Motor cortex stimulation for chronic neuropathic pain: results of a double-blind randomized study.

Motor cortex stimulation via surgically implanted electrodes has been used as an off-label treatment for chronic neuropathic pain, but its efficacy has not been fully established. We aimed to objectively study the efficacy of motor cortex stimulation and characterize potential predictors of response. In this randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, single centre trial, we recruited 18 patients with chronic neuropathic pain who did not adequately respond to conventional treatment and had a numerical pain rating scale (NRS) score ≥6. Patients were initially assigned to receive 3 months of active ('on') or sham ('off') stimulation in a double-blind cross-over phase. This was followed by a 3-month single-blind phase, and 6 months of open-label follow-up. A meaningful response in our trial was defined as a ≥30% or 2-point reduction in NRS scores during active stimulation. Using Bayesian statistics, we found a 41.4% probability of response towards on versus off motor cortex stimulation. The probability of improvement during active stimulation (double-blind, single-blind and open-label phases) compared to baseline was 47.2-68.5%. Thirty nine per cent of the patients were considered long-term responders, 71.4% of whom had facial pain, phantom limb pain or complex regional pain syndrome. In contrast, 72.7% of non-responders had either post-stroke pain or pain associated with brachial plexus avulsion. Thirty-nine per cent of patients had a substantial postoperative analgesic effect after electrode insertion in the absence of stimulation. Individuals with diagnoses associated with a good postoperative outcome or those who developed an insertional effect had a near 100% probability of response to motor cortex stimulation. In summary, we found that ∼40% of patients responded to motor cortex stimulation, particularly those who developed an insertional effect or had specific clinical conditions that seemed to predict an appropriate postoperative response.

Neuropathic pain after brachial plexus avulsion--central and peripheral mechanisms.

REVIEW: The pain that commonly occurs after brachial plexus avulsion poses an additional burden on the quality of life of patients already impaired by motor, sensory and autonomic deficits. Evidence-based treatments for the pain associated with brachial plexus avulsion are scarce, thus frequently leaving the condition refractory to treatment with the standard methods used to manage neuropathic pain. Unfortunately, little is known about the pathophysiology of brachial plexus avulsion. Available evidence indicates that besides primary nerve root injury, central lesions related to the abrupt disconnection of nerve roots from the spinal cord may play an important role in the genesis of neuropathic pain in these patients and may explain in part its refractoriness to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The understanding of both central and peripheral mechanisms that contribute to the development of pain is of major importance in order to propose more effective treatments for brachial plexus avulsion-related pain. This review focuses on the current understanding about the occurrence of neuropathic pain in these patients and the role played by peripheral and central mechanisms that provides insights into its treatment. Pain after brachial plexus avulsion involves both peripheral and central components; thereby it is characterized as a mixed (central and peripheral) neuropathic pain syndrome.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in chronic pain: a review of the literature.

OBJECTIVE: To review the literature on the analgesic effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in chronic pain according to different pain syndromes and stimulation parameters. DATA SOURCES: Publications on rTMS and chronic pain were searched in PubMed and Google Scholar using the following key words: chronic pain, analgesia, transcranial magnetic stimulation, neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and complex regional pain syndrome. STUDY SELECTION: This review only included double-blind, controlled studies with >10 participants in each arm that were published from 1996 to 2014 and written in English. Studies with relevant information for the understanding of the effects of rTMS were also cited. DATA EXTRACTION: The following data were retained: type of pain syndrome, type of study, coil type, target, stimulation intensity, frequency, number of pulses, orientation of induced current, number of session, and a brief summary of intervention outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 33 randomized trials were found. Many studies reported significant pain relief by rTMS, especially high-frequency stimulation over the primary motor cortex performed in consecutive treatment sessions. Pain relief was frequently >30% compared with control treatment. Neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and complex regional pain syndrome were the pain syndromes more frequently studied. However, among all published studies, only a few performed repetitive sessions of rTMS. CONCLUSIONS: rTMS has potential utility in the management of chronic pain; however, studies using maintenance sessions of rTMS and assessing the effects of rTMS on the different aspects of chronic pain are needed to provide a more solid basis for its clinical application for pain relief.

Motor corticospinal excitability abnormalities differ between distinct chronic low back pain syndromes.

