Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
1.
Pain Pract ; 22(2): 285-287, 2022 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34528377

RESUMO

Complex regional pain syndrome type I (CRPS I) is a multifactorial condition that is related to neural damage, and leads to chronic neuropathic pain. Due to its multifactorial nature, there are many methods that have been recruited for its management. Most of them limit the symptoms to some degree, but the most effective of them so far seems to be blockade of the sympathetic innervation of the region. We present the case of a 71-year-old woman, with an upper limb fracture which was treated conservatively, and later on developed CRPS type I. Analgesic medications and pregabalin were ineffective in controlling her symptoms. Blockade of the stellate ganglion was performed with local anesthetic and dexamethasone. After the stellate ganglion blockade was marked as successful in relieving her symptoms, cryoneurolysis was performed which was very effective. There are not many cases that have been treated with cryoneurolysis, and this is what makes this case interesting.


Assuntos
Bloqueio Nervoso Autônomo , Distrofia Simpática Reflexa , Idoso , Anestésicos Locais/uso terapêutico , Bloqueio Nervoso Autônomo/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Distrofia Simpática Reflexa/diagnóstico , Distrofia Simpática Reflexa/cirurgia , Gânglio Estrelado/cirurgia , Extremidade Superior
2.
J Clin Med ; 10(21)2021 Oct 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34768333

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Due to the growing interest in regional anesthesia (RA) techniques and the realization of the need for formalized education in them, the Greek Chapter of the European Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA-Hellas) has established a structured hands-on training course held annually since 2009, which is quite popular in the community of Greek anesthesiologists. The aim of the current survey was twofold: first, to provide an overview of the current practice of RA in Greece; secondly, to evaluate the effect the aforementioned training course has on participants' knowledge and attitude towards RA. METHODS: An electronic questionnaire was uploaded on SurveyMonkey and a link giving access to the questionnaire was forwarded via email to a mailing list of 825 practicing Greek anesthesiologists held in the electronic database of ESRA Hellas. The survey was totally anonymous and no identifying information was collected throughout. It contained questions relating to the anesthesiologists' demographic characteristics, their RA practice, and information pertaining to the RA training course. RESULTS: A total of 424 fully completed questionnaires were received, representing an overall response rate of 51.4%. Attendants of the course are more familiar than non-attendants with the performance of peripheral nerve blocks with neurostimulation and/or ultrasound guidance (p < 0.001). Attendants are also less likely to practice exclusively general anesthesia, more likely to use peripheral blocks for lower limb surgery, and more likely to consider taking the European Diploma of RA in comparison to non-attendants (p < 0.001, p = 0.018 and p = 0.002, respectively). Both cohorts consider the course of value and agree that the main reason to use regional techniques is to ensure optimal postoperative analgesia, while the main hindrance to RA practice is the lack of relevant education in the techniques, especially those under ultrasound guidance. Regarding improvement of the course, most participants suggested devoting ampler time in hands-on ultrasound practice and application. Conclusion: Greek anesthesiologists seek educational activities in the field of RA and the course seems to fulfil the majority of attendants' expectations. There will be further effort by the organizers to improve weaknesses of the current course and undertake further educational initiatives in the field of RA according to international recommendations.

3.
Pain Pract ; 17(7): 925-929, 2017 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27996191

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The Fibromyalgia Rapid Screening Tool (FiRST) is a brief, simple, and straightforward self-administered questionnaire that was developed by Perrot et al. for the detection of fibromyalgia syndrome in patients with diffuse chronic pain. The aim of our study was to develop and validate the Greek version of FiRST. METHODS: The study was set up as a prospective observational study. The original French version of FiRST was adapted into Greek using forward and backward translation. Patients with chronic diffuse pain with a clinical diagnosis of fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis based on the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology were invited to participate to the study. RESULTS: Of the 101 patients who met our inclusion criteria, 42 were diagnosed with fibromyalgia and 59 with osteoarthritis. The 2 groups did not differ significantly regarding gender and pain characteristics (duration, intensity). Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.79. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed an area under the curve of 89% (95% confidence interval = 83 to 95%; SE: 0.032, P < 0.001). At a cutoff score of ≥ 5, FiRST showed a sensitivity of 86%, a specificity of 83%, a positive predictive value of 78%, and a negative predictive value of 89%. The intraclass coefficient for the test-retest reliability was 0.96. CONCLUSION: The Greek version of FiRST is a valid screening tool for fibromyalgia in daily practice.


Assuntos
Dor Crônica/diagnóstico , Fibromialgia/diagnóstico , Medição da Dor/normas , Inquéritos e Questionários/normas , Traduções , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Dor Crônica/epidemiologia , Feminino , Fibromialgia/epidemiologia , Grécia/epidemiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes
4.
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol ; 31(1): 59-66, 2015.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25788775

