Pulsed radiofrequency treatment in interventional pain management: mechanisms and potential indications—a review

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: The objective of this review is to evaluate the efficacy of Pulsed Radiofrequency (PRF) treatment in chronic pain management in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and well-designed observational studies. The physics, mechanisms of action, and biological effects are discussed to provide the scientific basis for this promising modality. METHODS: We systematically searched for clinical studies on PRF. We searched the MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE database, using the free text terms: pulsed radiofrequency, radio frequency, radiation, isothermal radiofrequency, and combination of these. We classified the information in two tables, one focusing only on RCTs, and another, containing prospective studies. Date of last electronic search was 30 May 2010. The methodological quality of the presented reports was scored using the original criteria proposed by Jadad et al. FINDINGS: We found six RCTs that evaluated the efficacy of PRF, one against corticosteroid injection, one against sham intervention, and the rest against conventional RF thermocoagulation. Two trials were conducted in patients with lower back pain due to lumbar zygapophyseal joint pain, one in cervical radicular pain, one in lumbosacral radicular pain, one in trigeminal neuralgia, and another in chronic shoulder pain. CONCLUSION: From the available evidence, the use of PRF to the dorsal root ganglion in cervical radicular pain is compelling. With regards to its lumbosacral counterpart, the use of PRF cannot be similarly advocated in view of the methodological quality of the included study. PRF application to the supracapular nerve was found to be as efficacious as intra-articular corticosteroid in patients with chronic shoulder pain. The use of PRF in lumbar facet arthropathy and trigeminal neuralgia was found to be less effective than conventional RF thermocoagulation techniques

Percutaneous Cervical Cordotomy for the Treatment of Cancer Pain: A Prospective Case Series of 52 Patients with a Long‐Term Follow‐Up

Aim: The aim of this study is to describe the effects of percutaneous cervical cordotomy (PCC) on pain, opioid consumption, adverse events, and satisfaction in palliative care patients with cancer pain after PCC until end of life. Methods: This is a prospective observational case series of 58 PCCs in 52 consecutive patients. Indication for PCC was unilateral cancer pain with a maximum numeric rating scale (NRS) of pain above 5 despite maximal conservative treatment. The PCC was fluoroscopy guided. A radiofrequency lesion was made at 95°C for 20 seconds. The pain location and pain scores, analgesic medication, the cranial and caudal borders of dermatomes hypoesthetic for pin pricks, dysesthesia, urinary retention, Horner’s syndrome, muscle strength, Karnofsky performance scale (KPS) score, patient satisfaction, hospital anxiety and distress score (HADS), and RAND 36 score were evaluated at 1 day; 1 and 6 weeks; and 3, 6, 9, 12 18, and 24 months after PCC, or until death if death occurred during the follow-up period. Results: Pain relief after PCC was intense (change in median maximum NRS from 9 to 0) and persistent. Median opioid use per day was 240 mg (145 to 565 mg) before PCC and 55 mg (0 to 120 mg) after PCC. The upper and lower borders of dermatomes hypoesthetic for pin pricks were stable over time. The most common side effects were short-term (< 1 week) neck pain (28%), dysesthesia (40%), and mild loss of muscle strength (11%). Approximately 83% of the patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the results of PCC 1 week after the procedure, and this percentage remained high in the long term. There was no significant change in the KPS score, HADS, and RAND 36 score. Conclusion: Percutaneous cervical cordotomy is an effective treatment for unilateral cancer pain. The reduction in pain, reduction in opioid consumption, and hypoesthetic area remain stable until death

Stem Cell Therapy in Spinal Cord Injury: In Vivo and Postmortem Tracking of Bone Marrow Mononuclear or Mesenchymal Stem Cells

Objective: The aim of this study was to address the question of whether bone marrow-originated mononuclear cells (MNC) or mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) induce neural regeneration when implanted intraspinally. Materials and Methods: The study design included 4 groups of mice: Group 1, non-traumatized control group; Groups 2, 3 and 4 spinal cord traumatized mice with 1 g force Tator clips, which received intralesionally either no cellular implants (Group 2), luciferase (Luc) (+) MNC (Group 3) or MSC (Group 4) obtained from CMV-Luc or beta-actin Luc donor transgenic mice. Following the surgery until decapitation, periodical radioluminescence imaging (RLI) and Basso Mouse Scale (BMS) evaluations was performed to monitor neural activity. Postmortem immunohistochemical techniques were used to analyze the fate of donor type implanted cells. Results: All mice of Groups 3 and 4 showed various degrees of improvement in the BMS scores, whereas there was no change in Groups 1 and 2. The functional improvement was significantly better in Group 4 compared to Group 3 (18 vs 8, p = 0. 002). The immunohistochemical staining demonstrated GFP + Luc + neuronal/glial cells that were also positive with one or more of these markers: nestin, myelin associated glycoprotein, microtubule associated protein or myelin oligodendrocyte specific protein, which is considered as indicator of donor type neuronal regeneration. Frequency of donor type neuronal cells; Luc + signals and median BMS scores were observed 48-64 % and 68-72 %; 44-80 %; 8 and 18 within Groups III and IV respectively. Discussion: MSCs were more effective than MNC in obtaining neuronal recovery. Substantial but incomplete functional improvement was associated with donor type in vivo imaging signals more frequently than the number of neuronal cells expressing donor markers in spinal cord sections in vitro. Our results are in favor of functional recovery arising from both donor MSC and MNCs, contributing to direct neuronal regeneration and additional indirect mechanisms. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

Stem cell therapy in spinal cord injury: in vivo and postmortem tracking of bone marrow mononuclear or mesenchymal stem cells.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to address the question of whether bone marrow-originated mononuclear cells (MNC) or mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) induce neural regeneration when implanted intraspinally. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study design included 4 groups of mice: Group 1, non-traumatized control group; Groups 2, 3 and 4 spinal cord traumatized mice with 1 g force Tator clips, which received intralesionally either no cellular implants (Group 2), luciferase (Luc) (+) MNC (Group 3) or MSC (Group 4) obtained from CMV-Luc or beta-actin Luc donor transgenic mice. Following the surgery until decapitation, periodical radioluminescence imaging (RLI) and Basso Mouse Scale (BMS) evaluations was performed to monitor neural activity. Postmortem immunohistochemical techniques were used to analyze the fate of donor type implanted cells. RESULTS: All mice of Groups 3 and 4 showed various degrees of improvement in the BMS scores, whereas there was no change in Groups 1 and 2. The functional improvement was significantly better in Group 4 compared to Group 3 (18 vs 8, p=0.002). The immunohistochemical staining demonstrated GFP(+)Luc(+) neuronal/glial cells that were also positive with one or more of these markers: nestin, myelin associated glycoprotein, microtubule associated protein or myelin oligodendrocyte specific protein, which is considered as indicator of donor type neuronal regeneration. Frequency of donor type neuronal cells; Luc + signals and median BMS scores were observed 48-64% and 68-72%; 44-80%; 8 and 18 within Groups III and IV respectively. DISCUSSION: MSCs were more effective than MNC in obtaining neuronal recovery. Substantial but incomplete functional improvement was associated with donor type in vivo imaging signals more frequently than the number of neuronal cells expressing donor markers in spinal cord sections in vitro. Our results are in favor of functional recovery arising from both donor MSC and MNCs, contributing to direct neuronal regeneration and additional indirect mechanisms