OBJECTIVES: It is not known whether cortical plastic changes reported in low-back pain (LBP) are present in all etiologies of LBP. Here we report on the assessment of patients with three LBP conditions: non-specific-LBP (ns-LBP), failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), and sciatica (Sc). METHODS: Patients underwent a standardized assessment of clinical pain, conditioned pain modulation (CPM), and measures of motor evoked potential (MEPs)-based motor corticospinal excitability (CE) by transcranial magnetic stimulation, including short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), and intracortical facilitation (ICF). Comparisons were also made with normative data from sex- and age-matched healthy volunteers. RESULTS: 60 patients (42 women, 55.1±9.1 years old) with LBP were included (20 in each group). Pain intensity was higher in patients with neuropathic pain [FBSS (6.8±1.3), and Sc (6.4±1.4)] than in those with ns-LBP (4.7±1.0, P<0.001). The same was shown for pain interference (5.9±2.0, 5.9±1.8, 3.2±1.9, P<0.001), disability (16.4±3.3, 16.3±4.3, 10.4±4.3, P<0.001), and catastrophism (31.1±12.3, 33.0±10.4, 17.4±10.7, P<0.001) scores for FBSS, Sc, and ns-LBP groups, respectively. Patients with neuropathic pain (FBSS, Sc) had lower CPM (-14.8±1.9, -14.1±16.7, respectively) compared to ns-LBP (-25.4±16.6; P<0.02). 80.0% of the FBSS group had defective ICF compared to the other two groups (52.5% for ns-LBP, P=0.025 and 52.5% for Sc, P=0.046). MEPs (140%-rest motor threshold) were low in 50.0% of patients in the FBSS group compared to 20.0% of ns-LBP (P=0.018) and 15.0% of Sc (P=0.001) groups. Higher MEPs were correlated with mood scores (r=0.489), and with lower neuropathic pain symptom scores(r=-0.415) in FBSS. CONCLUSIONS: Different types of LBP were associated with different clinical, CPM and CE profiles, which were not uniquely related to the presence of neuropathic pain. These results highlight the need to further characterize patients with LBP in psychophysics and cortical neurophysiology studies.

Sifting the wheat from the chaff? Evidence for the existence of an asymmetric fibromyalgia phenotype.

BACKGROUND: The different phenotypic presentations of fibromyalgia (FM) have been infrequently studied and may have diagnostic and therapeutic implications. The aim of this study was to explore differences between FM patients with classical symmetric (s-FM) presentation and FM patients with marked asymmetric (a-FM) pain. METHODS: We performed two consecutive cross-sectional studies on FM patients and matched healthy volunteers (HV). FM patients were divided into a-FM (and s-FM groups according to their score of pain intensity on each body side; patients with a difference of ≥40 mm in VAS between left and right sides were classified as a-FM, otherwise classified as s-FM. Participants (FM = 32; HV = 31) were assessed for clinical, cortical excitability (CE), quantitative sensory testing (QST; study 1), and intraepidermal nerve fibre density (IENFD) determinations (study 2). RESULTS: While pain intensity did not significantly differ between s-FM and a-FM patients, pain interference in daily activities was significantly higher in the a-FM as compared to the s-FM group (54.7 ± 8.9 and 37.6 ± 13.5; p < .0001). PPT was significantly lower in the more painful side of a-FM as compared to the HV (27.7 ± 7.9 and 49.9 ± 13.0; p < .0001), while PPT in the less painful side of a-FM was significantly higher than PPT values in the s-FM (35.8 ± 8.3 and 27.7 ± 5.5; p = .031). S-FM and a-FM had significantly abnormal intracortical inhibition values on CE measurements compared to HV. There were no significant differences in IENFD between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Within the current FM criteria, there exist different phenotypes with clinical, psychophysics, and neurophysiological findings that are not related to peripheral IENFD abnormalities. SIGNIFICANCE: Current fibromyalgia criteria may contain different phenotypes of fibromyalgia based on the lateralization of pain.

Quality of Life After Motor Cortex Stimulation: Clinical Results and Systematic Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Motor cortex stimulation (MCS) is routinely used for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain but its effect on quality of life remains uncertain. OBEJCTIVE: To systematically review the published literature on MCS and quality of life and report the effects of this therapy in a series of patients prospectively followed in our center. METHODS: The systematic literature review was conducted using the search words "motor cortex stimulation and pain and neurosurgery" and "motor cortex stimulation and pain and quality of life." Quality of life in our clinical trial was investigated in a series of 10 patients with chronic neuropathic pain prospectively followed for 12 mo after MCS. RESULTS: Two hundred eighteen nonreplicated articles were pooled for analysis. Of these, 6 described measures of quality of life in the pre- and postoperative period. In these studies, 64 patients with different clinical conditions associated with neuropathic pain were followed for 6 to 84 mo after MCS surgery. Improvement in quality of life ranged from 35% to 85%. In our clinical series, visual analog scale (VAS), SF-12 physical (PhysCS), and mental scores (MenCS) recorded 12 mo after MCS were improved by 60 ± 10% (P = .002), 50 ± 13% (P = .002), and 22 ± 6% (P = .01), respectively. No significant correlation was found between postoperative improvement in pain and either PhysCS (r = 0.18; P = .6) or MenCS (r = -0.24; P = .5). CONCLUSION: MCS improves quality of life in patients with chronic refractory neuropathic pain. Additional factors other than a simple analgesic effect may contribute to these results.

