High intrathecal bupivacaine for severe pain in the head and neck.

BACKGROUND: Severe pain in the head and neck is associated with a lowered quality of life and conventional pain therapy often does not provide adequate relief. The aims of this study were to investigate the efficacy, pain relief, benefits and adverse effects of intracisternal or high cervical (IHC) administration of bupivacaine in patients with severe pain in the head, neck and face regions. METHODS: Between 1990 and 2005, 40 patients (age 27-84 years) were treated with continuous IHC infusions of bupivacaine for various non-cancer (n=15) or cancer-related (n=25) refractory pain conditions (duration 1 month-18 years) in the head, neck, mouth and shoulder regions. RESULTS: Visual analogue scale scores and opioid requirements decreased markedly after the start of the treatment and remained lowered throughout the study. No tachyphylaxis for bupivacaine was observed. Major side effects were few and most often transient. Most patients showed unchanged or improved mobility. There was no mortality, neurological damage or other severe events attributable to procedures in the study protocol. CONCLUSION: For patients with severe and refractory pain in areas innervated by cranial and upper cervical nerves, cervical high spinal analgesia can provide safe and effective analgesia.

Sympathetic discharge to mesenteric organs and the liver. Evidence for substantial mesenteric organ norepinephrine spillover.

This study using sampling of blood from the portal vein, in addition to arterial and hepatic sites, to estimate separately spillovers of norepinephrine from mesenteric organs and the liver in seven patients undergoing upper abdominal surgery. Conventional measurements in arterial and hepatic venous plasma provided a measure of net hepatomesenteric NE spillover (403 pmol/ml) that indicated a 13% contribution of these organs to total body spillover of NE into systemic plasma (3,071+/-518 pmol/min). The net hepatomesenteric spillover of NE into systemic plasma was much lower than the spillover of NE from mesenteric organs into portal venous plasma (1,684+/-418 pmol/min). This and the hepatic spillover of NE into systemic plasma (212+/-72 pmol/min) indicated a considerable combined spillover of NE from hepatomesenteric organs (1,896+/-455 pmol/min). The sum of the latter estimate with the difference between total body and net hepatomesenteric NE spillovers provided an adjusted total body spillover of NE into both systemic and portal venous plasma (4,564+/-902 pmol/min). Mesenteric organs made a 37% contribution, and the liver made a 5% contribution to the adjusted total body spillover of NE. Thus, a substantial proportion of total body sympathetic outflow is directed towards mesenteric organs; this is obscured by efficient hepatic extraction of NE (86+/-6%) when measurements are restricted to arterial and hepatic venous plasma.

Spinal epidural metastasis: implications for spinal analgesia to treat "refractory" cancer pain.

Two hundred one consecutive patients with cancer pain who received intrathecal pain treatment between 1985 and 1993 were included in this retrospective study undertaken to test the hypothesis that epidural metastasis is a common cause of "refractory" cancer pain and that its presence may affect the efficacy and the complication rates of intraspinal pain treatment. Fifty-seven (approximately 28%) patients were investigated by metrizamide myelography, computerized tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), laminectomy, or neurohistopathology. Epidural metastases were found in 40 (70%) and spinal stenosis in 33 (approximately 58%); 7 patients with total and 26 with partial occlusion of the spinal canal. Presence of epidural metastasis affected catheter insertion complications, daily dosages, and complications of the intrathecal pain treatment only when it was associated with spinal canal stenosis (partial or total). During the period of the intrathecal treatment, the patients with confirmed epidural metastasis and total spinal canal stenosis needed significantly (P < 0.05) higher daily doses of opioid (means = 77 +/- 103 versus 22 +/- 29 mg) and intrathecal bupivacaine (means = 65 +/- 44 versus 33 +/- 20 mg) and had significantly (P < 0.05) higher rates (14% versus 0%) of radicular pain at injection and poor distribution of analgesia than those without epidural metastasis and spinal canal stenosis. In contrast, the rate of occurrence of post-dural puncture headache was significantly (P < 0.05) lower in patients with partial (4%) and total (14%) spinal stenosis than in those without (29%). Unexpected paraplegia occurred in four patients and was due to accidental injury during attempted dural puncture (N = 1) and collapse (due to cerebrospinal fluid leakage leading to "medullary coning" of an unknown epidural metastasis (N = 3).

Epidural versus intrathecal morphine-bupivacaine: assessment of consecutive treatments in advanced cancer pain.

