Cryoneurolysis of the saphenous nerve in the pig: A proof-of-principle investigation.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if in vivo cryoneurolysis inhibits ex vivo compound action potential (CAP) conduction in the porcine saphenous nerve and if this occurs rapidly enough to justify performing the technique before stifle surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Blinded, controlled, randomized, preclinical study. ANIMALS: A group of eight healthy, 8 weeks old, intact, female pigs anesthetized for an unrelated terminal study. METHODS: Both saphenous nerves of each pig were exposed surgically, and 15 mm of a 20 gauge, closed-tip, commercial cryoneurolysis cannula were inserted cranial to each nerve within the neurovascular fascial sheath along its long axis. The cannula was only actuated on one limb, according to random allocation. Nerves were excised within 15 minutes of actuation and underwent testing in a nerve conduction chamber, where stimulus voltage was increased sequentially (from 0.1 to ≤ 1.9 V). An anesthesiologist blinded to treatment viewed recordings of time versus voltage for each nerve and answered 'yes' or 'no' when asked if an evoked CAP was observed. Fisher's exact test evaluated the incidence of CAP conduction between groups (p < 0.05 considered significant). Nerves were submitted for hematoxylin and eosin staining for blinded histopathological examination. RESULTS: A CAP was conducted in 8/8 and 1/8 of the control and treated nerves, respectively (p = 0.001). Maximal responses in control nerves were 1.92 ± 0.19 mV (mean ± standard error). In the single treated nerve that conducted a CAP, the maximal CAP amplitude was 0.4 mV, lower than the lowest maximal CAP (1.19 mV) in the control nerves. All control nerves were histologically normal, and all treated nerves displayed mild perivascular and perineural inflammation (cuffs of lymphocytes, plasma cells and eosinophils, and edema). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The rapid inhibition of CAP conduction warrants clinical investigation of saphenous cryoneurolysis for both intraoperative antinociception and postoperative analgesia in pigs undergoing experimental stifle surgery.

Dorsal root ganglion stimulation for the treatment of chronic pelvic pain: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) is a difficult condition to treat. Due to complex pelvic innervation, dorsal column spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has not been shown to produce the same effect as dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGS) given emerging evidence suggesting that applying DRGS may result in favorable outcomes for individuals with CPP. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the clinical use and effectiveness of DRGS for patients with CPP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of clinical studies demonstrating the use of DRGS for CPP. Searches were conducted using four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science) across August and September 2022. RESULTS: A total of nine studies comprising 65 total patients with variable pelvic pain etiologies met the inclusion criteria. The majority of subjects implanted with DRGS reported >50% mean pain reduction at variable times of follow-up. Secondary outcomes reported throughout studies including quality of life (QOL) and pain medication consumption were reported to be significantly improved. CONCLUSIONS: Dorsal root ganglion stimulation for CPP continues to lack supportive evidence from well-designed, high-quality studies and recommendations from consensus committee experts. However, we present consistent evidence from level IV studies showing success with the use of DRGS for CPP in reducing pain symptoms along with reports of improved QOL through periods as short as 2 months to as long as 3 years. Because the available studies at this time are of low quality with a high risk of bias, we strongly recommend the facilitation of high-quality studies with larger sample sizes in order to better ascertain the utility of DRGS for this specific patient population. At the same time, from a clinical perspective, it may be reasonable and appropriate to evaluate patients for DRGS candidacy on a case-by-case basis, especially those patients who report CPP symptoms that are refractory to noninterventional measures and who may not be ideal candidates for other forms of neuromodulation.

