Intrathecal Opioids for Chronic Pain: A Call for Evidence

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/93560/1/j.1526-4637.2012.01456.x.pd

Intrathecal Opioids for Chronic Pain: A Call for Evidence

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/109561/1/pme12576.pd

Topical diclofenac epolamine patch 1.3% for treatment of acute pain caused by soft tissue injury

Acute pain caused by musculoskeletal disorders is very common and has a significant negative impact on quality-of-life and societal costs. Many types of acute pain have been managed with traditional oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (coxibs). Data from prospective, randomised controlled clinical trials and postmarketing surveillance indicate that use of oral traditional NSAIDs and coxibs is associated with an elevated risk of developing gastrointestinal, renovascular and/or cardiovascular adverse events (AEs). Increasing awareness of the AEs associated with NSAID therapy, including coxibs, has led many physicians and patients to reconsider use of these drugs and look for alternative treatment options. Treatment with NSAIDs via the topical route of administration has been shown to provide clinically effective analgesia at the site of application while minimising systemic absorption. The anti-inflammatory and analgesic potency of the traditional oral NSAID diclofenac, along with its physicochemical properties, makes it well suited for topical delivery. Several topical formulations of diclofenac have been developed. A topical patch containing diclofenac epolamine 1.3% (DETP, FLECTOR® Patch), approved for use in Europe in 1993, has recently been approved for use in the United States and is indicated for the treatment of acute pain caused by minor strains, sprains and contusions. In this article, we review the available clinical trial data for this product in the treatment of pain caused by soft tissue injury

Topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for management of osteoarthritis in long-term care patients

Osteoarthritis is common in patients ≥65 years of age. Although nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are often prescribed for osteoarthritis pain, they pose age-related cardiovascular, renal, and gastrointestinal risks. Two topical NSAIDs, diclofenac sodium 1% gel (DSG) and diclofenac sodium 1.5% in 45.5% dimethylsulfoxide solution (D-DMSO), are approved in the US for the treatment of osteoarthritis pain. Topical NSAIDs have shown efficacy and safety in knee (DSG, D-DMSO) and hand (DSG) osteoarthritis. Analyses of data from randomized controlled trials of DSG in hand and knee osteoarthritis demonstrate significant improvement of pain and function in both younger patients (<65 years) and older patients (≥65 years) and suggest good safety and tolerability. However, long-term safety data in older patients are limited. Topical NSAIDs can ease medication administration and help address barriers to pain management in older patients, such as taking multiple medications and inability to swallow, and are a valuable option for long-term care providers

Human keratinocytes are vanilloid resistant

BACKGROUND: Use of capsaicin or resiniferatoxin (RTX) as analgesics is an attractive therapeutic option. RTX opens the cation channel inflammatory pain/vanilloid receptor type 1 (TRPV1) permanently and selectively removes nociceptive neurons by Ca(2+)-cytotoxicity. Paradoxically, not only nociceptors, but non-neuronal cells, including keratinocytes express full length TRPV1 mRNA, while patient dogs and experimental animals that underwent topical treatment or anatomically targeted molecular surgery have shown neither obvious behavioral, nor pathological side effects. METHODS: To address this paradox, we assessed the vanilloid sensitivity of the HaCaT human keratinocyte cell line and primary keratinocytes from skin biopsies. RESULTS: Although both cell types express TRPV1 mRNA, neither responded to vanilloids with Ca(2+)-cytotoxicity. Only ectopic overproduction of TRPV1 rendered HaCaT cells sensitive to low doses (1-50 nM) of vanilloids. The TRPV1-mediated and non-receptor specific Ca(2+)-cytotoxicity ([RTX]>15 microM) could clearly be distinguished, thus keratinocytes were indeed resistant to vanilloid-induced, TRPV1-mediated Ca(2+)-entry. Having a wider therapeutic window than capsaicin, RTX was effective in subnanomolar range, but even micromolar concentrations could not kill human keratinocytes. Keratinocytes showed orders of magnitudes lower TRPV1 mRNA level than sensory ganglions, the bona fide therapeutic targets in human pain management. In addition to TRPV1, TRPV1b, a dominant negative splice variant was also noted in keratinocytes. CONCLUSION: TRPV1B expression, together with low TRPV1 expression, may explain the vanilloid paradox: even genuinely TRPV1 mRNA positive cells can be spared with therapeutic (up to micromolar) doses of RTX. This additional safety information might be useful for planning future human clinical trials