Twenty-five patients with multifocal and multitype (somatic, visceral, and neurogenic) advanced cancer pain who experienced severe pain despite extradural (ED) morphine and bupivacaine were converted to intrathecal (IT) morphine and bupivacaine. The consecutive ED and IT periods (2-174 days, median = 50 days, and 1-305 days, median = 37 days, respectively) were assessed in clinical terms (daily analgesic dosages giving acceptable pain relief and quality of life expressed as sleeping hours and walking/daily activities). With the IT treatment, the total (all routes) opiate consumption and the daily doses of spinal morphine and spinal bupivacaine decreased significantly at the beginning of the treatment compared to the ED period, and continued to be significantly reduced for up to 1 wk for spinal opiate and bupivacaine and 6 mo for total opiate. The spinal opiate and bupivacaine doses were still lower in 50% of the patients at the end of the IT treatment compared to the end of the ED period. When final ED versus initial (2nd day) IT doses were assessed, the daily median dose ratios were 7.5 for total opiate and 4 for both spinal opiate and bupivacaine. Subsequently, lower daily volumes and higher concentrations were needed for IT administration of the drugs. During the first month of the IT treatment, sleeping and walking scores improved compared to ED treatment. Thus, the IT treatment gave more satisfactory pain relief, and--because of lower daily doses and volume--proved to be more suitable for treatment at home (continuous infusion from external pumps) than the ED treatment.

Complications of intrathecal opioids and bupivacaine in the treatment of "refractory" cancer pain.

OBJECTIVE: To test the concept that externalized tunneled intrathecal catheters lead to a high risk of complications, such as meningitis and epidural abscess, and therefore should not be used for durations of intrathecal pain treatment of > 1 week. DESIGN: Prospective, cohort, nonrandomized, consecutive, historical control trial. SETTING: Tertiary care center, institutional practice, hospitalized and ambulatory care. PATIENTS: Two hundred adults (107 women, 93 men) with refractory cancer pain treated for 1-575 (median, 33; total, 14,485) days; 79 patients were treated at home for 2-226 (median, 36; total, 4,711) days. All patients had died by the close of the study. INTERVENTIONS: Insertion of intrathecal tunneled nylon (Portex) catheters (223 in 200 patients) with Millipore filters. The catheter hubs were securely fixed to the skin with steel sutures. Standardized care after insertion: (a) daily phone contact with the patients, their families, or the nurses in charge; (b) weekly dressing change at the tunnel outlet by the nurses; (c) refilling of the infusion containers by the nurses; (d) exchange of the infusion systems when empty (within 1 month) and of the antibacterial filter once a month by specially instructed Pain Department nurses. All contact between the connections of the syringes, cassettes, and needles with the operator's hands was carefully avoided during filling and refilling of the infusion containers and exchange of the antibacterial filters; no other aseptic precautions were taken. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We recorded the rates of perfect function and complications of the systems. The rates of complications recorded in this study with externalized tunneled intrathecal catheters are discussed and compared with the rates reported in the literature with externalized (tunneled and non-tunneled) epidural and intrathecal catheters, as well as with internalized (both epidural and intrathecal) catheters connected to subcutaneous ports, reservoirs, and pumps. RESULTS: The following rates (as a percentage of number of patients) of perfect function and complications of the systems were recorded (the ranges of rates reported in the literature are given in parentheses): perfect function of the system, 93% (31-90%); accidental injury of an unknown epidural tumor followed by an epidural hematoma, 0.5% (0-6%); skin breakdown at the insertion site, 2% (2-50%); postdural puncture headache, 15.5% (10%); external leakage of CSF, 3.5% (4-27%); CSF hygroma ("pseudomeningocele"), 1.5% (4-6.25%); hearing loss and Ménière-like syndrome, 0% (12%); pain on injection, 0% with continuous infusion and 4.5% with intermittent injections (3-36% with intermittent injections); catheter tip dislodgement, 1.5% (6-33%); catheter (system) occlusion, 1% (3-12%); accidental catheter withdrawal, 4% (3-22%); catheter (system) leakage, 1.5% (2.1-26.6%); all mechanical complications, 8.5% (10-44%); local (catheter entry site) infection, 0.5% (2-33%); catheter track infection, 0% (6-25%); epidural abscess, 0% (0.6-25%); meningitis, 0.5% (1-25%); systemic infection, 0% (3%); incidence of all infections (n/treatment days), 1/7,242 (1/168-1/2,446). CONCLUSIONS: In our population and with the technique of insertion and care reported here, the use of externalized tunneled intrathecal catheters has not been associated with higher rates of complications when compared with earlier reported rates of externalized epidural catheters and internalized (both epidural and intrathecal) catheters connected to subcutaneously implanted ports, reservoirs, and pumps. The opinion that the use of externalized tunneled intrathecal catheters should be restricted only to patients who need pain treatment for < 1 week (because of the potential risk of infection, particularly meningitis and epidural abscess) is unfounded.