Cervical Spinal Cord Stimulation for Trigeminal Neuralgia: a Narrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a chronic neuropathic pain condition affecting one or more divisions of the fifth cranial (trigeminal) nerve. TN is defined by recurrent unilateral electric shock-like pain that is abrupt in both onset and termination. The pain is triggered by innocuous sensory stimuli and is classified as either classic TN, related to vascular compression; secondary TN, due to a tumor along the trigeminal nerve or an underlying disease like multiple sclerosis; or idiopathic TN. Among the various therapies available for TN, carbamazepine remains the first-line treatment. Newer medications have demonstrated efficacy in patients who do not respond to or cannot tolerate carbamazepine. When medical management and neuroablative procedures fail, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) serves as a promising and popular option, with an estimated 34,000 SCS procedures performed annually worldwide. SCS employs the implantation of electrical leads in the epidural space to manage pain. PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A review of literature was conducted to explore the use of cervical spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia. METHODS: A MEDLINE/PubMed search using the search terms "spinal cord stimulation" and "trigeminal neuralgia" was employed to find any case reports and research studies (retrospective studies, double-blinded studies, observational studies) on the topic. No date limiters were used for the search. The initial search resulted in 76 non-duplicate entries from the database. After application of the search criteria, 58 studies were excluded because they were not relevant to the study. A further detailed review of the included articles was conducted by all the reviewers. During this phase of the review, additional 6 studies were excluded. A total of 11 studies were included: 7 case reports and 4 retrospective review studies. RECENT FINDINGS: In the review, we discuss 7 different case reports on the use of cervical SCS for trigeminal neuralgia and an additional 4 retrospective studies reviewing outcomes and pain relief in patients who underwent treatment. The case reports and retrospective studies reviewed demonstrated that TN patients realized > 50% pain relief following permanent electrode implantation. In all the cases discussed, complications from SCS were rare and/or not reported. Additionally, most of the cases report that patients who had adequate pain relief from SCS were able to wean off, or significantly reduce, oral medications given the vast improvement in pain reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a safe and effective procedure for patients with trigeminal neuralgia (TN) who have refractory pain despite the use of medications. In many cases, the procedure provides an adequate level of pain relief with very few complications or side effects. The vast majority of current research on the use of cervical SCS for TN currently consists of case reports and retrospective analysis. In order to further evaluate the efficacy of SCS for treatment, large-scale randomized controlled studies or observational studies need to be conducted to properly evaluate SCS as a treatment modality for trigeminal neuralgia.

A Review of Sublingual Sufentanil Tablet (SST) and its Utility as an Analgesic Agent for Pain Procedures.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Sedation for pain medicine procedures provides a unique challenge for proceduralists. Many patients dealing with pain are on chronic opioids and require higher doses of sedation for adequate procedural comfort. Chronic pain patients have various comorbidities including depression, neuropsychiatric disorders, peripheral vascular disease, and renal impairment, among others [1]. These confounding variables make the overall treatment of their pain condition much more challenging. RECENT FINDINGS: For patients requiring intravenous (IV) sedation for their pain procedures, the constant need for access may render them a "difficult stick" over time. Another factor to consider is the increasing requirements by the hospital system needing IV sedatives and analgesics in the intensive care unit and operating rooms during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Sublingual sufentanil (SST) provides an excellent analgesic option for patients undergoing interventional pain procedures. The use of SST allows hospitals to preserve IV agents for more critical areas and mitigates the difficulty of obtaining IV access in patients.

Update on Interventional Management of Neuropathic Pain: A Delphi Consensus of the Spanish Pain Society Neuropathic Pain Task Force.

Background and Objectives: Interventional management of neuropathic pain (NP) is available to the patients who do not obtain satisfactory pain relief with pharmacotherapy. Evidence supporting this is sparse and fragmented. We attempted to summarize and critically appraise the existing data to identify strategies that yield the greatest benefit, guide clinicians, and identify areas that merit further investigation. Material and Methods: A two-round Delphi survey that involved pain clinic specialists with experience in the research and management of NP was done over an ad hoc 26-item questionnaire made by the authors. Consensus on each statement was defined as either at least 80% endorsement or rejection after the 2nd round. Results: Thirty-five and 29 panelists participated in the 1st and 2nd round, respectively. Consensus was reached in 20 out of 26 statements. There is sufficient basis to treat postherpetic neuralgias and complex regional pain syndromes with progressive levels of invasiveness and failed back surgery syndrome with neuromodulation. Radiculopathies and localized NP can be treated with peripheral blocks, neuromodulation, or pulsed radiofrequency. Non-ablative radiofrequency and non-paresthetic neuromodulation are efficacious and better tolerated than ablative and suprathreshold procedures. Conclusions: A graded approach, from least to most invasive interventions has the potential to improve outcomes in many patients with common refractory NP conditions. Preliminary promising data warrant further research on new indications, and technical advances might enhance the safety and efficacy of current and future therapies.

