RESUMO
Neuromodulation is an expanding area of pain medicine that incorporates an array of non-invasive, minimally invasive, and surgical electrical therapies. In this Series paper, we focus on spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapies discussed within the framework of other invasive, minimally invasive, and non-invasive neuromodulation therapies. These therapies include deep brain and motor cortex stimulation, peripheral nerve stimulation, and the non-invasive treatments of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. SCS methods with electrical variables that differ from traditional SCS have been approved. Although methods devoid of paraesthesias (eg, high frequency) should theoretically allow for placebo-controlled trials, few have been done. There is low-to-moderate quality evidence that SCS is superior to reoperation or conventional medical management for failed back surgery syndrome, and conflicting evidence as to the superiority of traditional SCS over sham stimulation or between different SCS modalities. Peripheral nerve stimulation technologies have also undergone rapid development and become less invasive, including many that are placed percutaneously. There is low-to-moderate quality evidence that peripheral nerve stimulation is effective for neuropathic pain in an extremity, low quality evidence that it is effective for back pain with or without leg pain, and conflicting evidence that it can prevent migraines. In the USA and many areas in Europe, deep brain and motor cortex stimulation are not approved for chronic pain, but are used off-label for refractory cases. Overall, there is mixed evidence supporting brain stimulation, with most sham-controlled trials yielding negative findings. Regarding non-invasive modalities, there is moderate quality evidence that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation does not provide meaningful benefit for chronic pain in general, but conflicting evidence regarding pain relief for neuropathic pain and headaches. For transcranial direct current stimulation, there is low-quality evidence supporting its benefit for chronic pain, but conflicting evidence regarding a small treatment effect for neuropathic pain and headaches. For transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, there is low-quality evidence that it is superior to sham or no treatment for neuropathic pain, but conflicting evidence for non-neuropathic pain. Future research should focus on better evaluating the short-term and long-term effectiveness of all neuromodulation modalities and whether they decrease health-care use, and on refining selection criteria and treatment variables.
Assuntos
Dor Crônica/terapia , Neuralgia/terapia , Neurotransmissores/uso terapêutico , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Estimulação Encefálica Profunda/métodos , Síndrome Pós-Laminectomia/complicações , Síndrome Pós-Laminectomia/patologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Córtex Motor/fisiopatologia , Neuralgia/etiologia , Sistema Nervoso Periférico/fisiopatologia , Estimulação da Medula Espinal/efeitos adversos , Estimulação da Medula Espinal/métodos , Estimulação Transcraniana por Corrente Contínua/métodos , Estimulação Magnética Transcraniana/métodos , Estimulação Elétrica Nervosa Transcutânea/métodosRESUMO
This Practice Advisory presents a comprehensive and evidence-based set of position statements and recommendations for the use of contrast media in interventional pain procedures. The advisory was established by an international panel of experts under the auspices of 11 multinational and multispecialty organizations based on a comprehensive review of the literature up to December 31, 2019. The advisory discusses the risks of using gadolinium-based contrast agents. These include nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, gadolinium brain deposition/retention, and encephalopathy and death after an unintentional intrathecal gadolinium injection. The advisory provides recommendations on the selection of a specific gadolinium-based contrast agent in patients with renal insufficiency, those who had multiple gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging examinations, and in cases of paraspinal injections. Additionally, recommendations are made for patients who have a history of mild, moderate, or severe hypersensitivity reactions to contrast medium.