Continuous infusion of opioid and bupivacaine by externalized intrathecal catheters in long-term treatment of "refractory" nonmalignant pain.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the possibility of obtaining pain relief by continuous intrathecal infusion of bupivacaine and opioid in patients with intractable nonmalignant pain. DESIGN: Prospective, cohort, nonrandomized, consecutive trial. SETTING: Tertiary care center, institutional practice, hospitalized, and ambulatory care. PATIENTS: A total of 90 patients, 40 men and 50 women, 20 to 96 years old (median, 70 years), with various nonmalignant "refractory" pain conditions lasting for 0.3 to 50 years (median, 3 years) with nociceptive (n = 9), neurogenic/neuropathic (n = 17), and mixed pain (n = 64) were consecutively included in the study when (a) the pain dominated their lives totally, (b) other methods failed to provide acceptable pain relief, and (c) unacceptable side effects from opioids had occurred. Moribund patients and those with overt psychoses at the time of the assessment were excluded from the study. INTERVENTIONS: (a) Insertion of externalized, tunnelled intrathecal catheters (101 in 90 patients). (b) Intrathecal infusion of opioid (morphine 0.5 mg/ml, or buprenorphine 0.015 mg/ml, and/or bupivacaine 4.75-5.0 mg/ml) from external electronic pumps was started in the operating room at a basic rate of 0.2 ml/hour, with optional bolus doses (0.1 ml 1-4 times/hour) by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). Thereafter, the daily volumes were tailored to give the patients satisfactory to excellent (60-100%) pain relief, with acceptable side effects from the infused drugs, by increase or decrease of the basic rates and/or of the bolus doses, and their timing. (c) Supervision of the patients for 24 hours after catheterization in the postoperative ward. (d) Daily phone contact with the patients, their families, or the nurses in charge. (e) The patients had ad libitum access to nonopioid analgesics/sedatives and to opioids administered by various routes, until they obtained satisfactory pain and anxiolytic relief. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (a) Pain intensity (visual analog scores 0-10) and pain relief (0-100%). (b) Daily dosages (opioid administered by intrathecal and other routes, and intrathecal bupivacaine). (c) Scores (0-5) of nonopioid analgesics, gait and ambulation, duration of nocturnal sleep, and (d) rates of adverse effects. RESULTS: During the intrathecal period [range, 3-1,706 days; median, 60 days; totaling 14,686 days, 7,460 (50% of which were spent at home)], 86 patients (approximately 95%) obtained acceptable (60-100%) pain relief. The nocturnal sleep duration increased from <4 to 7 hours (median values), nonopioid analgesic and sedative daily consumption became approximately two times lower, whereas the gait ability and ambulation patterns remained practically unchanged. Five patients still had ongoing treatment after durations of 30 to 1,707 (median, 206) days at the close of the study. In the remaining 85 patients, the intrathecal treatment was terminated because of patients' death (n = 23), replacement of the intrathecal treatment by dorsal column stimulation (n = 1), pain resolution (n = 32), refusal to continue the intrathecal treatment (n = 19), lack of cooperation due to delirium or to manipulation of the pump (n = 8), and loss of efficacy of the intrathecal treatment (n = 2). Thus, in the long run, the intrathecal treatment failed in 29 of the 85 patients with terminated treatment (34%). The principal side-effects and complications, except those attributed to the dural puncture, the equipment, and the long-term catheterization of the subarachnoid space, which are presented separately, were severe bradypnea (n = 1), transient paresthesiae (n = 26), short-lasting pareses (n = 16), temporary urine retention (n = 34), episodic orthostatic arterial hypotension (n = 11), and attempted suicide (n = 5, 3 of which were successful). No neurologic sequelae or death could be attributed to the intrathecal procedure. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

Efficacy and technical complications of long-term continuous intraspinal infusions of opioid and/or bupivacaine in refractory nonmalignant pain: a comparison between the epidural and the intrathecal approach with externalized or implanted catheters and infusion pumps.

OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacies, failure rates, and technical complication rates of intraspinal treatments in patients with "refractory" nonmalignant pain conditions in relation to the approach (epidural/intrathecal), the drug (opioid/opioid-bupivacaine or bupivacaine), and the type of system used (externalized/internalized). In these comparisons, recent data from a companion paper (Nitescu et al., Clin J Pain 1998;14:17-28) were used as a reference to be compared with data from a literature review of different intraspinal treatment modalities in nonmalignant pain. DESIGN: Prospective, cohort, nonrandomized, consecutive trial. SETTING: Tertiary care center, institutional practice, hospitalized, and ambulatory care. PATIENTS: Five groups according to treatment modality: (a) externalized, long-term intrathecal nylon catheters, connected to external, electronic infusion pumps (companion paper), n = 90; (b) internalized, long-term intrathecal catheters (Silastic) connected to implanted SynchroMed pumps, n = 330 (literature review); (c) externalized, "short-term" epidural catheters for "temporary" infusions, n = 565 (literature review); (d) externalized, long-term epidural catheters, n = 50 (literature review); (e) internalized, long-term epidural catheters, n = 111, connected to implanted systems: Port-A-Cath injection ports, n = 58; Infusaid pumps, n = 46; and SynchroMed pumps, n = 7 (literature review). INTERVENTIONS: In reviewing the literature, we found 21 studies that reported on the intraspinal (epidural or intrathecal) administration of opioids with or without local anesthetics (usually bupivacaine). These studies were analyzed with respect to the rates of the variables satisfactory pain relief (efficacy), failures, and technical complications. A rate is the number of observations of a variable divided by the number of patients or the number of catheters or infusion systems, as logically indicated (e.g., the numbers of complications, such as epidural abscess and meningitis, were related to the number of patients and those of catheter occlusion or leakage to the number of the catheters). The variables were expressed as the means of the rates of a variable from studies belonging to various treatment modalities: approach (epidural vs. intrathecal), duration (short vs. long term), drugs administered intraspinally (opioid vs. opioid and/or local anesthetic), and type of infusion system (externalized vs. internalized). Further, the sums of all observations of one variable in different studies with various treatment modalities were related to the corresponding sums of the patients (alternatively, catheters or implanted devices). The proportions of these sums were tested for significance in relation to treatment modality. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparative rates of successful intraspinal treatment and its failures and complications. RESULTS: (a) The intrathecal approach, compared with the epidural approach, was associated with higher rates of satisfactory pain relief for both externalized (86/90, 95% vs. 17/40, 42.5%, p < .0001) and internalized (295/336, 89% vs. 33/56, 59%, p < .0001) catheters; higher rates of treatment failures with externalized epidural catheters than with internalized intrathecal catheters (24/47, 51%, vs. 36/338, 11%, p < .0001); lower rates of treatment failures with internalized intrathecal catheters than with internalized epidural catheters (36/338, 11% vs. 29/76, 38%, p < .0001); higher rates of system replacement with internalized epidural catheters than with internalized intrathecal catheters (23/32, 72% vs. 6/49, 12%, p < .0001; higher rates of system removal with internalized epidural catheters than with internalized intrathecal catheters (22/49, 45% vs. 5/49, 10%, p < .001); higher rates of catheter-related complications with epidural than with intrathecal catheters (dislodgement 13/126, approximately 10% vs. 6/150, 4%, p < .05; leakage 5/51, approximately 10% vs. 1/116, 0.9%, p < .05; obstruction 2

Bacteriology, drug stability and exchange of percutaneous delivery systems and antibacterial filters in long-term intrathecal infusion of opioid drugs and bupivacaine in "refractory" pain.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a basis for recommendations on the exchange of containers (syringes and cassettes) and antibacterial filters, and for choice of administration device in patients with "refractory" pain treated with long-term percutaneous intrathecal (IT) infusions of opioid (morphine or buprenorphine) and bupivacaine mixtures. DESIGN: Prospective, cohort, nonrandomized control trial-case series, with consecutive sample, no standard criterion, and cost-benefit analysis. SETTING: Tertiary care center, institutional practice as well as hospitalized and ambulatory care. PATIENTS: Eighty-nine (51 women and 38 men); 81 with malignant pain and 8 with benign "refractory" pain. INTERVENTIONS: (a) The chemical stability of the drugs in the containers during 30 days. (b) The results of bacteriologic culture of the residual volumes of the analgesic mixtures from used and reused (1-16 times) syringes (n = 135) and cassettes (n = 258), and of 5 ml of sterile isotonic saline filtered through the used Millipore filters (n = 149). The bacteriologic samples from the 89 patients were taken after 1-40 (median = 7), 1-86 (median = 20), and 5-78 (median = 31) days of IT treatment, respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Chemical stability: buprenorphine and bupivacaine concentrations-liquid chromatography; morphine concentrations--gas chromatography. Bacteriologic cultures: standard laboratory procedures. The hypothesis (repeated use of the infusion systems and their exchange once a month does not significantly affect drug concentrations or increase the infection risk) was elaborated before data collection began. RESULTS: The bupivacaine-opioid mixtures were found to be chemically stable within 3-10% of the original doses up to 30 days. Seventeen cultures (from five syringes, six cassettes, and six filters) in 13 patients (having no signs of meningeal infection) were found to be colonized with Staphylococcus aureus (n = 4), coagulase negative staphylococci (n = 7), viridans streptococci (n = 3), Neisseria sp (n = 4), Corynebacterium sp (n = 4), Enterobacter sp (n = 2), Klebsiella sp (n = 3), gram-negative bacilli (n = 1), and yeasts (n = 2). The place of IT treatment, its duration, and patient-related infection risk factors (age; malignancy; diabetes; presence of a colostomy, pyelostomy, or indwelling urinary catheter; and the presence and location of infection foci) were not related to the results of the cultures. However, 9 of the 17 positive cultures came from patients with skin ulcers, a notable incidence. The positive cultures had no connection with the cultured item, its in-use duration, the number of times of reuse, the analgesic drugs used, their concentrations or the presence of preservatives (sodium metabisulfite and sodium edetate), or the antiseptic agent (70% ethanol or 0.5% chlorhexidine gluconate) used during bacteriologic sampling. The bacterial growth was sparse in 14 and massive in 3 of the 17 positive cultures. One item (filter) from one patient with meningitis was sterile. CONCLUSIONS: In our population, exchange of the infusion systems when they are empty (within 1 month) and of the antibacterial filters once a month does not appear to affect the concentrations of, or increase the infection risk from, the opioid-bupivacaine mixtures. The risk of bacterial contamination/colonization of the syringes from syringe drivers does not seem to be higher than that of cassettes from external portable pumps.

