Preoperative multidisciplinary team decisions for high-risk patients scheduled for noncardiac surgery-a retrospective observational study.

PURPOSE: Preoperative multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are recommended for patients at high risk for perioperative complications and mortality, although the underlying evidence is scarce. We aimed to investigate the effect of MDT decisions on patient management and patient outcome. METHODS: We conducted a single-centre retrospective cohort study including all noncardiac surgical patients selected for discussion at preoperative MDT meetings from January 2017 to December 2019 (N = 120). We abstracted preoperative data, MDT decisions, and patient outcomes from the electronic health records for analysis. RESULTS: Of the 120 patients registered for an MDT meeting, 43% did not undergo their initially planned surgery. Only 27% of patients received perioperative management as planned before the MDT meeting. Most surgery cancellations were the MDT's decision (22%) or the patient's decision before or after the MDT discussion (10%). Postoperative complications occurred in 28% of operated patients, and postoperative mortality was 4% at 30 days and 10% at three months, most of which was attributable to postoperative complications. Non-operated patients had a 7% mortality rate at 30 days and 9% at three months. Alterations of perioperative management following MDT discussion were associated with fewer cases of extended length of hospital stay (> ten days). CONCLUSION: This study shows that preoperative MDT meetings for high-risk noncardiac surgical patients altered the management of most patients. Management alterations were associated with fewer hospital admissions of long duration. These results should be interpreted with appropriate caution given the methodological limitations inherent to this small study.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les réunions préopératoires d'une équipe multidisciplinaire (EMD) sont recommandées pour les patients présentant un risque élevé de complications périopératoires et mortalité, bien que les données probantes sous-jacentes soient rares. Notre objectif était d'étudier l'effet des décisions d'une EMD sur la prise en charge et les issues des patients. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude de cohorte rétrospective monocentrique incluant tous les patients chirurgicaux non cardiaques retenus pour discussion lors des réunions préopératoires de l'EMD de janvier 2017 à décembre 2019 (N = 120). Pour notre analyse, nous avons extrait les données préopératoires, les décisions de l'EMD et les issues des patients des dossiers de santé électroniques. RéSULTATS: Sur les 120 patients inscrits pour discussion dans une réunion de l'EMD, 43 % n'ont pas subi la chirurgie initialement prévue. Seulement 27 % des patients ont bénéficié de la prise en charge périopératoire prévue avant la réunion de l'EMD. La plupart des annulations de chirurgie étaient dues à la décision de l'EMD (22 %) ou à la décision du patient avant ou après la discussion de l'EMD (10 %). Des complications postopératoires sont survenues chez 28 % des patients opérés, et la mortalité postopératoire était de 4 % à 30 jours et de 10 % à trois mois, en majorité attribuable à des complications postopératoires. Les patients non opérés avaient un taux de mortalité de 7 % à 30 jours et de 9 % à trois mois. Les modifications de prise en charge périopératoire à la suite des discussions de l'EMD ont été associées à une réduction des cas de prolongation du séjour à l'hôpital (> dix jours). CONCLUSION: Cette étude montre que les réunions préopératoires de l'EMD pour les patients chirurgicaux non cardiaques à haut risque ont modifié la prise en charge de la plupart des patients. Les modifications apportées à la prise en charge ont été associées à une diminution du nombre d'admissions à l'hôpital pour une longue durée. Ces résultats doivent toutefois être interprétés avec prudence compte tenu des limites méthodologiques inhérentes à cette petite étude.

Percutaneous radiofrequency treatment of the gasserian ganglion for trigeminal neuralgia complicated by trochlear nerve palsy: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) has the highest incidence of disorders causing facial pain. TN is provoked by benign stimuli, like shaving, leading to severe, short-lasting pain. Patients are initially treated using antiepileptic drugs; however, multiple invasive options are available when conservative treatment proves insufficient. Percutaneous radiofrequency treatment of the trigeminal, or gasserian, ganglion (RF-G) is a procedure regularly used in refractory patients with comorbidities. RF-G involves complex needle maneuvering to perform selective radiofrequency heat treatment of the affected divisions. We present a unique case of cranial nerve 4 (CN4) paralysis after RF-G. CASE PRESENTATION: A male patient in his 60s presented with sharp left-sided facial pain and was diagnosed with TN, attributed to the maxillary and mandibular divisions. MRI showed a vascular loop of the anterior inferior cerebellar artery without interference of the trigeminal complex. The patient opted for RF-G after inadequate conservative therapy. The procedure was performed by an experienced pain physician and guided by live fluoroscopy. The patient was discharged without problems but examined the following day for double vision. Postprocedural MRI showed enhanced signaling between the trigeminal complex and the brainstem. Palsy of CN4 was identified by a neurologist, and spontaneous recovery followed 5 months after the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Mention of postprocedural diplopia in guidelines is brief, and the exact incidence remains unknown. Different mechanisms for cranial nerve (CN) palsy have been postulated: incorrect technique, anatomical variations, and secondary heat injury. We observed postprocedural hemorrhage and hypothesized that bleeding might be a contributing factor in injury of CNs after RF-G.

