Non-Pharmacological Management of Painful Peripheral Neuropathies: A Systematic Review.

Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) is defined as the neuropathic pain that arises either acutely or in the chronic phase of a lesion or disease affecting the peripheral nervous system. PNP is associated with a remarkable disease burden, and there is an increasing demand for new therapies to be used in isolation or combination with currently available treatments. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current evidence, derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assess non-pharmacological interventions for the treatment of PNP.After a systematic Medline search, we identified 18 papers eligible to be included.The currently best available evidence (level II of evidence) exist for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy. In particular, spinal cord stimulation as adjuvant to conventional medical treatment can be effectively used for the management of patients with refractory pain. Similarly, adjuvant repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex is effective in reducing the overall pain intensity, whereas adjuvant static magnetic field therapy can lead to a significant decrease in exercise-induced pain. Weaker evidence (level III of evidence) exists for the use of acupuncture as a monotherapy and neurofeedback, either as an add-on or a monotherapy approach, for treatment of painful chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy CONCLUSIONS: Future RCTs should be conducted to shed more light in the use of non-pharmacological approaches in patients with PNP

The Diagnostic Odyssey of Patients with Chronic Neuropathic Pain—Expert Opinion of Greek Pain Specialists

The diagnosis of chronic neuropathic pain requires a laborious process and can be a very long journey for the patients, one that can be characterized as an “odyssey.” Our aim was to describe the “diagnostic odyssey” associated with chronic neuropathic pain in the Greek context. Specialized clinicians working at dedicated chronic pain and palliative care centers were asked to participate in a survey regarding the diagnostic process in Greece. In total, 44 respondents provided information on the organization of their centers, the diagnostic process, and the perceived obstacles involved in the diagnosis of chronic neuropathic pain. Most respondents reported that their centers were not fully or efficiently organized and believed that additional specialized healthcare personnel should be employed. Raising public awareness about the existence of such centers was also considered key. The two main obstacles in reaching a diagnosis were the difficulty non-experts had in recognizing chronic neuropathic pain and the lack of acknowledgement that chronic neuropathic pain is a condition that needs to be addressed. When considering these responses in light of the extended socioeconomic burden associated with chronic neuropathic pain, efforts should be made to limit the “diagnostic odyssey” of chronic neuropathic pain in Greece. The aim of this study is to explore the experience of patients with chronic neuropathic pain in Greece from the viewpoint of pain specialists. A better organization of pain and palliative care centers, facilitation of communication with previously treating clinicians, increased personnel, utilization of a chronic pain registry, and guidelines development can aid in this venture. Keypoints: The diagnosis of chronic neuropathic pain in Greece is a laborious and time-consuming process that needs to be refined; Greek clinicians believe that their centers were not fully or efficiently organized and think that additional specialized healthcare personnel should be employed; Patient comorbidities and retards in visiting a clinic at the onset of symptoms delay the diagnosis of neuropathic pain and may complicate subsequent care; The diagnostic delay has been reported as three years between the onset of symptoms and seeking general medical help and another nine years before a referral to a pain specialist; Neuropathic pain is associated with patient distress and socioeconomic burdens, and diagnostic delays prolong the condition, may allow it to worsen, and utilize valuable healthcare resources without providing effective solutions

The Diagnostic Odyssey of Patients with Chronic Neuropathic Pain—Expert Opinion of Greek Pain Specialists

The diagnosis of chronic neuropathic pain requires a laborious process and can be a very long journey for the patients, one that can be characterized as an “odyssey.” Our aim was to describe the “diagnostic odyssey” associated with chronic neuropathic pain in the Greek context. Specialized clinicians working at dedicated chronic pain and palliative care centers were asked to participate in a survey regarding the diagnostic process in Greece. In total, 44 respondents provided information on the organization of their centers, the diagnostic process, and the perceived obstacles involved in the diagnosis of chronic neuropathic pain. Most respondents reported that their centers were not fully or efficiently organized and believed that additional specialized healthcare personnel should be employed. Raising public awareness about the existence of such centers was also considered key. The two main obstacles in reaching a diagnosis were the difficulty non-experts had in recognizing chronic neuropathic pain and the lack of acknowledgement that chronic neuropathic pain is a condition that needs to be addressed. When considering these responses in light of the extended socioeconomic burden associated with chronic neuropathic pain, efforts should be made to limit the “diagnostic odyssey” of chronic neuropathic pain in Greece. The aim of this study is to explore the experience of patients with chronic neuropathic pain in Greece from the viewpoint of pain specialists. A better organization of pain and palliative care centers, facilitation of communication with previously treating clinicians, increased personnel, utilization of a chronic pain registry, and guidelines development can aid in this venture. Keypoints: The diagnosis of chronic neuropathic pain in Greece is a laborious and time-consuming process that needs to be refined; Greek clinicians believe that their centers were not fully or efficiently organized and think that additional specialized healthcare personnel should be employed; Patient comorbidities and retards in visiting a clinic at the onset of symptoms delay the diagnosis of neuropathic pain and may complicate subsequent care; The diagnostic delay has been reported as three years between the onset of symptoms and seeking general medical help and another nine years before a referral to a pain specialist; Neuropathic pain is associated with patient distress and socioeconomic burdens, and diagnostic delays prolong the condition, may allow it to worsen, and utilize valuable healthcare resources without providing effective solutions

Validation of the Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire for Patients Suffering From Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Greek