Long-term, open catheterization of the spinal subarachnoid space for continuous infusion of narcotic and bupivacaine in patients with "refractory" cancer pain. A technique of catheterization and its problems and complications.

The technique of long-term, open catheterization of the spinal subarachnoid space for infusion of analgesics in patients with refractory cancer pain is sparsely reported in the literature. We report on a technique using 18G Portex nylon catheters and 16G-17G Tuohy needles, and its problems and complications. One hundred fifty-seven catheters were inserted in 142 patients, in most of them (79%) under deep sedation and local anesthesia. Attempts were made to place the catheter tip as close to the painful segments as possible. The catheters were tunneled subcutaneously (87% of them paravertebrally, over the shoulder, and further parasternally to the third chondrocostal cartilage). The Luer connections of the catheters were fixed to the patients' skin with monofilament steel sutures of dimension 0 and connected to a bacterial filter. At the end of the procedure, 10 ml isotonic saline was injected intrathecally to prevent postspinal puncture headache. Absorbent and impermeable dressings were applied over the tunnel exit, catheter Luer connection and bacterial filter. Antibiotics were given on the day of insertion and 2 days thereafter. During the insertion procedure, the following problems and complications were encountered; two or more attempts before successful spinal-dural puncture (32%), accidental puncture of an extradural vessel (10%), difficult dural puncture (18%), absence of free dripping of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in spite of successful dural puncture (4%), blood-stained CSF (9%), radicular pain and paresthesiae (4%), difficult advancement of the catheter (6%), difficult tunneling (11%), and bleeding in the tunnel (0.7%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Comparison of 0.5% intrathecal bupivacaine with 0.5% intrathecal ropivacaine in the treatment of refractory cancer and noncancer pain conditions: results from a prospective, crossover, double-blind, randomized study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Intrathecal (IT) administration of bupivacaine (BUP) for treatment of "refractory" pain has sometimes been associated with unacceptable side effects. This study was undertaken to determine if IT-ropivacaine (ROP) can reduce the rate and intensity of these side effects e.g., urinary retention, paresthesia, and particularly, paresis with gait impairment. A prospective, crossover, double-blind, randomized study. METHODS: Twenty-one patients were enrolled, 9 dropped out of the study, and data were analyzed from 12 patients. Patients were treated by insertion of IT tunneled nylon catheters, continuous infusion of 0.5% ROP followed by 0.5% BUP or 0.5% BUP followed by 0.5% ROP solutions from an external electronic pump. Each local anesthetic was infused for 7 days, and their order of infusion randomized. The comparative efficacy of the ROP and BUP IT infusions was assessed from the daily doses of IT ROP and IT BUP, oral and parenteral opioids, and daily scores of nonopioid analgetic and sedative drug consumption. Self-reported pain intensity (visual analogue scale [VAS] mean scores) and scores of Bromage relaxation, ambulation, nocturnal sleep pattern, rates of side-effects attributable to the IT drugs, the patients' assessment of the IT ROP v the IT BUP periods of the trial, and the comparative daily cost of IT ROP v IT BUP were recorded. RESULTS: The daily doses of the local anesthetics used were 23% higher for ROP than for BUP. Further, the daily cost was approximately equals 3 times higher for ROP than for BUP. No other significant differences between IT ROP and IT BUP were found. CONCLUSION: The results of this study do not support the hypothesis that IT infusion of 0.5% ROP has advantages over IT infusion of 0.5% BUP when administered for relief of "refractory" pain.