A Prospective Study of Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation for Non-Operated Discogenic Low Back Pain.

INTRODUCTION: Disruptions of lumbar intervertebral discs may lead to severe discogenic low back pain (LBP). Severe pain has a deleterious effect on physical function and quality of life. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a robust treatment for many neuropathic pain conditions. New innovations may be well-suited to treat neuropathic chronic LBP, including discogenic pain. The aim of this prospective study was to determine the effect of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation for a well-selected group of patients with discogenic LBP with no history of previous back surgeries. METHODS: Twenty subjects with confirmed discogenic LBP and no prior history of back surgery underwent trials of DRG stimulation and, if successful with at least 50% pain reduction, were permanently implanted. Subjects rated their pain, disability, quality of life, and mood at baseline, and 14 subjects were followed through 12 months of treatment. RESULTS: Treatment with DRG stimulation reduced LBP ratings (68.3% reduction), from mean 7.20 ± 1.3 at baseline to 2.29 ± 2.1 after 12 months (p = < 0.001). Oswestry ratings of disability significantly decreased (p = < 0.001) from 42.09 ± 12.9 at baseline to 21.54 ± 16.4 after six months of treatment and to 20.1 ± 16.6 after 12 months. The average quality of life EQ-5D index score at baseline was 0.61 ± 0.12 and 0.84 ± 0.13 after 12 months. DISCUSSION: DRG stimulation treatment for discogenic LBP improved the level of pain, function, and quality of life. Further research is necessary into efficacy of DRG stimulation in patients with chronic discogenic LBP and to determine the place of SCS in the treatment algorithm.

A multicenter randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of intradiscal methylene blue injection for chronic discogenic low back pain: the IMBI study.

A study published in PAIN in 2010 showed remarkable effects of intradiscal methylene blue (MB) injections compared with placebo on pain intensity in patients with chronic discogenic low back pain (CD-LBP). Both groups received lidocaine hydrochloride injections for pain associated with the procedure. We replicated the design of the previously published study and performed a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to assess whether the extraordinary effects of MB on pain intensity could be confirmed. The primary outcomes were treatment success defined as at least 30% reduction in pain intensity and the Patients' Global Impression of Change 6 months after the intervention. We included 84 patients with CD-LBP of which 14 (35%) in the MB plus lidocaine group showed treatment success compared with 11 (26.8%) in the control group who received placebo plus lidocaine (P = 0.426). Twenty-seven percent of all participants treated with MB stated that their overall health improved much or very much (Patients' Global Impression of Change), vs 25.6% in the placebo group (P = 0.958). We were unable to confirm that intradiscal MB injections are better capable of significantly reducing pain in patients with CD-LBP 6 months after treatment compared with placebo. We observed that over one-quarter of patients receiving only lidocaine injections reported treatment success, which is in contrast with the previously published study. Our results do not support the recommendation of using intradiscal MB injections for patients with CD-LBP.

The Impact of Chronic Discogenic Low Back Pain: Costs and Patients' Burden.

Introduction: Chronic discogenic low back pain (CDP) is frequently diagnosed in patients referred to specialized pain clinics for their back pain. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of CDP both on the individual patient and on society. Materials and Methods: Using the baseline records of 80 patients in a randomized trial assessing the effectiveness of a new intervention for CDP, healthcare and societal costs related to back pain are calculated. Furthermore, the impact of the condition on perceived pain, disability, health-related quality of life, Quality of life Adjusted Life Years (QALY), and QALY loss is assessed. Results: Using the friction costs approach, we found that the annual costs for society are €7,911.95 per CDP patient, 51% healthcare and 49% societal costs. When using the human capital approach, total costs were €18,940.58, 22% healthcare and 78% societal costs. Healthcare costs were mainly related to pain treatment. Mean pain severity was 6.5 (0-10), and 46% suffered from severe pain (≥7/10). Mean physical limitations rate was 43.7; 13.5% of the patients were very limited to disabled. QALY loss compared to a healthy population was 64%. Discussion: This study shows that in patients with CDP referred to a pain clinic, costs for society are high and the most used healthcare resources are pain therapies. Patients suffer severe pain, are physically limited, and experience a serious loss in quality of life.