Assuntos
Encefalopatias/induzido quimicamente , Encéfalo/efeitos dos fármacos , Meios de Contraste/efeitos adversos , Hipersensibilidade a Drogas/etiologia , Dermopatia Fibrosante Nefrogênica/induzido quimicamente , Manejo da Dor/efeitos adversos , Encéfalo/metabolismo , Encefalopatias/diagnóstico , Encefalopatias/metabolismo , Consenso , Meios de Contraste/administração & dosagem , Meios de Contraste/metabolismo , Técnica Delphi , Hipersensibilidade a Drogas/diagnóstico , Humanos , Dermopatia Fibrosante Nefrogênica/diagnóstico , Prognóstico , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Distribuição TecidualRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Pain treatment is best performed when a patient-centric, safety-based philosophy is used to determine an algorithmic process to guide care. Since 2007, the International Neuromodulation Society has organized a group of experts to evaluate evidence and create a Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC) to guide practice. METHODS: The current PACC update was designed to address the deficiencies and innovations emerging since the previous PACC publication of 2012. An extensive literature search identified publications between January 15, 2007 and November 22, 2015 and authors contributed additional relevant sources. After reviewing the literature, the panel convened to determine evidence levels and degrees of recommendations for intrathecal therapy. This meeting served as the basis for consensus development, which was ranked as strong, moderate or weak. Algorithms were developed for intrathecal medication choices to treat nociceptive and neuropathic pain for patients with cancer, terminal illness, and noncancer pain, with either localized or diffuse pain. RESULTS: The PACC has developed an algorithmic process for several aspects of intrathecal drug delivery to promote safe and efficacious evidence-based care. Consensus opinion, based on expertise, was used to fill gaps in evidence. Thirty-one consensus points emerged from the panel considerations. CONCLUSION: New algorithms and guidance have been established to improve care with the use of intrathecal drug delivery.
Assuntos
Analgésicos/administração & dosagem , Consenso , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos/normas , Injeções Espinhais/normas , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos/métodos , Humanos , Dor/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Epidural corticosteroid injections are a common treatment for radicular pain caused by intervertebral disc herniations, spinal stenosis, and other disorders. Although rare, catastrophic neurologic injuries, including stroke and spinal cord injury, have occurred with these injections. METHODS: A collaboration was undertaken between the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Safe Use Initiative, an expert multidisciplinary working group, and 13 specialty stakeholder societies. The goal of this collaboration was to review the existing evidence regarding neurologic complications associated with epidural corticosteroid injections and produce consensus procedural clinical considerations aimed at enhancing the safety of these injections. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Safe Use Initiative representatives helped convene and facilitate meetings without actively participating in the deliberations or decision-making process. RESULTS: Seventeen clinical considerations aimed at improving safety were produced by the stakeholder societies. Specific clinical considerations for performing transforaminal and interlaminar injections, including the use of nonparticulate steroid, anatomic considerations, and use of radiographic guidance are given along with the existing scientific evidence for each clinical consideration. CONCLUSION: Adherence to specific recommended practices when performing epidural corticosteroid injections should lead to a reduction in the incidence of neurologic injuries.
Assuntos
Corticosteroides/administração & dosagem , Corticosteroides/efeitos adversos , Injeções Epidurais/efeitos adversos , Injeções Epidurais/normas , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso/induzido quimicamente , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso/prevenção & controle , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Animais , Consenso , Espaço Epidural/anatomia & histologia , Humanos , Dor Lombar/tratamento farmacológico , Dor/complicações , Dor/tratamento farmacológico , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug AdministrationRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Chronic axial low back pain (CLBP) that is not responsive to medication management or physical therapy often requires significant clinical intervention. Several interventional pain management options exist, including a 60-day peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) treatment. This economic evaluation investigated the potential for projected cost savings associated with prioritizing 60-day PNS treatment relative to a 'standard of care' (SOC) approach (where patients do not have access to 60-day PNS). METHODS: A decision tree (supervised machine learning) model tracked treatment progression across two hypothetical cohorts of US patients with CLBP in whom non-interventional options were ineffective (Cohort A: treatment starting with 60-day PNS followed by any additional interventional and surgical treatments versus Cohort B: standard of care interventional and surgical treatments without access to 60-day PNS). Treatment efficacy estimates were based on published success