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.

Use of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during epiduroscopy as a safety measure.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we present the first 12 cases of the use of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) during therapeutic epiduroscopy in patients with clinical canal stenosis. METHODS: IESS was performed using two working instruments: an epidural balloon to dilate the epidural space without damaging the nerve structures (Resaloon®) and an element to perform flavotomy of the ligamentum flavum (Resaflex®). The procedure was performed at levels of the greatest stenosis, as detected using preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: Of the 12 cases that used IONM, 2 patients presented neurotonic activity in roots during ligamentum flavum ablation, 1 patient presented neurotonic activity while using Resaloon® in a root contralateral to the level at which the procedure was conducted, and other presented neurotonic activity in a root below the level at which the ligamentum flavum was ablated. In all cases, potentially harmful discharges stopped when the procedure was interrupted momentarily. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring detected alterations in surgical field and roots below and/or contralateral to the field, which disappeared with complete recovery after interrupting the procedure; this can avoid the possible prolonged or even permanent complications postoperatively. SIGNIFICANCE: Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during epiduroscopy is safe, thus optimizing surgical outcomes.

A Cost-Consequence Analysis Examining the Differences Between Non-Rechargeable and Rechargeable Systems.

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment option to relieve chronic intractable pain, and failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is a key indication. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the current study was to analyze the cost consequences of using non-rechargeable (NR)-SCS and rechargeable (R)-SCS. METHODS: Real data taken from a review of 86 patients were used to simulate costs and review which patients might have benefitted more from R-SCS. Calculations were made to see what is the impact from a monetary point of view. RESULTS: On average, NR-SCS devices lasted for 58 months (M). Only 14 patients were not eligible to receive an R-SCS implant. We found that using R-SCS batteries would save up to €56.322 on average over a patient's life expectancy, which means a saving of 43% compared to using NR-SCS systems. In our analysis, we found that if R-SCS implants were used instead of NR-SCS batteries, a saving of €5,735,334.23 over patients' life expectancy would be made, which represented a 63% saving to the public health system. We found that R-SCS was cost-beneficial from second year compared to NR-SCS, saving up to 70% when patients are implanted for 9 years. CONCLUSIONS: This cost-consequences analysis suggests that R-SCS implants are more cost-beneficial than NR-SCS systems in well-selected patient candidates for this type of treatment.