Preperitoneal Bupivacaine Infiltration Reduces Postoperative Opioid Consumption, Acute Pain, and Chronic Postsurgical Pain After Bariatric Surgery: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: A multimodal pain treatment including local anesthetics is advised for perioperative analgesia in bariatric surgery. Due to obesity, bariatric surgery patients are at risk of respiratory complications. Opioid consumption is an important risk factor for hypoventilation. Furthermore, acute postoperative pain is an important risk factor for chronic postsurgical pain. In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether preperitoneal anesthesia with bupivacaine would reduce pain and opioid consumption after bariatric surgery. METHODS: One hundred adults undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery were randomized to receive either preperitoneal bupivacaine 0.5% or normal saline before incision. Postoperative opioid consumption, postoperative pain, and postoperative recovery parameters were assessed for the first 24 h after surgery. One year after surgery, chronic postsurgical pain and influence of pain on daily living were evaluated. RESULTS: Postoperative opioid consumption during the first hour after surgery was 2.8 ± 3.0 mg in the bupivacaine group, whereas in the control group, it was 4.4 ± 3.4 mg (p = 0.01). Pain scores were significantly reduced in this first hour at rest and at 6 h during mobilization on the ward. One year after surgery, the incidence of chronic postsurgical pain was 13% in the bupivacaine group versus 40% in the placebo group. CONCLUSION: This study shows that preperitoneal local anesthesia with bupivacaine results in a reduction in opioid consumption and postoperative pain and seems to lower the incidence rate of chronic postsurgical pain after laparoscopic bariatric surgery.

Severity of Neuropathy Is Associated With Long-term Spinal Cord Stimulation Outcome in Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: Five-Year Follow-up of a Prospective Two-Center Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence from prospective studies for long-term treatment efficacy of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) is not available. We report prospective data on the effect of SCS on pain ratings, treatment success and failure, and complications during a 5-year follow-up in patients with PDPN. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients with PDPN (n = 48) were included in this prospective multicenter study. The Michigan Diabetic Neuropathy Score (MDNS) was used to assess the severity of neuropathy. Numerical rating scale (NRS) score for pain, Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC), and treatment success (50% reduction of NRS score or significant PGIC) during 5 years of follow-up were evaluated. Complications of SCS were reported, and associations between baseline characteristics and SCS trial success or failure during a 5-year follow-up were investigated by using survival analyses. RESULTS: Treatment success was observed in 55% of patients after 5 years. Median duration of SCS treatment was 60 months (minimum 1 month, maximum 60 months), and 80% of patients with a permanent implant still used their SCS device after 5 years. Higher MDNS was associated with treatment failure during the 5-year follow-up (hazard ratio 3.9 [95% CI 1.3-11.6]; P = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: SCS is successful in reducing chronic pain symptoms in the lower extremities of patients with PDPN up to 5 years after initiation of treatment. Furthermore, 80% of patients with PDPN still use their SCS device after 5 years. Moreover, the severity of neuropathy is associated with a higher chance of long-term treatment failure during a 5-year follow-up.