rates. Conditional on treatment failure, up to two additional interventions were considered within the 12-month time frame in both cohorts. SOC treatment options included epidural injection, radiofrequency ablation (RFA), basivertebral nerve ablation (BVNA), PNS permanent implant (PNS-PI), spinal cord stimulator (SCS) trial/implant, and spinal fusion surgery. Treatment choice probabilities in both cohort algorithms were based on clinician interviews. Costs were based on national Medicare reimbursement levels in the ambulatory surgery center (ASC) setting. Savings reflected the difference in projected costs between cohorts. A Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analyses were conducted to generate confidence intervals and identify important inputs. RESULTS: The treatment algorithm which prioritized initial 60-day PNS treatment was projected to save $8056 (95% CI $6112-$9981) per patient during the first year of interventional treatment relative to the SOC approach. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the 60-day PNS treatment as an initial interventional treatment in patients with CLBP may result in significant savings for Medicare. Projected savings may be even larger for commercial payers covering non-Medicare patients.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Real-world data can provide important insights into treatment effectiveness in routine clinical practice. Studies have demonstrated that in multiple different pain indications temporary (60-day) percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) treatment can produce significant relief, but few real-world studies have been published. The present study is the first real-world, retrospective review of a large database depicting outcomes at the end of a 60-day PNS treatment period. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate outcomes during a 60-day PNS treatment in routine clinical practice. STUDY DESIGN: Secondary retrospective review. METHODS: Anonymized records of 6,160 patients who were implanted with a SPRINT PNS System from August 2019 through August 2022 were retrospectively reviewed from a national real-world database. The percentage of patients with ? 50% pain relief and/or improvement in quality of life was evaluated and stratified by nerve target. Additional outcomes included average and worst pain score, patient-reported percentage of pain relief, and patient global impression of change. RESULTS: Overall, 71% of patients (4,348/6,160) were responders with >= 50% pain relief and/or improvement in quality of life; pain relief among responders averaged 63%. The responder rate was largely consistent across nerve targets throughout the back and trunk, upper and lower extremities, and posterior head and neck. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature and reliance on a device manufacturer's database. Additionally, detailed demographic information and measures for pain medication usage and physical function were not assessed. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis supports recent prospective studies demonstrating that 60-day percutaneous PNS can provide significant relief across a wide range of nerve targets. These data serve an important role in complementing the findings of published prospective clinical trials.
Assuntos
Dor Crônica , Estimulação Elétrica Nervosa Transcutânea , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Dor Crônica/terapia , Estudos Prospectivos , Qualidade de Vida , Resultado do Tratamento , Nervos PeriféricosRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: While pain in the extremities often responds to treatment using spinal cord stimulation (SCS), axial pain is notoriously refractory to SCS. Interest in subcutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (SQ PNS) as an alternative to SCS has emerged, but the most appropriate electrode locations and neurostimulator programming techniques are not yet clear. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of consecutive patients evaluated from August 2009 to December 2010 who had undergone trial of SQ PNS with inter-lead stimulation for axial spine pain. Patients proceeding to implant were followed postoperatively with routine clinical visits and a survey form at last follow-up. Ultrasound was used intraoperatively to ensure placement of electrodes at the appropriate depth in patients with larger body mass index. Primary outcome was patient-reported pain relief at last follow-up. Literature review was conducted by searching MEDLINE (1948-present) and through an unstructured review by the authors. RESULTS: Ten patients underwent trial of SQ PNS and six proceeded to permanent implantation. Fifty percent (3/6) of implanted patients preferred neurostimulation programming that included inter-lead stimulation ("cross-talk"). Average duration of postoperative follow-up was 4.5 months (range 2-9 months). Average patient-reported pain relief at last follow-up was 45% (range 20-80%). One patient required re-operation for migration. Patients not proceeding to implant had paresthesia coverage but no analgesia. CONCLUSION: SQ PNS is a promising therapy for axial neck and back pain based on a small cohort of patients. Ultrasound was useful to assist with electrode placement at the most appropriate depth beneath the skin. While inter-lead stimulation has been preferred by patients in published reports, we did not find it clearly influenced pain relief. Future investigations should include a randomized, controlled study design, as well as defined implantation technique and neurostimulator programming algorithms.