Progressive systemic sclerosis: intrathecal pain management.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: At present, there is no reliable method for long-term treatment of severe pain from progressive systemic sclerosis (PSS) associated with Raynaud's phenomena leading to ischemia and ulcerations of the extremities. Long-term continuous intrathecal (IT) buprenorphine/bupivacaine analgesia was used in such a case. METHODS: The patient was a 71-year-old woman in whom conservative treatment, including opioids, dorsal column stimulation, and epidural bupivacaine, had failed to provide satisfactory, long-term relief for her severe lower extremity pain. An 18-gauge Portex intrathecal catheter was inserted via the L4-L5 interspace. An infusion of 4.75 mg/mL bupivacaine and 0.015 mg/mL buprenorphine was started from a portable Pharmacia-Deltec (St. Paul, MN) pump at a rate of 0.1 mL/h with optional bolus doses of 0.1 mL, 2-4 times/h by patient controlled intrathecal analgesia. The rate was adjusted to give the patient satisfactory (80-100%) pain relief. RESULTS: The IT treatment was continued with 0.1 mL (approximately 0.5 mg/h bupivacaine) for most of the time (mean dose = 18.6 mg/d). This treatment gave the patient 90-100% pain relief, which subsequently improved the quality of her life. Nocturnal sleep duration increased from 2 hours before to 7-8 hours during the IT treatment. The treatment was complicated by transient post-dural puncture headache and further by meningitis, successfully treated with parenteral and intrathecal antibiotics. Every attempt to increase the IT bupivacaine to >20 mg/d led to transient urinary retention, paresthesia, and reduced motor strength in the lower extremities accompanied by gait disturbances. The IT treatment lasted for 861 days (of which 580 days were spent at home), until the patient's death, not related to the treatment. CONCLUSION: Intrathecal infusion of buprenorphine/bupivacaine provided satisfactory long-term pain relief in a patient with PSS-associated Raynaud's phenomena, skin ulcerations, and intractable ischemic pain.

Intrathecal infusion of bupivacaine with or without buprenorphine relieved intractable pain in three patients with vertebral compression fractures caused by osteoporosis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: At present, there is no reliable method of relieving "refractory" pain in patients with compression fractures of the vertebral bodies caused by osteoporosis. We explored the possibility of relieving this type of pain by intrathecal (i.t.) infusion of bupivacaine with or without buprenorphine. METHODS: An 18-g nylon i.t. catheter was inserted via a lumbar interspace with its tip positioned at the level of the fractured vertebra from which the maximal pain originated. Bupivacaine (2.375-5.0 mg/mL) with (n = 1) or without (n = 2) buprenorphine (0.015 mg/mL) was infused through the i.t. catheter from an external electronic pump. The infusion began in the operating room at a basic rate of 0.1-0.2 mL/h, with optional bolus doses (0.1 mL, 1-4 times/h) via patient controlled analgesia. The daily dose of i.t. bupivacaine was adjusted to provide satisfactory pain relief [visual analogue scores (VAS) = 0-2 on a scale of 0-10]. RESULTS: Satisfactory pain relief was obtained with daily doses of i.t. bupivacaine ranging from 10 to 70 (mean approximately 25) mg and buprenorphine from 0.02 to 0.2 (mean = 0.15) mg. The duration of i.t. treatment was 37, 387, and 407 days, respectively. Two patients terminated the i.t. treatment when it was no longer needed. Treatment was discontinued in the third patient because of death caused by irreversible heart failure. The 2 surviving patients were still free of pain 1,074 and 1,476 days after termination of the i.t. treatment. No severe complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous intrathecal infusion of bupivacaine, with or without buprenorphine, appeared to be an effective method for the long-term treatment (months to > 1 year) of "refractory" pain from vertebral compression fractures, in this small group of patients.

Six years of continuous intrathecal infusion of opioid and bupivacaine in the treatment of refractory pain due to intrapelvic extrusion of bone cement after total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is at present no reliable method for long-term treatment of severe pain following complications of total hip arthroplasty. We explored the long-term use of continuous intrathecal opioid/bupivacaine analgesia in a case not amendable to corrective surgery. METHODS: A 77-year-old woman, having a total hip arthroplasty, developed refractory nociceptive-neuropathic pain located at the ventral and dorsal aspects of the left hip. Radiographs showed a mandarine-sized intrapelvic mass of bone cement adhering to the roof of the acetabular cup. Further surgery had been declined by the surgeon and by the patient. An 18-gauge Portex intrathecal catheter was inserted, and an intrathecal infusion of 4.75 mg/mL bupivacaine and 0.015 mg/mL buprenorphine was started from a portable Pharmacia-Deltec (St. Paul, Minnesota) pump. RESULTS: The mean daily doses during the treatment period (more than 6 years up to now) were 37 mg for bupivacaine and 0.114 mg for buprenorphine. The intrathecal treatment gave the patient 85-100% pain relief. The patient could transport herself in a wheelchair, was able to perform her own hygiene, receive visits, read, watch television, and also shop and visit restaurants. There has been no need to replace the intrathecal catheter. CONCLUSION: Intrathecal infusion of opioid/bupivacaine can provide satisfactory long-term analgesia in patients with refractory pain from the hip joint.