Methadone versus Fentanyl in Patients with Radiation-Induced Nociceptive Pain with Head and Neck Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain is still a burden for many patients with cancer. A recent trial showed the superiority of methadone over fentanyl in neuropathic pain, and we expect that this finding could influence the number of patients treated with methadone. METHODS: We performed a randomized controlled noninferiority trial in patients with nociceptive pain. Eighty-two strong-opioid-naïve patients with head and neck cancer with substantial pain (pain numeric rating scale [NRS] score ≥ 4) due to radiation therapy were included. Forty-two patients were treated with methadone, and 40 with fentanyl. Patients were evaluated at 1, 3, and 5 weeks. The primary outcomes were reduction in average pain and clinical success (50% pain decrease). We set the predefined noninferiority margin at 1 on the NRS and 10% clinical success. Secondary outcomes were pain interference, global perceived effect (GPE), side effects, and opioid escalation index. RESULTS: Noninferiority was shown for decrease in NRS for maximum and mean pain scores at 1 and 3 weeks. Noninferiority was shown for clinical success at 1 week only. The opioid escalation index was lower in the methadone group at 3 and 5 weeks as compared to fentanyl (1.44 vs. 1.99, P = 0.004; and 1.50 vs. 2.32, P = 0.013). The pain interference in the methadone group was significantly decreased at 3 weeks only. GPE and side effects were not different. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to show noninferiority of methadone compared to fentanyl at 1 and 3 weeks in the treatment of radiation-induced nociceptive pain in patients with head and neck cancer.

No Transfer of Pressure to Adjacent Discs During Human Low-Pressure Controlled Discography: A Prospective Clinical Study.

Background: A substantial part of low back pain (LBP) originates from degeneration of the intervertebral disc. To confirm the diagnosis of discogenic pain, provocation discography seems the best available tool. However, provocation discography is also considered to be a controversial and subjective test because the patient's personal pain response is the most crucial for the result of the test. Recently, an in vivo porcine study and a study in nine human subjects showed passing of pressure to the adjacent discs during discography. This could mean that the concordant pain the patient describes originates from an adjacent disc. The object of this study is to assess if during human lumbar pressure-controlled provocation discography there is pressure transmission to adjacent discs. Methods: Consecutive patients between age 18 and 65 years with intractable low back pain and at least 50% preserved height of the suspected painful disc were included. Exclusion criteria were prior lumbar surgery of the suspected level, use of anticoagulants, pregnancy, local infection, and iodine allergy. An arterial blood pressure monitoring system simultaneously assessed the pressure in the adjacent discs while low-speed flow, pressure-controlled discography was performed. Results: In 50 patients with a positive discography, the average intradiscal peak pressure was 15.1 psi (SD = 11.1). In 48 procedures, no pressure rise in the adjacent discs was found. A small pressure rise (1.1 psi) in the adjacent disc during discography was recorded in two patients. Conclusions: Pressure rise in adjacent discs does not seem to occur during low-speed flow pressure-controlled lumbar provocation discography. False-positive pain reactions caused by potentially painful adjacent discs are therefore unlikely during pressure-controlled discography.

Patient expectations for management of chronic non-cancer pain: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a major economic and social health problem. Up to 79% of chronic pain patients are unsatisfied with their pain management. Meeting patients' expectations is likely to produce greater satisfaction with care. The challenge is to explore patients' genuine expectations and needs. However, the term expectation encompasses several concepts and may concern different aspects of health-care provision. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to systematically collect information on types and subject of patients' expectations for chronic pain management. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched for quantitative and qualitative studies. Because of the multidimensional character of the term "expectations," the search included subject headings and free text words related to the concept of expectations. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A framework for understanding patients' expectations was used to map types of expectations within structure, process or outcome of health care. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-three research papers met the inclusion criteria: 18 quantitative and five qualitative. This review found that assessment of patients' expectations for treatment is mostly limited to outcome expectations (all 18 quantitative papers and four qualitative papers). Patients generally have high expectations regarding pain reduction after treatment, but expectations were higher when expressed as an ideal expectation (81-93% relief) than as a predicted expectation (44-64%). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: For health-care providers, for pain management and for pain research purposes, the awareness that patients express different types of expectations is important. For shared decision making in clinical practice, it is important that predicted expectations of the patient are known to the treating physician and discussed. Structure and process expectations are under-represented in our findings. However, exploring and meeting patients' expectations regarding structure, process and outcome aspects of pain management may increase patient satisfaction.