Assuntos
Dor Lombar/terapia , Cervicalgia/terapia , Nervos Periféricos/fisiologia , Estimulação Elétrica Nervosa Transcutânea/métodos , Adulto , Idoso , Eletrodos Implantados , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Dor Lombar/diagnóstico por imagem , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Cervicalgia/diagnóstico por imagem , Radiografia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The use of intrathecal (IT) infusion of analgesic medications to treat patients with chronic refractory pain has increased since its inception in the 1980s, and the need for clinical research in IT therapy is ongoing. The Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC) panel of experts convened in 2000, 2003, and 2007 to make recommendations on the rational use of IT analgesics based on preclinical and clinical literature and clinical experiences. METHODS: The PACC panel convened again in 2011 to update the standard of care for IT therapies to reflect current knowledge gleaned from literature and clinical experience. A thorough literature search was performed, and information from this search was provided to panel members. Analysis of published literature was coupled with the clinical experience of panel members to form recommendations regarding the use of IT analgesics to treat chronic pain. RESULTS: After a review of literature published from 2007 to 2011 and discussions of clinical experience, the panel created updated algorithms for the rational use of IT medications for the treatment of neuropathic pain and nociceptive pain. CONCLUSIONS: The advent of new algorithmic tracks for neuropathic and nociceptive pain is an important step in improving patient care. The panel encourages continued research and development, including the development of new drugs, devices, and safety recommendations to improve the care of patients with chronic pain.
Assuntos
Algoritmos , Analgésicos/administração & dosagem , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos/normas , Injeções Espinhais/normas , Dor/tratamento farmacológico , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos/métodos , Humanos , Injeções Espinhais/métodosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Continuous intrathecal infusion of drugs to treat chronic pain and spasticity has become a standard part of the algorithm of care. The use of opioids has been associated with noninfectious inflammatory masses at the tip of the intrathecal catheter, which can result in neurologic complications. METHODS: The Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference is a meeting of a group of well-published and experienced practitioners; the purpose of the meeting is to update the standard of care for intrathecal therapies to reflect current knowledge gleaned from literature and clinical experience. An exhaustive literature search was performed, and information from this search was provided to panel members. Analysis of the published literature was coupled with the clinical experience of panel participants to form recommendations regarding intrathecal inflammatory masses or granulomas. RESULTS: The panel has made recommendations for the prevention, diagnosis, and management of intrathecal granulomas. CONCLUSION: The use of chronic infusions of intrathecal opioids is associated with the formation of inflammatory masses at the intrathecal catheter tip in a small minority of treated patients. Nonetheless, the appearance of these space-occupying lesions can lead to devastating neurologic sequelae. The prevention, early detection, and successful treatment of intraspinal granulomas are important considerations when offering intrathecal drug therapy to patients with chronic intractable pain.
Assuntos
Catéteres/efeitos adversos , Granuloma/etiologia , Bombas de Infusão Implantáveis/efeitos adversos , Injeções Espinhais/efeitos adversos , Analgésicos Opioides/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Granuloma/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Inflamação/etiologia , Bombas de Infusão Implantáveis/normas , Injeções Espinhais/métodos , Injeções Espinhais/normasRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Trialing for intrathecal pump placement is an essential part of the decision-making process in placing a permanent device. In both the United States and the international community, the proper method for trialing is ill defined. METHODS: The Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC) is a group of well-published experienced practitioners who meet to update the state of care for intrathecal therapies on the basis of current knowledge in the literature and clinical experience. Anexhaustive search is performed to create a base of information that the panel considers when making recommendations for best clinical practices. This literature, coupled with clinical experience, is the basis for recommendations and for identification of gaps in the base of knowledge regarding trialing for intrathecal pump placement. RESULTS: The panel has made recommendations for the proper methods of trialing for long-term intrathecal drug delivery. CONCLUSION: The use of intrathecal drug delivery is an important part of the treatment algorithm for moderate to severe chronic pain. It has become common practice to perform a temporary neuroaxial infusion before permanent device implantation. On the basis of current knowledge, the PACC has developed recommendations to improve care. The need to update these recommendations will be very important as new literature is published.
