Extended Treatment with Micron-Size Oral Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) in Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) emerged over the years as a promising approach in the management of chronic pain. Despite the fact that the efficacy of micron-size PEA formulations appears to be time-dependent, the optimal timing has not yet been elucidated. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to estimate the possible advantage of an extended treatment in the relief of chronic pain. The literature search was conducted consulting scientific databases, to identify clinical trials in which micron-size PEA was administered for at least 60 days, and pain assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) or Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). Nine studies matched the required criteria, for a total of 742 patients involved. The meta-analysis showed a statistically and clinically significant pain intensity reduction after 60 days of micron-size PEA supplementation, compared to 30 days (1.36 points, p < 0.01). The secondary analysis revealed a weighted NRS/VAS score decrease of 2.08 points within the first month of treatment. These two obtained scores corresponded to a 35.1% pain intensity reduction within the first month, followed by a further 35.4% during the second month. Overall, these results confirm the clinically relevant and time-depended pain-relieving effect of micron-size PEA and therefore the advantage of an extended treatment, especially in patient with incomplete pain management.

Prevalence of FMS Diagnosis According to ACR 2016 Revised Criteria in a Pain Therapy Centre in Italy: Observational Study.

Background and Objectives: Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a multifaceted disease with a strong preference for the female sex. It is characterised by chronic widespread pain, sleep-wake disorders, fatigue, cognitive disturbances, and several other somatic symptoms. Materials and Methods: In this prospective observational study, we analysed data regarding 302 patients who were referred to our pain centre for a first clinical assessment evaluation and were then inspected for the physician-based 2016 revision of the ACR diagnostic criteria for FMS, regardless of the final diagnosis previously made by the pain therapist. Results: Among the 280 patients who adhered to the 2016 ACR questionnaire, 20.3% displayed positive criteria for FMS diagnosis. The level of agreement between the FMS discharge diagnosis made by the pain clinician and the ACR 2016 criteria-positivity was moderate (kappa = 0.599, with moderate agreement set at a kappa value of 0.6). Only four patients (1.7%) diagnosed as suffering from FMS at discharge did not satisfy the minimal 2016 ACR diagnostic criteria. Conclusions: This prospective observational study confirmed the diagnostic challenge with FMS, as demonstrated by the moderate grade of agreement between the FMS diagnosis at discharge and the positivity for 2016 ACR criteria. In our opinion, the use of widely accepted diagnostic guidelines should be implemented in clinical scenarios and should become a common language among clinicians who evaluate and treat patients reporting widespread pain and FMS-suggestive symptoms. Further methodologically stronger studies will be necessary to validate our observation.