving a spinal cord stimulator, TorHoerman Law can review your case and explain whether you may qualify to file a product liability claim.

Contact TorHoerman Law for a free consultation.

You can also use the chat feature on this page to find out if you may qualify for a spinal cord stimulator removal complications lawsuit.