4. Painful diabetic polyneuropathy

Introduction: Pain as a symptom of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) significantly lowers quality of life, increases mortality and is the main reason for patients with diabetes to seek medical attention. The number of people suffering from painful diabetic polyneuropathy (PDPN) has increased significantly over the past decades. Methods: The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic polyneuropathy was retrieved and summarized. Results: The etiology of PDPN is complex, with primary damage to peripheral nociceptors and altered spinal and supra-spinal modulation. To achieve better patient outcomes, the mode of diagnosis and treatment of PDPN evolves toward more precise pain-phenotyping and genotyping based on patient-specific characteristics, new diagnostic tools, and prior response to pharmacological treatments. According to the Toronto Diabetic Neuropathy Expert Group, a presumptive diagnosis of “probable PDPN” is sufficient to initiate treatment. Proper control of plasma glucose levels, and prevention of risk factors are essential in the treatment of PDPN. Mechanism-based pharmacological treatment should be initiated as early as possible. If symptomatic pharmacologic treatment fails, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) should be considered. In isolated cases, where symptomatic pharmacologic treatment and SCS are unsuccessful or cannot be used, sympathetic lumbar chain neurolysis and/or radiofrequency ablation (SLCN/SLCRF), dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRGs) or posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) may be considered. However, it is recommended that these treatments be applied only in a study setting in a center of expertise. Conclusions: The diagnosis of PDPN evolves toward pheno-and genotyping and treatment should be mechanism-based.</p

Predicting the Collapse of Pain Medicine Using the Economic Recession of 2008 as a Comparator: Lessons Remain Unlearned

Sayed E Wahezi,1 Corey W Hunter,2 Farshad M Ahadian,3 Charles E Argoff,4 Michael E Schatman5,6 1Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA; 2Ainsworth Institute of Pain Management, New York, NY, USA; 3Department of Anesthesiology, Center for Pain and Palliative Medicine, University of California, San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, CA, USA; 4Department of Neurology, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY, USA; 5Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Care and Pain Medicine, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA; 6Department of Population Health – Division of Medical Ethics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, USACorrespondence: Sayed E Wahezi, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Montefiore Medical Center, 1250 Waters Place, Tower &num;2 8th Floor, Bronx, NY, 10461, USA, Tel +1 718-920-7246, Fax +1 929-263-3950, Email [email protected]: The last decade has seen a boom in pain medicine, basic science and interventional pain management. Concomitantly, there is a need to educate trainees, young attendings, and seasoned attendings on these innovations. There has been a growth in the number of societies that represent pain medicine physicians, each with its own philosophy and guiding principles. The variety of thought within pain management, within the various groups that practice this field, and amongst the societies which protect those missions inherently creates divergence and isolation within these different communities. There is the enormous opportunity for our field to grow, but we need the voices of all different specialties and sub-specialties which practice pain medicine to collectively design the future of our emerging field. The explosion of revolutionary percutaneous surgeries, medications, psychotherapy, and research and development in our field has outpaced the ability of payers to fully embrace them. There is an increased number of pain practitioners using novel therapies, postgraduate training programs do not adequately train users in these techniques thereby creating a potential for sub-optimal outcomes. In part, this is a reason why payers for many of our more novel treatments have decreased patient access or eliminated remuneration for some of them. We believe that society-based collaborative regulation of education, research, and treatment guidelines is needed to improve visibility for payers and end users who provide these treatments. Furthermore, postgraduate chronic pain fellowship education has been deemed by many to be insufficient to educate on all of the necessary requirements needed for the independent practice of pain medicine, especially the consummation of newer technologies. Here, we draw comparison with this tenuous stage in pain management history with the last United States recession to remind us of how poor institutional regulation and neglect for long-term growth hampers a community.Keywords: fellowship, training, futur

High-frequency spinal cord stimulation at 10 kHz for the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy: design of a multicenter, randomized controlled trial (SENZA-PDN)