Insular and anterior cingulate cortex deep stimulation for central neuropathic pain: Disassembling the percept of pain.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the analgesic effects of stimulation of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) or the posterior superior insula (PSI) against sham deep (d) repetitive (r) transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in patients with central neuropathic pain (CNP) after stroke or spinal cord injury in a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled, 3-arm parallel study. METHODS: Participants were randomly allocated into the active PSI-rTMS, ACC-rTMS, sham-PSI-rTMS, or sham-ACC-rTMS arms. Stimulations were performed for 12 weeks, and a comprehensive clinical and pain assessment, psychophysics, and cortical excitability measurements were performed at baseline and during treatment. The main outcome of the study was pain intensity (numeric rating scale [NRS]) after the last stimulation session. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients (age 55.02 ± 12.13 years) completed the study. NRS score was not significantly different between groups at the end of the study. Active rTMS treatments had no significant effects on pain interference with daily activities, pain dimensions, neuropathic pain symptoms, mood, medication use, cortical excitability measurements, or quality of life. Heat pain threshold was significantly increased after treatment in the PSI-dTMS group from baseline (1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09-3.06]) compared to sham-dTMS (-1.02, 95% CI -2.10 to 0.04, p = 0.014), and ACC-dTMS caused a significant decrease in anxiety scores (-2.96, 95% CI -4.1 to -1.7]) compared to sham-dTMS (-0.78, 95% CI -1.9 to 0.3; p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: ACC- and PSI-dTMS were not different from sham-dTMS for pain relief in CNP despite a significant antinociceptive effect after insular stimulation and anxiolytic effects of ACC-dTMS. These results showed that the different dimensions of pain can be modulated in humans noninvasively by directly stimulating deeper SNC cortical structures without necessarily affecting clinical pain per se. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01932905.

Liposomal topical capsaicin in post-herpetic neuralgia: a safety pilot study.

UNLABELLED: Topical treatments have gained popularity for general use as an adjunct to systemic drugs in neuropathic pain, but their use produces variable clinical results and local adverse events. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and analgesic effect of a formulation of liposomal capsaicin (LC) (0.025%) in patients with post herpetic neuralgia (PHN). METHOD: Patients who remained symptomatic after first-and second-line treatment were randomized to receive LC for six weeks in a placebo-controlled, crossover design study. Clinical assessment was performed at baseline, in the second, fourth and sixth week of treatment. RESULTS: Thirteen patients completed both treatment periods. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was significantly decreased after the end of the study (p = 0.008), however the effect of treatment was not significant (p = 0.076). There was no difference on global impression of change and other pain characteristics. LC was safe and well tolerated. However, at the concentration used, its analgesic effects were marginal and not significant.

Methadone in post-herpetic neuralgia: A pilot proof-of-concept study.

OBJECTIVE: This research was designed as a pilot proof-of-concept study to evaluate the use of low-dose methadone in post-herpetic neuralgia patients who remained refractory after first and second line post-herpetic neuralgia treatments and had indications for adding an opioid agent to their current drug regimens. METHODS: This cross-over study was double blind and placebo controlled. Ten opioid naïve post-herpetic neuralgia patients received either methadone (5 mg bid) or placebo for three weeks, followed by a 15-day washout period and a second three-week treatment with either methadone or placebo, accordingly. Clinical evaluations were performed four times (before and after each three-week treatment period). The evaluations included the visual analogue scale, verbal category scale, daily activities scale, McGill pain questionnaire, adverse events profile, and evoked pain assessment. All patients provided written informed consent before being included in the study. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01752699 RESULTS: Methadone, when compared to placebo, did not significantly affect the intensity of spontaneous pain, as measured by the visual analogue scale. The intensity of spontaneous pain was significantly decreased after the methadone treatment compared to placebo on the category verbal scale (50% improved after the methadone treatment, none after the placebo, p=0.031). Evoked pain was reduced under methadone compared to placebo (50% improved after the methadone treatment, none after the placebo, p=0.031). Allodynia reduction correlated with sleep improvement (r=0.67, p=0.030) during the methadone treatment. The side effects profile was similar between both treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Methadone seems to be safe and efficacious in post-herpetic neuralgia. It should be tried as an adjunctive treatment for post-herpetic neuralgia in larger prospective studies.

The assessment and management of pain in the demented and non-demented elderly patient.