Interventional Therapies for Pain in Cancer Patients: a Narrative Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pain is a prevalent symptom in the lives of patients with cancer. In light of the ongoing opioid epidemic and increasing awareness of the potential for opioid abuse and addiction, clinicians are progressively turning to interventional therapies. This article reviews the interventional techniques available to mitigate the debilitating effects that untreated or poorly treated pain have in this population. RECENT FINDINGS: A range of interventional therapies and technical approaches are available for the treatment of cancer-related pain. Many of the techniques described may offer effective analgesia with less systemic toxicity and dependency than first- and second-line oral and parenteral agents. Neuromodulatory techniques including dorsal root ganglion stimulation and peripheral nerve stimulation are increasingly finding roles in the management of oncologic pain. The goal of this pragmatic narrative review is to discuss interventional approaches to cancer-related pain and the potential of such therapies to improve the quality of life of cancer patients.

Patient perspectives on interventional pain management: thematic analysis of a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a widespread problem that is usually approached by focusing on its psychological aspects or on trying to reduce the pain from the pain generator. Patients report that they feel responsible for their pain and that they are disempowered and stigmatized because of it. Here, we explored interventional pain management from the patient's perspective to understand the process better. METHODS: A purposive sample of 19 subjects was interviewed by an independent interviewer. The interviews were transcribed into text and thematic analysis was performed. RESULTS: The subjects' perceptions covered three key themes: themselves as objects; the caregivers, including the process of tests and retests, the encounters and interactions with professionals, and the availability of the caregivers; and finally the outcomes, including the results of the tests and treatments and how these inspired them to think of other people with pain. Linking these themes, the subjects reported something best described as "gained empowerment" during interventional pain management; they were feeling heard and seen, they gained knowledge that helped them understand their problem better, they could ask questions and receive answers, and they felt safe and listened to. CONCLUSIONS: Many of the themes evolved in relation to the subjects' contact with the healthcare services they received, but when the themes were merged and structured into the model, a cohesive pattern of empowerment appeared. If empowerment is a major factor in the positive effects of interventional pain management, it is important to facilitate and not hinder empowerment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov 2013-04-24 (Protocol ID SE-Dnr-2012-446-31 M-3, ClinicalTrials ID NCT01838603 ).

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Neuropathic Pain Treatment in Brachial Plexus Avulsions: A Literature Review and Report of Two Cases.

BACKGROUND: At least 50% of individuals who suffer a brachial plexus avulsion (BPA) will develop chronic pain, frequently more debilitating than their functional limitations. Similar to other neuropathic pain states, BPA pain is often refractory to pharmacological agents. Despite spinal cord stimulation (SCS) first being used for BPA in 1974, there have been no published literature reviews examining the current evidence of SCS for the treatment of neuropathic pain following BPA. In addition to a clinical review of the literature for this indication, we also share our experience with high-frequency SCS (HF-SCS) for BPA-related pain. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched. All published articles including at least one BPA individual treated with SCS for pain treatment were included. RESULTS: The initial search identified 288 articles, of which 13 met inclusion criteria for a total of 41 patients. These patients were primarily male and underwent SCS with reported improved pain scores. CASE REPORTS: HF-SCS leads were percutaneously placed in two male patients who suffered BPA from traumatic injuries. At follow-ups of 13 and eight months, respectively, both patients continued to report an improvement in their pain. CONCLUSIONS: Despite published reports showing benefit for pain control in patients with BPA, the overall low quality, retrospective evidence included in this review highlights the need for a rigorous prospective study to further address this indication.

How to Restart the Interventional Activity in the COVID-19 Era: The Experience of a Private Pain Unit in Spain.

