Peripheral neuropathic pain : a mechanism-related organizing principle based on sensory profiles

Patients with neuropathic pain are heterogeneous in etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical appearance. They exhibit a variety of painrelated sensory symptoms and signs (sensory profile). Different sensory profiles might indicate different classes of neurobiological mechanisms, and hence subgroups with different sensory profilesmight respond differently to treatment. The aim of the investigation was to identify subgroups in a large sample of patients with neuropathic pain using hypothesis-free statistical methods on the database of 3 large multinational research networks (German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS), IMI-Europain, and Neuropain). Standardized quantitative sensory testing was used in 902 (test cohort) and 233 (validation cohort) patients with peripheral neuropathic pain of different etiologies. For subgrouping, we performed a cluster analysis using 13 quantitative sensory testing parameters. Three distinct subgroupswith characteristic sensory profileswere identified and replicated. Cluster 1 (sensory loss, 42%) showed a loss of small and large fiber function in combination with paradoxical heat sensations. Cluster 2 (thermal hyperalgesia, 33%) was characterized by preserved sensory functions in combination with heat and cold hyperalgesia and mild dynamic mechanical allodynia. Cluster 3 (mechanical hyperalgesia, 24%) was characterized by a loss of small fiber function in combinationwith pinprick hyperalgesia and dynamic mechanical allodynia. All clusters occurred across etiologies but frequencies differed. We present a new approach of subgrouping patients with peripheral neuropathic pain of different etiologies according to intrinsic sensory profiles. These 3 profiles may be related to pathophysiological mechanisms and may be useful in clinical trial design to enrich the study population for treatment responders.Peer reviewe

The epidemiology of chronic pain in Libya: a cross-sectional telephone survey.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a public health problem although there is a paucity of prevalence data from countries in the Middle East and North Africa. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of chronic pain and neuropathic pain in a sample of the general adult population in Libya. METHODS: A cross-sectional telephone survey was conducted before the onset of the Libyan Civil War (February 2011) on a sample of self-declared Libyans who had a landline telephone and were at least 18 years of age. Random sampling of household telephone number dialling was undertaken in three major cities and interviews conducted using an Arabic version of the Structured Telephone Interviews Questionnaire on Chronic Pain previously used to collect data in Europe. In addition, an Arabic version of S-LANSS was used. 1212 individuals were interviewed (response rate = 95.1 %, mean age = 37.8 ± 13.9 years, female = 54.6 %). RESULTS: The prevalence of chronic pain ≥ 3 months was 19.6 % (95 % CI 14.6 % to 24.6 %) with a mean ± SD duration of pain of 6 · 5 ± 5 · 7 years and a higher prevalence for women. The prevalence of neuropathic pain in the respondents reporting chronic pain was 19 · 7 % (95 % CI 14 · 6-24 · 7), equivalent to 3 · 9 % (95 % CI 2 · 8 to 5 · 0 %) of the general adult population. Only, 71 (29 · 8 %) of respondents reported that their pain was being adequately controlled. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of chronic pain in the general adult population of Libya was approximately 20 % and comparable with Europe and North America. This suggests that chronic pain is a public health problem in Libya. Risk factors are being a woman, advanced age and unemployment. There is a need for improved health policies in Libya to ensure that patients with chronic pain receive effective management

Colocalized Structural and Functional Changes in the Cortex of Patients with Trigeminal Neuropathic Pain

Background: Recent data suggests that in chronic pain there are changes in gray matter consistent with decreased brain volume, indicating that the disease process may produce morphological changes in the brains of those affected. However, no study has evaluated cortical thickness in relation to specific functional changes in evoked pain. In this study we sought to investigate structural (gray matter thickness) and functional (blood oxygenation dependent level – BOLD) changes in cortical regions of precisely matched patients with chronic trigeminal neuropathic pain (TNP) affecting the right maxillary (V2) division of the trigeminal nerve. The model has a number of advantages including the evaluation of specific changes that can be mapped to known somatotopic anatomy. Methodology/Principal Findings: Cortical regions were chosen based on sensory (Somatosensory cortex (SI and SII), motor (MI) and posterior insula), or emotional (DLPFC, Frontal, Anterior Insula, Cingulate) processing of pain. Both structural and functional (to brush-induced allodynia) scans were obtained and averaged from two different imaging sessions separated by 2–6 months in all patients. Age and gender-matched healthy controls were also scanned twice for cortical thickness measurement. Changes in cortical thickness of TNP patients were frequently colocalized and correlated with functional allodynic activations, and included both cortical thickening and thinning in sensorimotor regions, and predominantly thinning in emotional regions. Conclusions: Overall, such patterns of cortical thickness suggest a dynamic functionally-driven plasticity of the brain. These structural changes, which correlated with the pain duration, age-at-onset, pain intensity and cortical activity, may be specific targets for evaluating therapeutic interventions