Assuntos
Algoritmos , Analgésicos/administração & dosagem , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos/normas , Injeções Espinhais/normas , Dor/tratamento farmacológico , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos/métodos , Humanos , Injeções Espinhais/métodosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Targeted intrathecal drug infusion to treat moderate to severe chronic pain has become a standard part of treatment algorithms when more conservative options fail. This therapy is well established in the literature, has shown efficacy, and is an important tool for the treatment of both cancer and noncancer pain; however, it has become clear in recent years that intrathecal drug delivery is associated with risks for serious morbidity and mortality. METHODS: The Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference is a meeting of experienced implanting physicians who strive to improve care in those receiving implantable devices. Employing data generated through an extensive literature search combined with clinical experience, this work group formulated recommendations regarding awareness, education, and mitigation of the morbidity and mortality associated with intrathecal therapy to establish best practices for targeted intrathecal drug delivery systems. RESULTS: Best practices for improved patient care and outcomes with targeted intrathecal infusion are recommended to minimize the risk of morbidity and mortality. Areas of focus include respiratory depression, infection, granuloma, device-related complications, endocrinopathies, and human error. Specific guidance is given with each of these issues and the general use of the therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted intrathecal drug delivery systems are associated with risks for morbidity and mortality that can be devastating. The panel has given guidance to treating physicians and healthcare providers to reduce the incidence of these problems and to improve outcomes when problems occur.
Assuntos
Analgésicos/administração & dosagem , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos/normas , Bombas de Infusão Implantáveis/normas , Injeções Espinhais/normas , Dor Crônica/mortalidade , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos/métodos , Humanos , Injeções Espinhais/métodosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The role of preoperative gabapentin in postoperative pain management is not clear, particularly in patients receiving regional blockade. Patients undergoing thoracotomy benefit from epidural analgesia but still may experience significant postoperative pain. We examined the effect of preoperative gabapentin in thoracotomy patients. METHODS: Adults undergoing elective thoracotomy were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, and randomly assigned to receive 600 mg gabapentin or active placebo (12.5 mg diphenhydramine) orally within 2 hours preoperatively. Standardized management included thoracic epidural infusion, intravenous patient-controlled opioid analgesia, acetaminophen and ketorolac. Pain scores, opioid use and side effects were recorded for 48 hours. Pain was also assessed at 3 months. RESULTS: One hundred twenty patients (63 placebo and 57 gabapentin) were studied. Pain scores did not significantly differ at any time point (P = 0.53). Parenteral and oral opioid consumption was not significantly different between groups on postoperative day 1 or 2 (P > 0.05 in both cases). The frequency of side effects such as nausea and vomiting or respiratory depression was not significantly different between groups, but gabapentin was associated with decreased frequency of pruritus requiring nalbuphine (14% gabapentin vs. 43% control group, P < 0.001). The frequency of patients experiencing pain at 3 months post-thoracotomy was also comparable between groups (70% gabapentin vs. 66% placebo group, P = 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: A single preoperative oral dose of gabapentin (600 mg) did not reduce pain scores or opioid consumption following elective thoracotomy, and did not confer any analgesic benefit in the setting of effective multimodal analgesia that included thoracic epidural infusion.
Assuntos
Aminas/uso terapêutico , Analgésicos/uso terapêutico , Ácidos Cicloexanocarboxílicos/uso terapêutico , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Toracotomia , Ácido gama-Aminobutírico/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Aminas/efeitos adversos , Analgésicos/efeitos adversos , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Anestesia Epidural , Ácidos Cicloexanocarboxílicos/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Gabapentina , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Ácido gama-Aminobutírico/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Although total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an effective treatment for severe knee osteoarthritis (OA), a subset of patients experience significant postoperative pain and dissatisfaction. Several clinical trials support the analgesic benefits of genicular nerve radiofrequency ablation (GN-RFA) for non-operative knee OA, but only one prior trial has examined the effects of this intervention given preoperatively on postoperative outcomes following TKA, showing no analgesic benefit of cooled GN-RFA. The current study evaluated whether conventional thermal GN-RFA performed preoperatively resulted in significant improvements in pain and function following TKA. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, sham-controlled, double-blinded pilot trial in which patients received either conventional GN-RFA (n=30) or sham (n=30) between 2 and 4 weeks prior to their TKA. Baseline measures were obtained preprocedurally on the day of intervention, with follow-up outcomes obtained preoperatively on the day of surgery, and at 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively. RESULTS: Patients receiving GN-RFA showed no significant improvements relative to sham controls in the primary outcome, pain intensity at rest at 6-week follow-up. Secondary outcomes, including pain with ambulation and physical function, also showed no significant differences between groups at any follow-up assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional GN-RFA of the superior lateral, superior medial, and inferior medial genicular nerves when performed prior to TKA did not provide clinically significant pain relief or improvement in functional status at 2 or 6 weeks postoperatively. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02947321.
