RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Nociception is the most prevalent pain mechanism in Parkinson disease (PD). It negatively affects quality of life, and there is currently no evidence-based treatment for its control. Burst spinal cord stimulation has been used to control neuropathic pain and recently has been shown to relieve pain of nociceptive origin. In this study, we hypothesize that burst transspinal magnetic stimulation (bTsMS) reduces nociceptive pain in PD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-six patients were included in a double-blind, sham-controlled, randomized parallel trial design, and the analgesic effect of lower-cervical bTsMS was assessed in patients with nociceptive pain in PD. Five daily induction sessions were followed by maintenance sessions delivered twice a week for seven weeks. The primary outcome was the number of responders (≥ 50% reduction of average pain intensity assessed on a numerical rating scale ranging from 0-10) during the eight weeks of treatment. Mood, quality of life, global impression of change, and adverse events were assessed throughout the study. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients (46.2% women) were included in the study. The number of responders during treatment was significantly higher after active than after sham bTsMS (p = 0.044), mainly owing to the effect of the first week of treatment, when eight patients (61.5%) responded to active and two (15.4%) responded to sham bTsMS (p = 0.006); the number needed to treat was 2.2 at week 1. Depression symptom scores were lower after active (4.0 ± 3.1) than after sham bTsMS (8.7 ± 5.3) (p = 0.011). Patients' global impressions of change were improved after active bTsMS (70.0%) compared with sham bTsMS (18.2%; p = 0.030). Minor adverse events were reported in both arms throughout treatment sessions. One major side effect unrelated to treatment occurred in the active arm (death due to pulmonary embolism). Blinding was effective. CONCLUSION: BTsMS provided significant pain relief and improved the global impression of change in PD in this phase-II trial. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT04546529.
Assuntos
Neuralgia , Dor Nociceptiva , Doença de Parkinson , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , Qualidade de Vida , Doença de Parkinson/complicações , Doença de Parkinson/terapia , Neuralgia/tratamento farmacológico , Fenômenos Magnéticos , Método Duplo-Cego , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The posterior-superior insula (PSI) has been shown to be a safe and potentially effective target for neuromodulation in peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) in humans and animal models. However, it remains unknown whether there is a measurable responder profile to PSI stimulation. Two factors were hypothesized to influence the response of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the PSI: differences in rTMS target (discrete subregions of the PSI) or PNP phenotype. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis from a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, cross-over trial assessing PSI-rTMS in PNP (N = 31, 5 days rTMS) (10.1016/j.neucli.2021.06.003). Active PSI-rTMS true responders (>50% pain reduction from baseline after active but not after sham series of treatment) were compared with not true responders, to determine whether they differed with respect to 1) rTMS neuro-navigational target coordinates, and/or 2) specific neuropathic pain symptom inventory (NPSI) clusters (pinpointed pain, evoked pain, and deep pain) at baseline. RESULTS: Mean rTMS target coordinates did not differ between true (n = 45.1%) and not true responders (p = 0.436 for X, p = 0.120 for Y, and p = 0.116 for Z). The Euclidian distance between true and not true responders was 4.04 mm. When comparing differences in responders between NPSI clusters, no participant within the evoked pain cluster was a true responder (p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Response to PSI-rTMS may depend on pain cluster subtype rather than on differences in targeting within the PSI.
Assuntos
Neuralgia , Manejo da Dor , Animais , Método Duplo-Cego , Humanos , Neuralgia/terapia , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Estimulação Magnética Transcraniana/métodos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: We assessed whether COVID-19 is associated with de novo pain and de novo chronic pain (CP). METHODS: This controlled cross-sectional study was based on phone interviews of patients discharged from hospital after COVID-19 compared to the control group composed of individuals hospitalized during the same period due to non-COVID-19 causes. Patients were classified as having previous CP based on the ICD-11/IASP criteria, de novo pain (i.e. any new type of pain, irrespective of the pain status before hospital stay), and de novo CP (i.e. persistent or recurring de novo pain, lasting more than 3 months) after COVID-19. We assessed pain prevalence and its characteristics, including headache profile, pain location, intensity, interference, and its relationship with fatigue, and persistent anosmia. Forty-six COVID-19 and 73 control patients were included. Both groups had similar sociodemographic characteristics and past medical history. RESULTS: Length of in-hospital-stay and ICU admission rates were significantly higher amongst COVID-19 survivours, while mechanical ventilation requirement was similar between groups. Pre-hospitalisation pain was lower in COVID-19 compared to control group (10.9% vs. 42.5%; p = 0.001). However, the COVID-19 group had a significantly higher prevalence of de novo pain (65.2% vs. 11.0%, p = 0.001), as well as more de novo headache (39.1%) compared to controls (2.7%, p = 0.001). New-onset CP was 19.6% in COVID-19 patients and 1.4% (p = 0.002) in controls. These differences remained significant (p = 0.001) even after analysing exclusively (COVID: n = 40; controls: n = 34) patients who did not report previous pain before the hospital stay. No statistically significant differences were found for mean new-onset pain intensity and interference with daily activities between both groups. COVID-19 pain was more frequently located in the head/neck and lower limbs (p < 0.05). New-onset fatigue was more common in COVID-19 survivours necessitating inpatient hospital care (66.8%) compared to controls (2.5%, p = 0.001). COVID-19 patients who reported anosmia had more new-onset pain (83.3%) compared to those who did not (48.0%, p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 was associated with a significantly higher prevalence of de novo CP, chronic daily headache, and new-onset pain in general, which was associated with persistent anosmia. SIGNIFICANCE: There exists de novo pain in a substantial number of COVID-19 survivours, and some develop chronic pain. New-onset pain after the infection was more common in patients who reported anosmia after hospital discharge.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Dor Crônica/epidemiologia , Dor/epidemiologia , Anosmia/epidemiologia , Anosmia/virologia , COVID-19/complicações , Estudos Transversais , Cefaleia/epidemiologia , Humanos , Prevalência , SobreviventesRESUMO
The authors provide a review of brain arteriovenous malformations, initially reviewing epidemiological and etiological aspects in addition to the pathophysiology and risk factors associated with bleeding. The emphasis of this review is directed to the clinical and care should be taken since the diagnosis of this pathology, intraoperative management on the viewpoint of the anesthesiologist to the potential complications that occur after resection of the lesion.
Os autores realizam uma revisão sobre malformações arteriovenosas encefálicas, revisando inicialmente aspectos etiológicos e epidemiológicos, além da fisiopatologia e de fatores relacionados com risco de sangramento. A maior ênfase dessa revisão é direcionada para o quadro clínico e para os cuidados que devem ser tomados desde o diagnóstico dessa patologia, o manejo intraoperatório sob o ponto de vista do anestesista, até as possíveis complicações que ocorrem após a ressecção da lesão.