[Severe pain relief with intrathecal infusion. The patient controls, treatment can be provided at home]. / Svår smärta lindras med intratekal infusion. Patienten styr, behandlingen kan ges i hemmet.

Intrathecal administration of an opioid such as morphine in combination with a local anaesthetic such as bupivacaine is an effective treatment for severe cancer pain. The treatment, which can often be made available in the patient's home, provides relief from pain without unwanted sedation, when high-dose oral or parenteral morphine no longer has any effect. The patient controls the treatment, and can achieve a balance between pain relief and side-effects. The article outlines the routines established at the pain unit at Sahlgrenska Hospital in Gothenburg.

High thoracic/low cervical, long-term intrathecal (i.t.) infusion of bupivacaine alleviates "refractory" pain in patients with unstable angina pectoris. Report of 2 cases.

BACKGROUND: There is no reliable treatment for "refractory" pain from unstable angina pectoris (UAP) when epidural infusion of bupivacaine has failed to relieve it. In two such cases we explored the potential of intrathecal (i.t.) bupivacaine infusion to provide pain relief. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two female patients, 70 and 67 years. An 18-G nylon catheter was inserted intrathecally through a 17-G Tuohy needle via the T2-T3 interspace and its tip located at the height of C6-C7 vertebrae. The catheter was connected to a portable, programmable electronic pump filled with bupivacaine 5 mg/ml. The infusion started at rates of 0.1-0.2 ml/h, with optional bolus doses of 0.1-0.2 ml, 4-2 times/h, respectively, by PCA (Patients-Controlled Analgesia), and then adjusted to give the patients satisfactory (80%-100%) pain relief. RESULTS: Pain relief was obtained with doses of i.t.-bupivacaine ranging from 17 to 45 (mean = 25) mg/d. The pain intensity decreased from VAS (Visual Analogue Score) 9-10 to 0-2 out of 10. The nocturnal sleep improved from 2-4 to 6-7 h. The patients could now ambulate, walking or in a wheel-chair. The i.t.-treatment lasted 700 and 437 d, of which 540 and 343 d (respectively) were spent at home, and was terminated by: (a) the patient's death due to intracranial bleeding (1st case); (b) progressive aggravation of the unstable angina that could not be fully countered by increasing the bupivacaine dose above 1.0 mg/h due to occurrence of cerebral transient ischemic attacks, usually not correlated with orthostatic arterial hypotension but apparently facilitated by microembolization of the cerebral arteries (2nd case). CONCLUSION: I.t.-bupivacaine infusion may alleviate "refractory" pain in patients with unstable angina pectoris when epidural bupivacaine failed to do so. Its use is apparently limited by the IT-bupivacaine critical dosage (in these patients = 1.0-1.5 mg/h).

Continuous intrathecal infusion of opioid and bupivacaine in the treatment of refractory pain due to postherpetic neuralgia: a case report.

This report details the course of a 77-year-old patient suffering mild pain from operated tongue cancer and excruciating, intractable pain from thoracic (T6-T8) post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN), The mouth pain was treated with nonopioid analgesics, as the patient had personal objections to opioid treatment. All the components of the pain from his PHN (continuous burning pain, intermittent lancinating stabbing pain, and tactile allodynia) were successfully treated with an Intrathecal Infusion of buprenorphine (0.03 mg/ml) and bupivacaine (4.75 mg/ml) administered via an externalized intrathecal catheter with the tip located at T9-T10 intervertebral disc. The treatment started three months after the appearance of the herpetic eruption and lasted 294 days until the patient died of malnutrition and the progression of his tongue cancer. During treatment, he experienced satisfactory pain relief from his PHN; the mean visual analogue scores (VASmean), recorded on a scale from 0 to 10, ranged from 1 to 2, compared to 9 to 10 before starting the intrathecal treatment. Analgesia was established with 0.2-0.315 mg/day of intrathecal buprenorphine and 90-100 mg/day of intrathecal bupivacaine. His undisturbed nocturnal sleep increased from 4 to 5-6 hours. The side-effects from the bupivacaine (urine retention requiring insertion of an indwelling urinary catheter, paresthesias, and mild pareses) were recorded. The patient could ambulate without support while on 90-100 mg/day of intrathecal bupivacaine. During a series of high-pressure oxygen treatments in a pressure chamber to treat an infection at the site of his tumor, the intrathecal infusion was interrupted. Thus, repeated observation of the intervals of severe pain and of analgesia were possible.