Assuntos
Artroplastia do Joelho , Osteoartrite do Joelho , Ablação por Radiofrequência , Artroplastia do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Osteoartrite do Joelho/diagnóstico por imagem , Osteoartrite do Joelho/cirurgia , Dor , Projetos Piloto , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is an effective tool for the treatment of chronic pain, although its efficacy and utilization have previously been significantly limited by technology. In recent years, purpose-built percutaneous PNS devices have been developed to overcome the limitations of conventional permanently implanted neurostimulation devices. Recent clinical evidence suggests clinically significant and sustained reductions in pain can persist well beyond the PNS treatment period, outcomes that have not previously been observed with conventional permanently implanted neurostimulation devices. This narrative review summarizes mechanistic processes that contribute to chronic pain, and the potential mechanisms by which selective large diameter afferent fiber activation may reverse these changes to induce a prolonged reduction in pain. The interplay of these mechanisms, supported by data in chronic pain states that have been effectively treated with percutaneous PNS, will also be discussed in support of a new theory of pain management in neuromodulation: Peripherally Induced Reconditioning of the Central Nervous System (CNS).
Assuntos
Dor nas Costas/tratamento farmacológico , Injeções Epidurais/métodos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Pregnadienos/administração & dosagem , Comitês Consultivos , Humanos , Injeções Epidurais/efeitos adversos , Injeções Epidurais/normas , Deslocamento do Disco Intervertebral/tratamento farmacológico , Cervicalgia/tratamento farmacológico , Segurança do Paciente , Pregnadienos/química , Estados Unidos , United States Food and Drug AdministrationRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Stellate ganglion block (SGB) is commonly performed for upper extremity complex regional pain syndrome and other conditions. Known complications of stellate block include Horner's syndrome, hoarseness, hematoma formation, airway compromise, immediate seizure (presumably from vertebral artery injection), and death. A previous arterial anatomy study demonstrated other vessels, eg, the ascending and deep cervical arteries, reinforcing the blood supply of the spinal cord and brain stem. The potential role of these vessels in the pathogenesis of seizures or hematoma during SGB has not been studied. METHODS: The anatomical recording log from 10 cadaver dissections and photographic records of same were reviewed to ascertain the presence of the ascending or deep cervical arteries, or other branches emanating from the thyrocervical or costocervical trunk and their relationship to the medial anterior surface of the C6 and C7 transverse processes. RESULTS: In 4 cases, as determined by the dissection log, and in 6 cases, determined by photographic images, the ascending cervical artery or a branch from the thyrocervical trunk passed over the anterior aspect of the transverse processes of C6 or C7. DISCUSSION: Arterial vessels other than the vertebral artery that also supply the anterior spinal cord and brain stem pass directly anterior to the transverse processes at the most common sites of the SGB. It is anatomically possible, therefore, that accidental injection or induced spasm of these vessels and not the vertebral arteries is responsible for some cases of seizure, hematoma, or other vascular complications during SGB.