INTRODUCTION: The situation generated in the health system by the COVID-19 pandemic has provoked a crisis involving the necessity to cancel non-urgent and oncologic activity in the operating room and in day-to-day practice. As the situation continues, the need to reinstate attention for patients with chronic pain grows. The restoration of this activity has to begin with on-site appointments and possible surgical procedures. On-site clinical activity has to guarantee the safety of patients and health workers. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to evaluate how to manage activity in pain units, considering the scenario generated by the pandemic and the implications of chronic pain on the immune system and proposed pharmacological and interventional therapies. METHODS: Besides the established general recommendations (physical distance, surgical masks, gloves, etc.), we established specific recommendations that will allow patient treatment and relieve the disruption of the immune response. It is important to highlight the use of opioids with the least influence in the immune system. Further, individualized corticoid use, risk assessment, reduced immune suppression, and dose adjustment should take patient needs into account. In this scenario, we highlight the use of radiofrequency and neuromodulation therapies, techniques that do not interfere with the immune response. CONCLUSIONS: We describe procedures to implement these recommendations for individual clinical situations, the therapeutic possibilities and safety guidelines for each center, and government recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

"Evidence-Based Interventional Pain Medicine According to Clinical Diagnoses": Update 2018.

INTRODUCTION: Between 2009 and 2011 a series of 26 articles on evidence-based medicine for interventional pain medicine according to clinical diagnoses were published. The high number of publications since the last literature search justified an update. METHODS: For the update an independent 3rd party, specialized in systematic reviews was asked in 2015 to perform the literature search and summarize relevant evidence using Cochrane and GRADE methodology to compile guidelines on interventional pain management. The guideline committee reviewed the information and made a last update on March 1st 2018. The information from new studies published after the research performed by the 3th party and additional observational studies was used to incorporate other factors such as side effects and complications, invasiveness, costs and ethical factors, which influence the ultimate recommendations. RESULTS: For the different indications a total of 113 interventions were evaluated. Twenty-seven (24%) interventions were new compared to the previous guidelines and the recommendation changed for only 3 (2.6%) of the interventions. DISCUSSION: This article summarizes the evolution of the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations for the interventional pain treatment options for 28 clinical pain diagnoses.

Percutaneous Image-Guided Cryoneurolysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article is to review the available evidence regarding image-guided percutaneous cryoneurolysis, with a focus on indications, technique, efficacy, and potential complications. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous image-guided cryoneurolysis is safe and effective for the management of several well-described syndromes involving neuropathic pain. Additional rigorous prospective study is warranted to further define the efficacy and specific role of these interventions.

New frontier: cancer pain management clinical fellowship.

Cancer pain is a multi-dimensional experience, varies from person to person both physically and psycho-socially, and impacts all aspects of the patients' quality of life. Majority of patients with an advanced or metastatic cancer will experience pain. It is estimated that as many as half of cancer patients are under-treated and as many as 20% experience pain refractory to the conventional WHO ladder of pain management. The McGill University Health Centre (MUHC) Cancer Pain Clinic (CPC) was created to meet the needs of those patients with a diagnosis of cancer whose pain had become a main symptom and those who failed to respond to conventional treatment. The clinic offers a unique interdisciplinary approach with a core team that includes an anesthesiologist, a palliative care physician, a radiation oncologist, a nurse clinician specialist in oncology and palliative care, and, recently, also an interventional radiologist. A cancer pain clinical fellowship was offered for the first time in July 2016. It provides intense training in the classification, epidemiology, pathophysiology, and treatment of cancer pain. Through our education program, the fellow learns to appreciate, weigh, and respond to the full spectrum of factors influencing a specific patient's condition and to develop a tailor-made care plan. To our knowledge, it is the only fellowship program in existence that focuses exclusively on cancer pain. We see it as a beacon and hope that our graduate fellows become professional leaders with a quest not only to provide the best possible care but also to raise awareness of the humanitarian need to control cancer pain.

Prospective Assessment of Pain and Comfort in Chronic Pain Patients Undergoing Interventional Pain Management Procedures.