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Regional anesthesia (RA) techniques (central neuraxial and peripheral nerve blocks [CNBs and PNBs]) are well-established anesthesia/analgesia modalities. However, information on their nationwide use is sparse. The aim of the survey was to assess the utility of RA techniques in Greece, during 2011. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A nationwide, cross-sectional descriptive survey was conducted (March to June, 2012), using a structured questionnaire that was sent to 128 Greek Anesthesia Departments. RESULTS: Sixty-six completed questionnaires (response rate 51.56%) were analyzed. The data corresponded to 187,703 operations and represented all hospital categories and geographical regions of Greece. On the whole, RA was used in 45.5% of performed surgical procedures (85,386/187,703). Spinal anesthesia was the technique of choice (51.9% of all RA techniques), mostly preferred in orthopedics (44.8%). Epidural anesthesia/analgesia (application rate of 23.2%), was mostly used in obstetrics and gynecology (50.4%). Combined spinal-epidural and PNBs were less commonly instituted (11.24% and 13.64% of all RA techniques, respectively). Most PNBs (78.5%) were performed with a neurostimulator, while elicitation of paresthesia was used in 16% of the cases. Conversely, ultrasound guidance was quite limited (5%). The vast majority of consultant anesthesologists (94.49%) were familiar with CNBs, whereas only 46.4% were familiar with PNBs. The main reported limitations to RA application were lack of equipment (58.23%) and inadequate education/training (49.29%). CONCLUSION: Regional modalities were routinely used by Greek anesthesiologists during 2011. Neuraxial blocks, especially spinal anesthesia, were preferred over PNBs. The underutilization of certain RA techniques was attributed to lack of equipment and inadequate training.

5.
Pain Pract ; 15(7): 627-32, 2015 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24796220

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Douleur Neuropathique 4 questionnaire (DN4) was developed by the French Neuropathic Pain Group and is a simple and objective tool, primarily designed to screen for neuropathic pain. The aim of our study is to validate the DN4 in the Greek language. METHODS: The study was set up as a prospective observational study. Two pain specialists independently examined patients and diagnosed them with neuropathic, nociceptive, or mixed pain, according to the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) definitions. A third and a fourth physician administered the DN4 questionnaire to the patients. RESULTS: Out of the 237 patients who met our inclusion criteria and had identical diagnoses regarding the type of pain, 123 were diagnosed with neuropathic, 59 with nociceptive, and 55 with mixed pain. Among patients with identical diagnoses of neuropathic or nociceptive pain, using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.92. A cutoff point of equal or greater than 4 resulted in a sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 78%. Among patients suffering from pain with neuropathic element (neuropathic or mixed pain) or pain with no neuropathic element (nociceptive pain), using a ROC curve analysis, the AUC was 0.89. A cutoff point of equal or greater than 4 resulted in a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 78%. CONCLUSION: The Greek version of DN4 is a valid tool for discriminating between neuropathic and nociceptive pain conditions in daily practice.


Assuntos
Multilinguismo , Neuralgia/diagnóstico , Neuralgia/epidemiologia , Medição da Dor/normas , Inquéritos e Questionários/normas , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Pesquisa Biomédica , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor/métodos , Médicos , Estudos Prospectivos
7.
Pain Pract ; 14(1): 32-42, 2014 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23464813

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Neuropathic cancer pain (NCP) is a common manifestation of cancer and/or its treatment. Treatment following the WHO analgesic ladder provides relief for the majority of cancer pain patients; however, concern remains that opioids may be less efficacious for neuropathic pain (NP) compared with nociceptive pain, often necessitating the use of higher doses. Adjuvants, such as pregabalin, have shown to be efficacious for the treatment of NP, although data come mostly from noncancer studies. The comparative efficacy and safety of opioids versus adjuvants has not been studied for NCP. The aim of this study was to directly compare pregabalin versus a strong opioid for the treatment of NCP. METHODS: A total of 120 patients, diagnosed with "definite" NCP, were randomized into two groups and received increasing doses of either oral pregabalin or transdermal fentanyl for 28 days. VAS score, patient satisfaction, need for opioid rescue, and adverse events (AEs) were recorded. RESULTS: In the pregabalin group, a significantly higher proportion of patients achieved at least 30% reduction in VAS compared with the fentanyl group (73.3%, 95% CI: 60.3%-83.93 vs. 36.7%, 95% CI: 24.5%-50.1%, P < 0.0001, respectively), while the percentage mean change from baseline was also significantly different [46% (95% CI: 39.5%-52.8%) for pregabalin and 22% (95% CI: 14.9%-29.5%) for fentanyl (P < 0.0001)]. Patient-reported satisfaction was more frequent with pregabalin, while AEs and treatment discontinuations were more frequent in the fentanyl group. DISCUSSION: Prompt use of a neuropathic pain-specific adjuvant, such as pregabalin, in NCP may lead to better control of the neuropathic component, with opioid-sparing effects.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Neuralgia/tratamento farmacológico , Medição da Dor/métodos , Ácido gama-Aminobutírico/análogos & derivados , Idoso , Analgésicos Opioides/farmacologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias/epidemiologia , Neuralgia/epidemiologia , Medição da Dor/efeitos dos fármacos , Pregabalina , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Ácido gama-Aminobutírico/farmacologia , Ácido gama-Aminobutírico/uso terapêutico
8.
ISRN Pain ; 2014: 853826, 2014.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27335883

RESUMO

Trigeminal neuralgia is the most common neuralgia. Its therapeutic approach is challenging as the first line treatment often does not help, or even causes intolerable side effects. The aim of our randomized double blind, placebo controlled, crossover study was to investigate in a prospective way the effect of lidocaine in patients with trigeminal neuralgia. Twenty patients met our inclusion criteria and completed the study. Each patient underwent four weekly sessions, two of which were with lidocaine (5 mgs/kg) and two with placebo infusions administered over 60 minutes. Intravenous lidocaine was superior regarding the reduction of the intensity of pain, the allodynia, and the hyperalgesia compared to placebo. Moreover, contrary to placebo, lidocaine managed to maintain its therapeutic results for the first 24 hours after intravenous infusion. Although, intravenous lidocaine is not a first line treatment, when first line medications fail to help, pain specialists may try it as an add-on treatment. This trial is registered with NCT01955967.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...