Efficacy, Safety, and Predictors of Intradiscal Methylene Blue Injection for Discogenic Low Back Pain: Results of a Multicenter Prospective Clinical Series.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective clinical study of intradiscal methylene blue injection for the treatment of lumbar discogenic pain. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to collect information about efficacy, safety, and acceptability of the intervention, gain and burden of outcome measures, and sample size assumptions for a potential following randomized controlled trial (RCT). If the pilot study demonstrates that this treatment is potentially effective and safe, and the methods and procedures used in this study are feasible, a RCT follows. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Low back pain (LBP) is a highly common problem with a lifetime prevalence of more than 70%. A substantial part of chronic LBP is attributable to degenerative changes in the intervertebral disc. A recently published RCT assessing the treatment intradiscal injection of methylene blue for chronic discogenic LBP, showed exceptionally good results. METHODS: Patients were selected on clinical criteria, magnetic resonance imaging, and a positive provocative discogram. The primary outcome measure was mean pain reduction at 6 months. RESULTS: Fifteen consecutive patients with chronic lumbar discogenic pain enrolled in a multicenter prospective case series in two interventional pain treatment centers in the Netherlands. Six months after the intervention, 40% of the patients claimed at least 30% pain relief. In patients who responded, physical function improved and medication use diminished. We observed no procedural complications or adverse events. Predictors for success were Pfirrmann grading of 2 or less and higher quality of life mental component scores. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings of 40% positive respondents, and no complications, give reason to set up a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, trial.

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of intradiscal methylene blue injection for chronic discogenic low back pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a common health problem and a substantial part of LBP is presumed to be attributable to degeneration of the intervertebral disc. For patients suffering from intractable discogenic LBP, there are few evidence-based effective interventional treatment options available. In 2010, the results of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) were published concerning "intradiscal methylene blue injection" (IMBI), in which this intervention appeared to be very successful in relieving discogenic pain. Therefore, we decided to repeat this study to investigate whether we could replicate the published results. The results of our preliminary feasibility study gave reason to set up an RCT. The aim of this RCT is to evaluate if IMBI is a more effective treatment of discogenic low back pain as an intradiscal placebo intervention, and furthermore, to assess the cost-effectiveness of this intervention. METHODS/DESIGN: Consecutive discogenic low back pain patients referred to four specialized pain treatment facilities are being screened for eligibility. After a positive standardized provocation discography and informed consent, patients are randomized into two groups. The treatment group receives an intradiscal injection with methylene blue, lidocaine, and contrast, and the control group receives intradiscal isotonic saline with lidocaine and contrast. Main outcome measures are pain at the 6-month follow-up, patient's global impression of change, cost-effectiveness, quality of life, disability, and analgesic intake. DISCUSSION: The importance of this study is emphasized by the fact that for intractable discogenic low back pain patients, evidence-based effective pain treatments are rare. If this study establishes clinical success and cost-effectiveness, IMBI could become the "pain treatment of choice" for a selected group of patients with chronic discogenic low back pain for whom noninvasive treatment options have failed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Trial register NTR2547 Registered at 29 September 2010 and 31 March 2014.

Prolonged QT interval by methadone: relevance for daily practice? A prospective study in patients with cancer and noncancer pain.

INTRODUCTION: Increased methadone use in patients with pain has raised concerns that the effect of methadone on the QT interval duration and the potential risk of torsades de pointes (TdP) has been underestimated. Most studies on prolonged QT intervals by methadone are performed in maintenance patients; however, doses of methadone in pain treatment are much lower. Hardly any studies have prospectively addressed QT interval prolongation by methadone in patients with pain, and this study aims to address this literature gap. METHODS: In a period of 3 years, while 130 patients used methadone as pain treatment at a stable dose for at least 1 week, 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) were performed. Corrected QT times, demographic features, methadone dose, duration of therapy, and relevant comedication were documented. RESULTS: The findings included 50 percent of 130 patients, with a mean methadone dose of 18.2 mg/d, were potentially at risk for TdP. Beyond this, 5 percent were at definite risk for TdP. No correlations were found between QTc and gender, age, serum potassium or magnesium levels, methadone dose, underlying disease, or comedication. CONCLUSION: The study found that in our patients with pain, with relatively low doses of methadone, 5 percent had QTc times ≥500 ms and were thus at serious at risk for TdP. ECGs have to be made in all patients with methadone therapy 1 week after introducing methadone (or after dosage increases).