Purpose: The Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire (PNQ) represents a diagnostic tool concerning patients with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). The application of such a tool in the Greek clinical praxis requires validation. Methods: Validation consists of three stages - translation, reverse translation, and patient application. Hundred oncologic patients were assessed by comparing the PNQ to the National Cancer Institute-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) at the chemotherapy onset and second, fourth, and sixth sessions. The diagnostic tool’s specific requirements (compliance, validity, concordance, sensitivity, specificity, reliability) were statistically evaluated. Results: Differences between translated texts and between the reverse translation and the original were considered negligible. At the second, fourth, and sixth session compliance was 98%, 95%, and 93% while Cronbach’s a was 0,57 0,69, and 0,81, respectively. Cohen’s weighted. was 0,67 and 0,58, Spearman’s. was 0,7 and 0,98, while the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) was 1 and 0,9 for the sensory and the motor part, respectively. The variance’s linear regression analysis confirmed CIPN worsening over time (P<0.0001). Discussion: The Greek version remains close to the original English version. Compliance rates reflect easy PNQ applications. Cohen’s. values highlight the physicians’ tension to underestimate the patients’ condition. Spearman’s., Cronbach’s a, and AUC values reflect good validity, reliability, and specificity of the PNQ respectively. Finally, the linear analysis confirmed the PNQ sensitivity over time. Conclusions: The PNQ validation in Greek adds a crucial tool to the physicians’ armamentarium. It can now delineate the necessary information to modify the chemotherapy and analgesic treatment regimens at both preventive and acute levels

Regional anesthesia practice in Greece: A census report

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

Pharmacological Management of Neuropathic Pain after Radiotherapy in Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review

Background: Neuropathic pain (NP) in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients represents a treatment challenge. Most studies investigating drugs against NP are conducted in patients suffering with diabetic neuropathy or postherpetic neuralgia, while data are limited in cancer pain management. Additionally, regarding cancer therapy-related NP, most of the studies do not focus on HNC patients. The aim of this review is to identify the studies on systematically administered medication for NP management that included HNC patients under radiotherapy. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov on 30 October 2021. The medical subject heading (MeSH) terms were (“head and neck cancer” OR “tumor”) AND “neuropathic pain” AND “medication” AND “radiotherapy.” The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used for quality assessment. Results: The search identified 432 articles. Three more articles were identified after searching the reference lists of the retrieved articles. A total of 10 articles met the eligibility inclusion criteria and were included in this review; 6 on gabapentin, 1 on pregabalin, 1 on nortriptyline, 1 on methadone, and 1 on ketamine. Statistically significant results in pain reduction compared to placebo or standard pain medication were found in the studies on pregabalin (p = 0.003), methadone (p = 0.03), ketamine (p = 0.012), and in two out of six gabapentin studies (p < 0.004). Two of the studies (both concerning gabapentin) had no comparison arm. Conclusions: Treatments including pregabalin, methadone, ketamine, and gabapentin were found to provide pain relief against HNC NP. While there is a plethora of pharmacological treatments available for the management of NP, only a few studies have been conducted regarding the pharmacological management of therapy-related NP in HNC patients. More studies should be conducted regarding the pharmacological approaches in HNC therapy-related NP so that specific treatment algorithms can be developed

The Greek Neuropathic Pain Registry: The structure and objectives of the sole NPR in Greece

Objectives Neuropathic pain (NP) is a complex condition that impairs the patients’ quality of life. Registries are useful tools, increasingly used as they provide high-quality data. This article aims to describe the Greek Neuropathic Pain Registry (Gr.NP.R.) design, the patients’ baseline data, and real-world treatment outcomes. Methods The Gr.NP.R. collects electronically, stores, and shares real-world clinical data from Pain and Palliative Care centers in Greece. It is a web-based application, which ensures security, simplicity, and transparency. VAS, DN4, and Pain Detect were used for pain and NP assessment. Results From 2016 to 2020, 5980 patients with chronic pain, of cancer or non-cancer origin, were examined and 2334 fulfilled the NP inclusion criteria (VAS > 5, DN4 > 4, and Pain Detect >= 19). At the first visit, the mean age was 64.8 years, 65.5% were female patients, and 97.9% were Greek. The mean (SD) time from pain initiation to visiting the pain clinics was 1.5 (3.8) years. Most patients were undertreated. Following the patients’ registration, the national guidelines were implemented. The majority of the prescribed medications were gabapentinoids (70.2%), especially pregabalin (62.6%), and opioids (tramadol, 55.3%). At visits 1 and 6, mean VAS was 7.1 and 5, and mean DN4 score was 5.6 and 3.5, respectively. Conclusions The Gr.NP.R. provides information on the demographics, clinical progress, treatment history, treatment responses, and the drugs of choice for patients with cancer and non-cancer NP. The collected data may help physicians plan the management of their patients

Oral Complications of Head and Neck Cancer Therapy

Current therapies for Head and Neck cancer treatment are extremely advanced. Though, they cause oral complications which have deleterious effects on basic life functions, affect oral and overall health, may lead to significant morbidity and treatment discontinuation and have an impact on survivorship and quality of life. As new therapies are introduced, a new spectrum of oral complications is rising, compromising the mucosal integrity and the salivary function, that may not be recognized, reported and treated properly. Oral complications, often permanent and extremely painful, may include mucositis, xerostomia, dysgeusia, infections, trismus and fibrosis, risk of dental disease and necrosis of the jaw, neurosensory disorders and when targeted therapies and immunotherapy are involved, aphthoid and lichenoid lesions can also be reported. Increased awareness is required for the prevention and management of these complications, which can be best provided by a multidisciplinary team