Continuous intracisternal and high cervical intrathecal bupivacaine analgesia in refractory head and neck pain.

BACKGROUND: The upper cervical component of the spinomesencephalic tract and cranial nerves V, VII (nervus intermedius), IX, and X are involved in mechanisms of acute and chronic pain from head and neck structures. To date there is no reliable method for relief of refractory pain (i.e., pain that cannot be relieved by conventional pharmacologic therapies) from these structures. Therefore, we explored continuous intracisternal infusion of bupivacaine for the treatment of refractory pain of the head and neck. METHODS: Intracisternal catheters were inserted in 13 adults with refractory nonmalignant (n = 4) and malignant (n = 9) pain from the head, face, mouth, neck, and upper extremities; 0.5% plain bupivacaine was infused continuously at rates of 1-7 (median 1.5) mg/h with optional bolus doses of 0.5-2.0 mg 4-2 times/h. The efficacy was assessed from pain relief (daily VAS(max), VAS(min), and VAS(mean) scores 0-10), daily doses of intracisternal bupivacaine and total opioid (expressed as mg parenteral morphine-eq), amount of nocturnal sleep, and rates of adverse effects. RESULTS: The 13 patients were treated for 3-182 days (median 37, total 712 days), 3 patients being treated at home for 10-112 days (median 88, total 210 days). In one patient, the efficacy of the treatment could not be estimated because of advanced senility. Eleven of the remaining 12 patients obtained acceptable pain relief with daily doses of intracisternal bupivacaine ranging from 20 to 118 mg (median 37 mg): VAS(mean) scores decreased from 7 to 2, mean pain relief increased for 30% to 80%, total opioid daily dose decreased from 53 to 36 mg parenteral morphine-eq, and nocturnal sleep increased from 2 to >6h (all figures are median values). Speech, eating, walking, and natural functions were generally not affected. Side effects such as tiredness and malaise, somnolence and sleep, feeling of coldness in the neck and skull base, transient post-spinal puncture headache, paresthesias, hoarseness, dysphagia, transient paresis of the upper/lower extremities, episodic miosis and conjunctival hyperemia, and transient orthostatic arterial hypotension were each observed in one or two patients. No patient presented clinical evidence of phrenic nerve paralysis. There was no nausea or vomiting. No persistent neurologic deficit or death could be attributed to the intracisternal pain treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous intracisternal infusion of bupivacaine may be a useful method in exceptional, well selected patients with refractory pain from the head and neck structures. Further studies are necessary to establish the indications and the safety of the method.

Long-term intrathecal morphine and bupivacaine in patients with refractory cancer pain. Results from a morphine:bupivacaine dose regimen of 0.5:4.75 mg/ml.

BACKGROUND: There are no clinical data regarding the ratios and concentrations in which morphine and bupivacaine should be combined, when given intrathecally, to improve analgesia while decreasing adverse effects. This study was undertaken to test the clinical efficacy of a constant infusion of 0.5 mg/ml morphine plus 4.75 mg/ml bupivacaine (morphine: bupivacaine approximately 1:10), given through open intrathecal catheters. METHODS: In 53 patients, the clinical efficacy was estimated from: pain relief (visual analog scale scores 0-10); daily dosages (intrathecal and total opioid and intrathecal bupivacaine); scores (0-5) of nonopioid analgesic and sedative consumption, gait and daily activity, and amount of sleep; and rates of adverse effects. RESULTS: During the intrathecal period (7-334, median 29 days), all 53 patients obtained acceptable pain relief (visual analog scale scores 0-2 vs. 6-10 in the pre-intrathecal stage). The total opioid daily consumption decreased (median 10 vs. 120 mg), the sleep was about two times longer, the nonopioid analgesic and sedative consumption about two times lower, and the gait ability pattern was unchanged. The daily dose of intrathecal morphine (median 6 mg) and the daily intrathecal volumes (median 10 ml) were low, whereas the daily dose of intrathecal bupivacaine was relatively high (median 50 mg). Side effects potentially related to intrathecal morphine (seizures, cerebral, and spinal clonus) were not recorded. Side effects attributable to intrathecal bupivacaine (in patients not having these complications before the intrathecal treatment) occurred in the forms of late urinary retention (9 of 27), paresthesias (11 of 27), paresis/gait impairment (9 of 27), and occasional episodes of orthostatic arterial hypotension (1 of 53 patients). CONCLUSIONS: A constant intrathecal infusion with a morphine:bupivacaine ratio of approximately 1:10 and concentrations of morphine of 0.5 mg/ml and bupivacaine of 4.75 mg/ml may significantly improve the relief of refractory cancer pain with a certain risk of adverse effects (which should be balanced against pain by the patient) from the relatively high intrathecal bupivacaine doses and concentration.