Persistent pain is a frequent health problem in the elderly. Its prevalence ranges from 45% to 80%. Chronic diseases, such as depression, cardiovascular disease, cancer and osteoporosis have a higher prevalence in aged individuals and increase the risk of developing chronic pain. The presence of pain is known to be associated with sleep disorders in these patients, as well as functional impairment, decreased sociability and greater use of the health system, with consequent increase in costs. Alzheimer's disease patients seem to have a normal pain discriminative capacity and they may probably have weaker emotional and affective experience of pain when compared to other types of dementia. Many patients have language deficits and thus cannot properly describe its characteristics. In more advanced cases, it becomes even difficult to determine whether pain is present or not. Therefore, the evaluation of these patients should be performed in a systematic way. There are three ways to measure the presence of pain: by direct questioning (self-report), by direct behavioral observation and by interviews with caregivers or informants. In recent years, many pain scales and questionnaires have been published and validated specifically for the elderly population. Some are specific to patients with cognitive decline, allowing pain evaluation to be conducted in a structured and reproducible way. The next step is to determine the type of painful syndrome and discuss the bases of the pharmacological management, the use of multiple medications and the presence of comorbidities demand the use of smaller doses and impose contra-indications against some drug classes. A multiprofessional approach is the rule in the management of these patients.

Liposomal topical capsaicin in post-herpetic neuralgia: a safety pilot study / Capsaicina lipossomal tópica na neuralgia pós-herpética: um estudo piloto de segurança

Topical treatments have gained popularity for general use as an adjunct to systemic drugs in neuropathic pain, but their use produces variable clinical results and local adverse events. Objective To evaluate the safety and analgesic effect of a formulation of liposomal capsaicin (LC) (0.025%) in patients with post herpetic neuralgia (PHN). Method Patients who remained symptomatic after first-and second-line treatment were randomized to receive LC for six weeks in a placebo-controlled, crossover design study. Clinical assessment was performed at baseline, in the second, fourth and sixth week of treatment. Results Thirteen patients completed both treatment periods. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was significantly decreased after the end of the study (p = 0.008), however the effect of treatment was not significant (p = 0.076). There was no difference on global impression of change and other pain characteristics. LC was safe and well tolerated. However, at the concentration used, its analgesic effects were marginal and not significant. .

Os tratamentos tópicos ganharam popularidade para uso geral como um adjuvante de medicamentos sistêmicos na dor neuropática, mas seu uso produz resultados clínicos variáveis e eventos adversos locais. Objetivo Avaliar o efeito de segurança e analgesia de uma formulação de capsaicina lipossomal (LC) (0,025%) em pacientes com neuralgia pós-herpética. Método Os pacientes que permaneceram sintomáticos após tratamento de primeira e de segunda linha foram randomizados para receber LC durante seis semanas em um estudo cruzado controlado por placebo. A avaliação clínica foi realizada no início do estudo, na segunda, quarta e sexta semana de tratamento. Resultados Treze pacientes completaram dois períodos de tratamento. Escala Visual Analógica diminuiu significativamente após o final do estudo (p = 0,008), no entanto, o efeito do tratamento não era significativo (p = 0,076). Não houve diferença na impressão global de mudança e de outras características da dor. LC foi segura e bem tolerada. No entanto, para a concentração utilizada, os seus efeitos analgésicos foram marginais e não significativos. .

Methadone in post-herpetic neuralgia: A pilot proof-of-concept study

OBJECTIVE: This research was designed as a pilot proof-of-concept study to evaluate the use of low-dose methadone in post-herpetic neuralgia patients who remained refractory after first and second line post-herpetic neuralgia treatments and had indications for adding an opioid agent to their current drug regimens. METHODS: This cross-over study was double blind and placebo controlled. Ten opioid naïve post-herpetic neuralgia patients received either methadone (5 mg bid) or placebo for three weeks, followed by a 15-day washout period and a second three-week treatment with either methadone or placebo, accordingly. Clinical evaluations were performed four times (before and after each three-week treatment period). The evaluations included the visual analogue scale, verbal category scale, daily activities scale, McGill pain questionnaire, adverse events profile, and evoked pain assessment. All patients provided written informed consent before being included in the study. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01752699 RESULTS: Methadone, when compared to placebo, did not significantly affect the intensity of spontaneous pain, as measured by the visual analogue scale. The intensity of spontaneous pain was significantly decreased after the methadone treatment compared to placebo on the category verbal scale (50% improved after the methadone treatment, none after the placebo, p = 0.031). Evoked pain was reduced under methadone compared to placebo (50% improved after the methadone treatment, none after the placebo, p = 0.031). Allodynia reduction correlated with sleep improvement (r = 0.67, p = 0.030) during the methadone treatment. The side effects profile was similar between both treatments. Conclusions: Methadone seems to be safe and efficacious in post-herpetic neuralgia. It should be tried as an adjunctive treatment for post-herpetic ...