Interventional management of neuropathic pain: NeuPSIG recommendations.

Neuropathic pain (NP) is often refractory to pharmacologic and noninterventional treatment. On behalf of the International Association for the Study of Pain Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group, the authors evaluated systematic reviews, clinical trials, and existing guidelines for the interventional management of NP. Evidence is summarized and presented for neural blockade, spinal cord stimulation (SCS), intrathecal medication, and neurosurgical interventions in patients with the following peripheral and central NP conditions: herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN); painful diabetic and other peripheral neuropathies; spinal cord injury NP; central poststroke pain; radiculopathy and failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS); complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS); and trigeminal neuralgia and neuropathy. Due to the paucity of high-quality clinical trials, no strong recommendations can be made. Four weak recommendations based on the amount and consistency of evidence, including degree of efficacy and safety, are: 1) epidural injections for herpes zoster; 2) steroid injections for radiculopathy; 3) SCS for FBSS; and 4) SCS for CRPS type 1. Based on the available data, we recommend not to use sympathetic blocks for PHN nor radiofrequency lesions for radiculopathy. No other conclusive recommendations can be made due to the poor quality of available data. Whenever possible, these interventions should either be part of randomized clinical trials or documented in pain registries. Priorities for future research include randomized clinical trials, long-term studies, and head-to-head comparisons among different interventional and noninterventional treatments.

Treatment considerations for patients with neuropathic pain and other medical comorbidities.

The efficacy of drugs for neuropathic pain has been established in randomized controlled trials that have excluded patients with comorbid conditions and those taking complex medications. However, patients with neuropathic pain frequently present with complex histories, making direct application of this evidence problematic. Treatment of neuropathic pain needs to be individualized according to the cause of the pain, concomitant diseases, medications, and other individual factors. Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), gabapentinoids, selective noradrenergic reuptake inhibitors, and topical lidocaine are the first-line choices; if needed, combination therapy may be used. When a new drug is added, screening for potential drug interactions is recommended. The TCAs have anticholinergic adverse effects and may cause orthostatic hypotension. They should be avoided or used cautiously in patients with cardiac conduction disturbances or arrhythmias. Patients who lack cytochrome P450 2D6 isoenzyme activity are prone to adverse effects of TCAs and venlafaxine and have a weaker analgesic response to tramadol. A combination of several serotoninergic drugs may lead to serotonin syndrome. Risk of gastrointestinal tract bleeding is increased in patients taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or venlafaxine, especially when combined with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Dose adjustment may be needed in patients with renal or hepatic impairment. Depending on the drug, the dose is reduced or the dosage interval lengthened. Slow titration and careful follow-up are needed. No drug is absolutely safe during pregnancy and lactation. Particular care must be exercised during the first trimester when drug dose should be as low as possible. Individual weighing of benefits and risks should guide therapeutic decisions.

Recommendations for the pharmacological management of neuropathic pain: an overview and literature update.

The Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain recently sponsored the development of evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. Tricyclic antidepressants, dual reuptake inhibitors of serotonin and norepinephrine, calcium channel alpha(2)-delta ligands (ie, gabapentin and pregabalin), and topical lidocaine were recommended as first-line treatment options on the basis of the results of randomized clinical trials. Opioid analgesics and tramadol were recommended as second-line treatments that can be considered for first-line use in certain clinical circumstances. Results of several recent clinical trials have become available since the development of these guidelines. These studies have examined botulinum toxin, high-concentration capsaicin patch, lacosamide, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and combination therapies in various neuropathic pain conditions. The increasing number of negative clinical trials of pharmacological treatments for neuropathic pain and ambiguities in the interpretation of these negative trials must also be considered in developing treatment guidelines. The objectives of the current article are to review the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group guidelines for the pharmacological management of neuropathic pain and to provide a brief overview of these recent studies.

Epidural abscess due to spinal cord stimulator trial.

Spinal cord stimulation is increasingly utilized as a treatment to alleviate low back pain and lumbar radiculopathy, particularly in patients with failed back surgery syndrome. We present an illustrative case of early, rapidly progressive methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection after a brief stimulator trial lead implantation. Operators should maintain a high level of suspicion for deep infection, including epidural abscess, even when only minor symptoms and signs are present. Because of the poor ability to clear infections in the presence of a retained foreign body, the device must be explanted immediately. Subsequent surgical intervention, however, may nevertheless still be needed. While a variety of bacteria may cause epidural abscess, methicillin sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, and increasingly, MRSA and community-associated MRSA, are the most likely etiologic organisms.

On the therapeutic viability of peripheral nerve stimulation for ilioinguinal neuralgia: putative mechanisms and possible utility.

Injury to the ilioinguinal nerve commonly follows during lower abdominal and pelvic surgery, especially with inguinal hernia repair, appendectomy, and hysterectomy. Other potential causes include low abdominal blunt trauma, iliac crest bone graft, psoas abscess, Pott's disease, and prolonged wearing of abdominally constrictive clothing. The actual incidence of ilioinguinal neuralgia is uncertain, as reported percentage ranges between 12% and 62%. Prompt and accurate diagnosis is critical, and appropriate treatments range from conservative pharmacologic management with nonopioid (eg, gabapentin, topiramate) as well as opioid agents, to surgical neurectomy of the proximal portion of the ilioinguinal nerve. Pharmacological treatment is frequently unsuccessful (particularly if delayed) and while surgery is successful in approximately 73% of cases, it can result in problematic paresthesias, and pain may continue to persist in some patients. Thus, minimally invasive techniques, such as peripheral nerve stimulation, may be viable in those patients who are refractory to pharmacological management, as an option to surgery, and who have not gained satisfactory pain relief through surgical intervention. We present three cases of successful pain control of ilioinguinal neuralgia with peripheral nerve stimulation. These cases demonstrate the potential benefits of neurostimulation including durable effective pain relief and decreased use of medication. Putative mechanisms of effect(s) and caveats for continued research to inform prudent employment of this technique are presented.