Assuntos
Bloqueio Nervoso Autônomo/efeitos adversos , Complicações Intraoperatórias/etiologia , Hemorragia Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Gânglio Estrelado/irrigação sanguínea , Gânglio Estrelado/cirurgia , Artéria Vertebral/lesões , Bloqueio Nervoso Autônomo/instrumentação , Bloqueio Nervoso Autônomo/métodos , Cadáver , Dissecação/métodos , Humanos , Complicações Intraoperatórias/fisiopatologia , Hemorragia Pós-Operatória/fisiopatologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Gânglio Estrelado/anatomia & histologia , Artéria Subclávia/anatomia & histologia , Artéria Subclávia/lesões , Artéria Subclávia/cirurgia , Artéria Vertebral/anatomia & histologiaRESUMO
Cervical radicular pain is defined as pain perceived as arising in the arm caused by irritation of a cervical spinal nerve or its roots. Approximately 1 person in 1,000 suffers from cervical radicular pain. In the absence of a gold standard, the diagnosis is based on a combination of history, clinical examination, and (potentially) complementary examination. Medical imaging may show abnormalities, but those findings may not correlate with the patient's pain. Electrophysiologic testing may be requested when nerve damage is suspected but will not provide quantitative/qualitative information about the pain. The presumed causative level may be confirmed by means of selective diagnostic blocks. Conservative treatment typically consists of medication and physical therapy. There are no studies assessing the effectiveness of different types of medication specifically in patients suffering cervical radicular pain. Cochrane reviews did not find sufficient proof of efficacy for either education or cervical traction. When conservative treatment fails, interventional treatment may be considered. For subacute cervical radicular pain, the available evidence on efficacy and safety supports a recommendation (2B+) of interlaminar cervical epidural corticosteroid administration. A recent negative randomized controlled trial of transforaminal cervical epidural corticosteroid administration, coupled with an increasing number of reports of serious adverse events, warrants a negative recommendation (2B-). Pulsed radiofrequency treatment adjacent to the cervical dorsal root ganglion is a recommended treatment for chronic cervical radicular pain (1B+). When its effect is insufficient or of short duration, conventional radiofrequency treatment is recommended (2B+). In selected patients with cervical radicular pain, refractory to other treatment options, spinal cord stimulation may be considered. This treatment should be performed in specialized centers, preferentially study related.
Assuntos
Protocolos Clínicos/normas , Doença Iatrogênica/prevenção & controle , Exame Físico/métodos , Radiculopatia/fisiopatologia , Radiculopatia/terapia , Medicina Baseada em Evidências/métodos , Medicina Baseada em Evidências/normas , Humanos , Doença Iatrogênica/epidemiologia , Exame Físico/normas , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto/normas , Radiculopatia/diagnósticoRESUMO
The regional anesthesia community regularly uses social media for advocacy and education. Well-known leaders in the field are willing to share their opinions with colleagues in a public forum. Some visionaries predict that the influence of social media will soon transcend that of the traditional academic journal. While physicians support the use of social media, an trend may exist toward anecdotal information. Does a lack of online regulation along with a bias towards self-promotion cloud meaningful discussion? In order to avoid the pitfalls of social media, thoughtful communication will help regional anesthesiologists promote their subspecialty. Mindful dialog, promotion of academic journals, and professional etiquette will help maintain a collegial environment.
Assuntos
Anestesiologistas/tendências , Mídias Sociais/tendências , Humanos , Publicações Periódicas como AssuntoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to describe our experience applying a minimally invasive, ultrasound-assisted technique for peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) trial and permanent implantation in patients with neuropathic extremity pain. DESIGN: Retrospective case series and review of the literature. Setting. Tertiary referral center and academic medical center. PATIENTS: Patients with upper or lower extremity neuropathic pain resistant to other therapies who responded to an ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block at a proximal location. Interventions. Ultrasound-assisted through-the-needle placement of percutaneous neurostimulation electrodes on target major peripheral nerves for fully percutaneous trial, staged trial or permanent implantation of PNS system. A PNS trial period of 3-7 days was used. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain relief at last follow-up, complications, therapeutic limitations due to technique as applied. Results. Six of eight (75%) patients and 7/9 (78%) peripheral nerves had a successful trial and underwent permanent PNS system implantation using a minimally invasive, ultrasound-assisted technique from November 2007 to December 2008. All but one patient with an implanted PNS system had > or =50% pain relief at last follow-up and 3/7 (43%) permanent systems were associated with > or =80% relief. Loss of paresthesia required revision to dual-lead systems in upper extremity radial nerve PNS. Infection led to explant in one case. CONCLUSIONS: In a small series of patients, a minimally invasive, ultrasound-assisted technique for PNS trial, and permanent PNS implantation proved feasible. Patients without adequate analgesia during neurostimulation trial avoided surgical incision and those undergoing permanent implantation were not subjected to the potential morbidity associated with nerve dissection.