Catheter Tip-Associated Mass With Continuous Infusion of Sufentanil for Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Type 2: A Case Report Including Histopathologic Examination and Review of the Associated Basic and Clinical Research.

OBJECTIVES: Intrathecal opioids delivered by implanted pumps are used to treat malignant or nonmalignant chronic pain. In this study, we 1) review a case in which intrathecal infusions of sufentanil along with other adjuvants were used and after an extended period led to an intrathecal mass and 2) compared and contrasted the potential mechanisms for these phenomena. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A woman aged 66 years with a history of scoliosis and multiple spine surgeries was treated with an implantable drug delivery system for treating persistent pain after laminectomy. The patient received intrathecal medication comprising sufentanil, bupivacaine, and clonidine. RESULTS: Intrathecal therapy over approximately ten years served to reduce pain and improve function over the treatment period. After the extended treatment interval, the patient developed an intrathecal mass that was associated with impairment. The mass was surgically removed. Systematic histopathology revealed the space-occupying mass to largely comprise fibroblasts and some inflammatory cells embedded in a collagen mass located proximally to the catheter tip. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first published case report of sufentanil causing this complication. The science and mechanism of intrathecal catheter tip-associated mass formation and associated clinical research correlates are reviewed in detail, and explanations for this phenomenon are proposed based on histochemical analysis of the patient's pathology findings.

Simulation-based training in brain death determination.

BACKGROUND: Despite straightforward guidelines on brain death determination by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN), substantial practice variability exists internationally, between states, and among institutions. We created a simulation-based training course on proper determination based on the AAN practice parameters to address and assess knowledge and practice gaps at our institution. METHODS: Our intervention consisted of a didactic course and a simulation exercise, and was bookended by before and after multiple-choice tests. The 40-min didactic course, including a video demonstration, covered all aspects of the brain death examination. Simulation sessions utilized a SimMan 3G manikin and involved a complete examination, including an apnea test. Possible confounders and signs incompatible with brain death were embedded throughout. Facilitators evaluated performance with a 26-point checklist based on the most recent AAN guidelines. A senior neurologist conducted all aspects of the course, including the didactic session, simulation, and debriefing session. RESULTS: Ninety physicians from multiple specialties have participated in the didactic session, 38 of whom have completed the simulation. Pre-test scores were poor (41.4 %), with attendings scoring higher than residents (46.6 vs. 40.4 %, p = 0.07), and neurologists and neurosurgeons significantly outperforming other specialists (53.9 vs. 38.9 %, p = 0.003). Post-test scores (73.3 %) were notably higher than pre-test scores (45.4 %). Participant feedback has been uniformly positive. CONCLUSION: Baseline knowledge of brain death determination among providers was low but improved greatly after the course. Our intervention represents an effective model that can be replicated at other institutions to train clinicians in the determination of brain death according to evidence-based guidelines.