Persistent chest pain following COVID-19 infection - A scoping review.

Persistent chest pain (PCP) following acute COVID-19 infection is a commonly reported symptom with an unclear etiology, making its management challenging. This scoping review aims to address the knowledge gap surrounding the characteristics of PCP following COVID-19, its causes, and potential treatments. This is a scoping review of 64 studies, including observational (prospective, retrospective, cross-sectional, case series, and case-control) and one quasi-experimental study, from databases including Embase, PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Google Scholar, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. Studies on patients with PCP following mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19 infection were included. Studies with patients of any age, with chest pain that persisted following acute COVID-19 disease, irrespective of etiology or duration were included. A total of 35 studies reported PCP symptoms following COVID-19 (0.24%-76.6%) at an average follow-up of 3 months or longer, 12 studies at 1-3 months and 17 studies at less than 1-month follow-up or not specified. PCP was common following mild-severe COVID-19 infection, and etiology was mostly not reported. Fourteen studies proposed potential etiologies including endothelial dysfunction, cardiac ischemia, vasospasm, myocarditis, cardiac arrhythmia, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, postural tachycardia syndrome, or noted cardiac MRI (cMRI) changes. Evaluation methods included common cardiopulmonary tests, as well as less common tests such as flow-mediated dilatation, cMRI, single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Only one study reported a specific treatment (sulodexide). PCP is a prevalent symptom following COVID-19 infection, with various proposed etiologies. Further research is needed to establish a better understanding of the causes and to develop targeted treatments for PCP following COVID-19.

Incidence of Lead Migration With Loss of Efficacy or Paresthesia Coverage After Spinal Cord Stimulator Implantation: Systematic Review and Proportional Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies and Randomized Clinical Trials.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this meta-analysis was to approximate the incidence of overall lead migration, clinically significant lead migration, and asymptomatic lead migration in patients who have undergone spinal cord stimulator implantation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed for studies published before May 31, 2022. Only randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies with more than ten patients were included. Two reviewers analyzed the articles from the literature search for final inclusion, after which, study characteristics and outcome data were extracted. The primary dichotomous categorical outcome variables were the incidence of overall lead migration, clinically significant lead migration (defined as lead migration resulting in loss of efficacy), and asymptomatic lead migration (defined as lead migration discovered incidentally on follow-up imaging) in patients with spinal cord stimulator implant. Freeman-Tukey arcsine square root transformation for meta-analysis of proportions using random effects (DerSimonian and Laird method) was used to calculate incidence rates for the outcome variables. Pooled incidence rates and 95% CIs were calculated for the outcome variables. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 2932 patients having received spinal cord stimulator implants. The pooled incidence of overall lead migration was 9.97% (95% CI of 7.62%-12.59%). Only 24 of the included studies commented on the clinical significance of reported lead migrations, of which every lead migration was clinically significant. In these 24 studies, 96% of the reported lead migrations required a revision procedure or explant. Unfortunately, no studies that reported lead migration commented on asymptomatic lead migrations; therefore, the incidence of asymptomatic lead migrations could not be defined. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis found that the rate of lead migration in patients who have received spinal cord stimulator implants is approximately one in ten patients. This likely closely approximates the incidence of clinically significant lead migration owing to the included studies not routinely performing follow-up imaging. Therefore, lead migrations were primarily discovered owing to loss of efficacy, and no included studies clearly reported asymptomatic lead migration. The results of this meta-analysis can be used to inform patients more accurately on the risks and benefits of spinal cord stimulator implantation.

Trends in gender, race, and ethnic diversity among prospective physical medicine and rehabilitation physicians.

BACKGROUND: As the proportion of women and individuals who are underrepresented in medicine slowly rises, disparities persist in numerous arenas and specialties. In physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R), there is a continued need to focus on diversity among trainees. This study aims to evaluate diversity among PM&R applicants and residents over the past 6 years. OBJECTIVE: To describe the demographic trends in PM&R over the last 6 years and compare those findings with trends in other specialties. DESIGN: Surveillance. SETTING: Analyses of national databases from self-reported questionnaires. PARTICIPANTS: The study consists of 126,833 medical school matriculants, 374,185 resident applicants, and 326,134 resident trainees over the last 6 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported demographic data from the Association of American Medical Colleges and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education were analyzed for medical school matriculants, PM&R applicants, and current residents for the cycles of 2014-2015 to 2019-2020. The data were then comparatively reviewed between PM&R and other medical specialties. RESULTS: In the 6 cycles evaluated, women accounted for 36%-39% of PM&R residents, but 47%-48% in non-PM&R specialties. Women applicants to the PM&R specialty averaged 34.4% over the 6 years analyzed, which was the fourth lowest of the 11 specialties examined. Black or African American and Hispanic, Latino, or of Spanish Origin populations each accounted for only 6% of PM&R residents. PM&R demonstrated a noticeably higher proportion of White (62.1% vs. 60.3%) and an observably lower proportion of Black or African American (6.0% vs. 7.1%) and Hispanic, Latino, or of Spanish Origin (6.3% vs. 7.9%) residents compared with non-PM&R specialties. CONCLUSION: There is underrepresentation of women and multiple racial and ethnic minority groups in the field of PM&R from applicants to trainees demonstrating a need to improve recruitment efforts.