Objective: Interventional pain management procedures have an important role in the management of chronic pain. The present study seeks to identify the proportion of patients who experience severe pain during pain procedures either with or without sedation. There is then an attempt to identify any association of high pain levels with factors such as age, gender, ethnicity, preprocedure pain level, procedure type, tobacco use, and baseline pharmaceuticals taken for both pain and/or mood disorder management. Methods: This is a prospective survey study evaluating patients' discomfort during interventional pain procedures in an outpatient academic facility. Patient discomfort was assessed by the PROcedural Sedation Assessment Survey (PROSAS) and modified for nonsedation cases. Results: There were 155 patients in the survey, with 20 of these receiving nonspinal injections. Of the remaining 135 patients who underwent spinal injections, only 10 received conscious sedation. On average, 14.2% experienced severe pain during spinal injections, whereas 20% experienced severe pain with nonspinal injections. Though few patients received conscious sedation, most of these (60%) experienced high levels of pain. There was no correlation between level of procedural pain with age, gender, ethnicity, preprocedure pain level, procedure type, tobacco use, or medication type used. Conclusions: The majority of patients who undergo nonsedated interventional pain management procedures do not experience severe pain. There is a small but appreciable group of subjects who seem to experience severe pain that cannot be correlated to any particular clinical characteristic in a standard patient evaluation. Even with standard conscious sedation, there is no clear best method to ensure patient comfort for this high-pain level group.

Pain Management for Primary Care Providers: A Narrative Review of High-Impact Studies, 2014-2016.

Objective: This manuscript reviews high-impact, peer-reviewed studies published from January 2014 to March 2016 that are relevant to pain management in primary care. Given the recent release of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's "Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain" emphasizing the primacy of nonopioid treatment, we focused our review on nonopioid pain management. Design: Narrative review of peer-reviewed literature. Methods: We searched three article summary services and queried expert contacts for high-impact, English-language studies related to the management of pain in adults in primary care. All authors reviewed 142 study titles to arrive at group consensus on article content domains. Within article domains, individual authors selected studies approved by the larger group according to their impact on primary care clinical practice, policy, and research, as well as quality of the study methods. Through iterative discussion, 12 articles were selected for detailed review, discussion, and presentation in this narrative review. Results: We present key articles addressing each of six domains of pain management: pharmacotherapy for acute pain; interventional treatments; medical cannabis; complementary and integrative medicine; care management in chronic pain; and prevention. Within each section, we conclude with implications for pain management in primary care. Conclusions: There is growing evidence for multiple nonopioid treatment modalities available to clinicians for the management of pain in primary care. The dissemination and implementation of these studies, including innovative care management interventions, warrant additional study and support from clinicians, educators, and policy-makers.

[Diagnosis and interventional treatment of pain syndromes after surgery for degenerative lumbar spine diseases]. / Diagnostika i interventsionnoe lechenie bolevykh sindromov posle operativnykh vmeshatel'stv po povodu degenerativno-distroficheskikh zabolevanii poiasnichnogo otdela pozvonochnika.

Postoperative pain accompanies up to 20% of interventions for degenerative spine diseases (DSDs). The epidemiologic data are contradictory; clinical and radiological diagnostics is often low efficient; capabilities of interventional diagnosis and treatment techniques are poorly understood. PURPOSE: The study purpose was to investigate the structure of pain syndromes after surgery for DSDs of the lumbar spine, based on complex diagnostics, as well as to evaluate the capabilities of interventional treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We examined 310 patients with postoperative pain syndromes. Patients with obvious indications for repeated surgery were excluded from the analysis; the remaining patients underwent selective diagnostic blockades followed by interventional (puncture) treatment. A positive outcome was defined as a reduction in pain by 50% on the numerical rating scale (NRS-11), by 20% in the Oswestry index (ODI), and by 8 points in the sciatica bothersomeness index (SBI), with the effect lasting for 12 months. Predictive factors for the risk of pain syndromes were analyzed. RESULTS: Out of 310 patients, 162 (52.6%) patients had no obvious indications for surgery. Radicular pain was detected in 56 (18.6%) of 310 patients; the positive treatment outcome was achieved in 38 (67.86%) of 56 patients. Facet pain was present in 29 (9.35%) patients; the positive treatment outcome was achieved in 23 (79.31%) patients. Discogenic pain was found in 12 (3.87%) patients; the positive treatment outcome was achieved in 5 (41.63%) patients. sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain was present in 42 (13.55%) patients; the positive treatment outcome was achieved in 36 (85.71%) patients. Myofascial and competing pain was detected in 12 (3.87%) patients; the causes were not identified in 11 (3.55%) cases. The main risk factors were sagittal balance parameters. CONCLUSION: Complex diagnostics revealed postoperative pain not associated with surgical causes in 52.6% of cases; the origin of pain was identified in 49.95% of cases. Interventional treatment was effective in 64.81% of cases; failed back surgery syndrome was diagnosed in 16.13% of patients.