The role of pain coping and kinesiophobia in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1 of the legs.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate to what extent pain coping and kinesiophobia contribute to limitations in activity and participation in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPS-1) of the lower limbs. METHODS: A total of 238 patients with CRPS-1 of the legs from 4 pain clinics and 1 Department of Neurology of University Hospitals participated in this study. Pain and CRPS severity were assessed with the pain rating index of the McGill Pain Questionnaire and the CRPS Severity Score, respectively. Activity was measured with the Rising & Walking scale, and participation with the Social Functioning scale of the SF-36. In addition, the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia and Pain Coping Inventory were administered. Hierarchical linear regression was used to evaluate to what extent kinesiophobia and pain coping contributed to difficulties with Rising & Walking and Social Functioning. RESULTS: The analyses showed that the "resting" subscale of the Pain Coping Inventory-that is, 1 of the 3 scales evaluating passive pain coping strategies-contributed significantly to difficulties in rising and walking (explaining 12.5% of the variance) and to difficulties in social functioning (explaining 6.5%), whereas kinesiophobia was not associated with either of these measures. DISCUSSION: These findings indicate that making use of "resting" as a pain coping strategy contributes significantly to limitations in activity and participation in patients with CRPS-1 of the legs. Indications for a negative influence of kinesiophobia or a positive influence of an active pain coping style were not found.

Spinal cord stimulation for complex regional pain syndrome type I: a prospective cohort study with long-term follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment for intractable complex regional pain syndrome type I pain. Long-term data are scarce on effectiveness, degree of pain relief, predictors, and complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1997 to 2008, 84 consecutive patients who received an implanted SCS system after positive test stimulation were included in the prospective study. Treatment effectiveness was assessed annually as measured by mean visual analog scale pain scores and with the Patients Global Impression of Change scale. Treatment success was defined as at least 30% mean pain relief at end point and treatment failure as explantation of the system. A Cox regression determined if baseline factors were associated with both these outcomes. RESULTS: During 11 years, 41% (95% CI: 27-55) of the patients experience at least 30% pain relief at assessment end point. During 12 years of follow-up 63% (95%CI: 41-85) of the implanted patients still use their SCS device at measured end point. Pain relief of at least 50% one week following test stimulation is associated with a higher probability of long-term treatment success. In 51 patients, 122 reinterventions were performed over 12 years; 13 were due to complications, 44 to battery changes, and 65 reinterventions were equipment related. CONCLUSION: SCS provides an effective long-term pain treatment for 63% (95%CI: 41-85) of implanted patients. Forty-one percent (95%CI: 27-55) of SCS treated patients have at least 30% pain reduction at measurement end point. The number of reinterventions after implantation due to equipment-related problems, battery changes, and complications is 122 over 12 years of follow-up. Sixty-one percent (N = 51) of the patients had at least one reintervention. Mean pain relief of at least 50% (visual analog scale) one week after the test stimulation is associated with long-term treatment success.

Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of the splanchnic nerves in patients with chronic pancreatitis: results of single and repeated procedures in 11 patients.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a major problem for chronic pancreatitis (CP) patients. Unfortunately, medical therapy often fails. Endoscopic and surgical treatments are invasive, and results vary. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of the splanchnic nerves (RFSN) is a relatively new and minimally invasive procedure for treatment of intractable pain in CP patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 18 RFSN procedures in 11 CP patients, all refractory to analgesics. Five patients underwent a second procedure; two patients underwent a third procedure. NRS pain scores were assessed. Complications, analgesics usage, and length of the pain-free period were recorded. RESULTS: Radiofrequency ablation of the splanchnic nerves was effective in 15/18 interventions. The mean NRS pain score decreased from 7.7 ± 1.0 to 2.8 ± 2.7 (P ≤ 0.001). The pain-free period lasted for a median period of 45 weeks. The effect of repeated interventions was comparable to the initial procedure. One transient side effect was reported. Four patients reported significantly reduced analgesic usage; 4 patients completely stopped their pain medication. CONCLUSION: Radiofrequency ablation of the splanchnic nerves is a minimally invasive, effective procedure for pain relief. After the effect has subsided, RFSN can be successfully repeated. RFSN might become an alternative treatment in a selected group of CP patients. A larger, randomized trial is justified to substantiate these findings.

[Useful guideline for treatment of pain in vulnerable elderly people]. / Richtlijn pijn bij kwetsbare ouderen goed bruikbaar.

Forty to fifty percent of elderly people (> 70 years of age) appear to have pain that interferes with daily life. The frail elderly, described as elderly people who are vulnerable, mostly chronically ill, with physical, and psychological, as well as social, and communicative disabilities, are often inadequately treated for pain. This interdisciplinary guideline aims to improve recognition and treatment of chronic pain in frail elderly patients and is therefore very useful in clinical practice. Interventional, minimally invasive pain treatment is not described in this guideline, although for a number of pain syndromes this could be an evidence-based potential treatment.