Background: Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN), a debilitating and progressive chronic pain condition that significantly impacts quality of life, is one of the common complications seen with long-standing diabetes mellitus. Neither pharmacological treatments nor low-frequency spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has provided significant and long-term pain relief for patients with PDN. This study aims to document the value of 10-kHz SCS in addition to conventional medical management (CMM) compared with CMM alone in patients with refractory PDN. Methods: In a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (SENZA-PDN), 216 subjects with PDN will be assigned 1:1 to receive 10-kHz SCS combined with CMM or CMM alone after appropriate institutional review board approvals and followed for 24 months. Key inclusion criteria include (1) symptoms of PDN for at least 12 months, (2) average pain intensity of at least 5 cm—on a 0- to 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS)—in the lower limbs, and (3) an appropriate candidate for SCS. Key exclusion criteria include (1) large or gangrenous ulcers or (2) average pain intensity of at least 3 cm on VAS in the upper limbs or both. Along with pain VAS, neurological assessments, health-related quality of life, sleep quality, and patient satisfaction will be captured. The primary endpoint comparing responder rates (≥50% pain relief) and safety rates between the treatment groups will be assessed at 3 months. Several secondary endpoints will also be reported on. Discussion: Enrollment commenced in 2017 and was completed in 2019. This study will help to determine whether 10-kHz SCS improves clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life and is a cost-effective treatment for PDN that is refractory to CMM

Telemedicine During COVID-19 and Beyond: A Practical Guide and Best Practices Multidisciplinary Approach for the Orthopedic and Neurologic Pain Physical Examination.

BACKGROUND:The COVID pandemic has impacted almost every aspect of human interaction, causing global changes in financial, health care, and social environments for the foreseeable future. More than 1.3 million of the 4 million cases of COVID-19 confirmed globally as of May 2020 have been identified in the United States, testing the capacity and resilience of our hospitals and health care workers. The impacts of the ongoing pandemic, caused by a novel strain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), have far-reaching implications for the future of our health care system and how we deliver routine care to patients. The adoption of social distancing during this pandemic has demonstrated efficacy in controlling the spread of this virus and has been the only proven means of infection control thus far. Social distancing has prompted hospital closures and the reduction of all non-COVID clinical visits, causing widespread financial despair to many outpatient centers. However, the need to treat patients for non-COVID problems remains important despite this pandemic, as care must continue to be delivered to patients despite their ability or desire to report to outpatient centers for their general care. Our national health care system has realized this need and has incentivized providers to adopt distance-based care in the form of telemedicine and video medicine visits. Many institutions have since incorporated these into their practices without financial penalty because of Medicare\u27s 1135 waiver, which currently reimburses telemedicine at the same rate as evaluation and management codes (E/M Codes). Although the financial burden has been alleviated by this policy, the practitioner remains accountable for providing proper assessment with this new modality of health care delivery. This is a challenge for most physicians, so our team of national experts has created a reference guide for musculoskeletal and neurologic examination selection to retrofit into the telemedicine experience. OBJECTIVES:To describe and illustrate musculoskeletal and neurologic examination techniques that can be used effectively in telemedicine. STUDY DESIGN:Consensus-based multispecialty guidelines. SETTING:Tertiary care center. METHODS:Literature review of the neck, shoulder, elbow, wrist, hand, lumbar, hip, and knee physical examinations were performed. A multidisciplinary team comprised of physical medicine and rehabilitation, orthopedics, rheumatology, neurology, and anesthesia experts evaluated each examination and provided consensus opinion to select the examinations most appropriate for telemedicine evaluation. The team also provided consensus opinion on how to modify some examinations to incorporate into a nonhealth care office setting. RESULTS:Sixty-nine examinations were selected by the consensus team. Household objects were identified that modified standard and validated examinations, which could facilitate the examinations.The consensus review team did not believe that the modified tests altered the validity of the standardized tests. LIMITATIONS:Examinations selected are not validated for telemedicine. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were not performed. CONCLUSIONS:The physical examination is an essential component for sound clinical judgment and patient care planning. The physical examinations described in this manuscript provide a comprehensive framework for the musculoskeletal and neurologic examination, which has been vetted by a committee of national experts for incorporation into the telemedicine evaluation