Interventional pain management for spinal disorders: a review of injection techniques.

Chronic spinal pain has a high prevalence and a severe economic, societal and health impact. In the last decades the practice and research of interventional techniques for the diagnosis and treatment of spinal pain has increased sharply. The level of evidence of the most common techniques is well documented. With image-guided precise diagnostic blocks it is possible to identify the source of chronic spinal pain in well over 60% of the cases. Nonsurgical specialties such as PM&R increasingly resort to the possibilities of interventional pain management for musculoskeletal disorders. For many forms of spinal pain there is at least fair evidence for long-term pain relief after a guided therapeutic injection often reducing the intake of analgesic medication or the need for surgery. This review focuses on the evidence, the application spectrum and special considerations of injection techniques for the treatment of spinal disorders.

Neuromodulation Techniques in Chronic Refractory Coccydynia: A Narrative Review.

Refractory coccydynia is a condition characterized by severe coccygeal pain and poses a challenging management dilemma for clinicians. Advancements in neuromodulation (NM) technology have provided benefits to people experiencing chronic pain that is resistant to standard treatments. This review aims to summarize the spectrum of current NM techniques employed in the treatment of refractory coccydynia along with their effectiveness. A review of studies in the scientific literature from 2012 to 2023 was conducted, revealing a limited number of case reports. Although the available evidence at this time suggests significant pain relief with the utilization of NM techniques, the limited scope and nature of the studies reviewed emphasize the need for large-scale, rigorous, high-level research in this domain in order to establish a comprehensive understanding of the role of NM and its effectiveness in the management of intractable coccydynia.

Potential Cost Savings with 60-day Peripheral Nerve Stimulation Treatment in Chronic Axial Low Back Pain.

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.

The First Use of a Midline Catheter in Outpatient Pain Management.

Midline catheters (MCs) are used to deliver intravenous therapy lasting over 5 days to patients in hospitals. However, the constant development of home and outpatient care is challenging medical teams to provide effective and safe planned therapy to patients under such conditions. We describe the first time an MC was used in outpatient pain management in Poland. A 60-year-old man presented to the Pain Management Clinic with a history of RCC of the left kidney and lumbar back pain radiating to the left knee joint. The person whose case is described below had poor peripheral veins. He intravenously received lidocaine for 10 days via a midline catheter with a good response.

Integrating an Interventional Pain Management Curriculum in Hospice and Palliative Medicine Fellowship Training: A Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common symptom for patients with cancer. Hospice and Palliative Medicine (HPM) physicians are expected to be experts in both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment of pain for this patient population. Insufficient knowledge of non-pharmacologic, interventional approaches to pain management is a barrier to providing optimal care. This study assesses the feasibility and effectiveness of an interventional pain management curriculum on HPM fellow knowledge at a single institution. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to implement an interventional pain management curriculum for HPM fellows' and secondly to measure its effects on their knowledge and confidence in interventional pain management approaches. METHODS: We executed an interventional pain management curriculum for HPM fellows. The curriculum consisted of 6 fifty-minute virtual lectures. Anonymous pre- and post-curriculum surveys were used to assess curricular impact. RESULTS: Post-course surveys showed a significant increase in HPM fellows' knowledge and confidence in interventional pain management techniques. CONCLUSIONS: An interventional pain management curriculum for HPM fellows is a feasible and promising intervention to significantly impact fellows' knowledge and confidence in non-pharmacologic treatment of cancer pain.