Preoperative electrodiagnostic studies and postoperative outcomes for ulnar mononeuropathy at the elbow: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the association between preoperative electrodiagnostic (EDX) studies and postoperative pain and functional outcomes following ulnar nerve decompression and/or transposition for ulnar neuropathy at the elbow (UNE). LITERATURE SURVEY: Protocol was submitted and database search was conducted by an experienced librarian of all available studies in the English language from 1990 to June 8, 2022. Databases included Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus. METHODOLOGY: Inclusion criteria consisted of randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective longitudinal studies, and studies involving adults ≥18 years of age who underwent ulnar nerve decompression and/or transposition for UNE. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Study Quality of Assessment Tool. Certainty in evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. A meta-analysis was not performed. SYNTHESIS: A total of 289 studies were screened, and 8 retrospective cohort studies met inclusion criteria comprising 762 patients. A decreased or absent preoperative sensory nerve action potential amplitude (SNAP) showed significance with worse postoperative outcomes. The presence of preoperative conduction block showed significance in higher quality studies. There was limited evidence for slow preoperative motor conduction velocities or preoperative electromyography (EMG) abnormalities and postoperative outcomes. Overall quality assessment demonstrated that two studies had "good," four "fair," and two "poor" quality of evidence. Certainty in evidence was "low" due to risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: A decreased or absent preoperative ulnar SNAP may predict worse postoperative outcomes. Per higher quality studies, preoperative conduction block at the elbow may also predict worse postoperative outcomes. Careful interpretation is required with a full understanding of the limited evidence, risk of bias, and low certainty in evidence to support the use of preoperative EDX to predict postoperative outcomes in UNE.

Does Fibromyalgia Affect the Outcomes of Spinal Cord Stimulation: An 11-Year, Multicenter, Retrospective Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is a prevalent disorder manifesting with widespread musculoskeletal pain and central sensitization, as well as fatigue, sleep issues, psychologic distress, and poor quality of life. Patients with fibromyalgia also may be diagnosed with other painful conditions amenable to treatment with spinal cord stimulation (SCS), although it is unclear how these patients respond to SCS compared with patients without fibromyalgia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed an 11-year, multicenter, retrospective matched cohort study comparing SCS-treated patients with fibromyalgia and those without fibromyalgia. The primary outcome was comparison in mean calculated percentage pain relief between cohorts at six months after SCS implantation. Secondary outcomes included comparison of patient satisfaction between six and 12 months after SCS implantation, and percentage of patients reporting opioid intake and neuropathic medication intake at six months and 12 months after SCS implantation. Adjusted regression analysis was performed to make comparisons while adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, preoperative opioid intake, and preoperative neuropathic medication intake. RESULTS: Of 90 patients with fibromyalgia who underwent SCS trial, 18 patients (20%) failed their SCS trial and did not proceed toward implantation. Sixty-eight patients with fibromyalgia were matched to 141 patients in the control cohort based on age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score. At six months after SCS implantation, there was no statistical difference in calculated percentage change in pain intensity between the fibromyalgia cohort (46.6 ± 29.0) and the control cohort (50.9 ± 32.8; ß, -18.4; 95% CI, -44.3 to 7.6; p = 0.157). At baseline, a greater percentage of patients in the fibromyalgia cohort reported preoperative opioid intake (51.5% vs 22.7%, p < 0.001) and preoperative neuropathic medication intake (67.6% vs 15.6%, p < 0.001). However, there was no difference between cohorts in the percentage of patients taking opioid or neuropathic medications at six months and 12 months after SCS implantation. Similarly, there was no difference between cohorts in the percentage of patients reporting satisfaction between six and 12 months. CONCLUSION: Patients with fibromyalgia who received a diagnosis approved for treatment with SCS may expect similar post-SCS-implantation pain relief, overall satisfaction, and analgesic use rate to those of patients without fibromyalgia.

The state-of-the-art pharmacotherapeutic options for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain.

INTRODUCTION: Pharmacotherapeutic options continue to expand for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain. There has been an increasing emphasis on multimodal analgesia. This strategy employs use of multiple analgesic medications each with a distinct mechanism of action, which when administered concomitantly may provide profound analgesia. AREAS COVERED: The authors describe evidence from randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews on a variety of established medications including anti-inflammatory agents, opioids, anti-convulsants, anti-depressants, N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists, sodium channel blockers, cannabinoids, and alpha-2-receptor blockers. Furthermore, they provide developing evidence on more novel pharmacotherapeutics including alpha lipoic acid, acetyl-L-carnitine, low-dose naltrexone, calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists, targeted toxin therapy, Nav1.7 inhibitors, neurotensin agonists, purinoceptor antagonists, and sigma-1 receptor antagonists. Furthermore, the authors review the safety and adverse effect profile for these agents. EXPERT OPINION: In this era of the opioid epidemic, clinicians should first offer non-opioid analgesics and employ a multimodal analgesic strategy. Current guidelines recommend a personalized approach to the chronic pain treatment, in each case accounting for type, location, severity, and chronicity of pain. Clinicians should also carefully consider the risk-to-benefit ratio to the patient based on the drug side effect profile, patient age, and comorbidities.

Rare extraspinal cause of acute lumbar radiculopathy.

A 60-year-old man presented to an outpatient pain management clinic with antalgic gait and left lower extremity (LLE) radiculopathy from an unknown aetiology. A lumbar MRI revealed minimal disc protrusion at L3 and a partially visualised left-sided kidney abnormality. Abdominal and pelvic CT demonstrated severe hydronephrosis of the left kidney compressing the left psoas major. The patient was immediately referred to an outside hospital for nephrology workup, and following nephrostomy tube, his radicular pain resolved. He remained asymptomatic at 4 weeks follow-up. We found two cases of postsurgical, retroperitoneal fluid collection that caused lumbar radiculopathy, but none associated with hydronephrosis. To our knowledge, this is the first case in the literature to report hydronephrosis as the potential aetiology of lumbar radiculopathy, which highlights an important clinical reminder: to consider extraspinal aetiologies in all patients who present with lumbar radiculopathy, when clinical symptoms, examination findings and diagnostic studies present with unusual characteristics.