Buprenorphine for neuropathic pain in adults

BACKGROUND Opioid drugs, including buprenorphine, are commonly used to treat neuropathic pain, and are considered effective by some professionals. Most reviews have examined all opioids together. This review sought evidence specifically for buprenorphine, at any dose, and by any route of administration. Other opioids are considered in separate reviews. OBJECTIVES To assess the analgesic efficacy of buprenorphine for chronic neuropathic pain in adults, and the adverse events associated with its use in clinical trials. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and EMBASE from inception to 11 June 2015, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews, and two online study registries. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised, double-blind studies of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing any oral dose or formulation of buprenorphine with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently searched for studies, extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality. We did not carry out any pooled analyses. MAIN RESULTS Searches identified 10 published studies, and one study with results in ClinicalTrials.gov. None of these 11 studies satisfied our inclusion criteria, and so we included no studies in the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There was insufficient evidence to support or refute the suggestion that buprenorphine has any efficacy in any neuropathic pain condition

Fentanyl for neuropathic pain in adults

BACKGROUND Opioid drugs, including fentanyl, are commonly used to treat neuropathic pain, and are considered effective by some professionals. Most reviews have examined all opioids together. This review sought evidence specifically for fentanyl, at any dose, and by any route of administration. Other opioids are considered in separate reviews. OBJECTIVES To assess the analgesic efficacy of fentanyl for chronic neuropathic pain in adults, and the adverse events associated with its use in clinical trials. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase from inception to June 2016, together with the reference lists of retrieved articles, and two online study registries. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised, double-blind studies of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing fentanyl (in any dose, administered by any route, and in any formulation) with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently searched for studies, extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality and potential bias. We did not carry out any pooled analyses. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS Only one study met our inclusion criteria. Participants were men and women (mean age 67 years), with postherpetic neuralgia, complex regional pain syndrome, or chronic postoperative pain. They were experiencing inadequate relief from non-opioid analgesics, and had not previously taken opioids for their neuropathic pain. The study used an enriched enrolment randomised withdrawal design. It was adequately blinded, but we judged it at unclear risk of bias for other criteria.Transdermal fentanyl (one-day fentanyl patch) was titrated over 10 to 29 days to establish the maximum tolerated and effective dose (12.5 to 50 µg/h). Participants who achieved a prespecified good level of pain relief with a stable dose of fentanyl, without excessive use of rescue medication or intolerable adverse events ('responders'), were randomised to continue with fentanyl or switch to placebo for 12 weeks, under double-blind conditions. Our prespecified primary outcomes were not appropriate for this study design, but the measures reported do give an indication of the efficacy of fentanyl in this condition.In the titration phase, 1 in 3 participants withdrew because of adverse events or inadequate pain relief, and almost 90% experienced adverse events. Of 258 participants who underwent open-label titration, 163 were 'responders' and entered the randomised withdrawal phase. The number of participants completing the study (and therefore continuing on treatment) without an increase of pain by more than 15/100 was 47/84 (56%) with fentanyl and 28/79 (35%) with placebo. Because only 63% responded sufficiently to enter the randomised withdrawal phase, this implies that only a maximum of 35% of participants entering the study would have had useful pain relief and tolerability with transdermal fentanyl, compared with 22% with placebo. Almost 60% of participants taking fentanyl were 'satisfied' and 'very satisfied' with their treatment at the end of the study, compared with about 40% with placebo. This outcome approximates to our primary outcome of moderate benefit using the Patient Global Impression of Change scale, but the group was enriched for responders and the method of analysis was not clear. The most common adverse events were constipation, nausea, somnolence, and dizziness.There was no information about other types of neuropathic pain, other routes of administration, or comparisons with other treatments.We downgraded the quality of the evidence to very low because there was only one study, with few participants and events, and there was no information about how data from people who withdrew were analysed. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the suggestion that fentanyl works in any neuropathic pain condition

Paracetamol (acetaminophen) with or without codeine or dihydrocodeine for neuropathic pain in adults

BACKGROUND Paracetamol, either alone or in combination with codeine or dihydrocodeine, is commonly used to treat chronic neuropathic pain. This review sought evidence for efficacy and harm from randomised double-blind studies. OBJECTIVES To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of paracetamol with or without codeine or dihydrocodeine for chronic neuropathic pain in adults. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase from inception to July 2016, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews, and two online study registries. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised, double-blind studies of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing paracetamol, alone or in combination with codeine or dihydrocodeine, with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently searched for studies, extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality and potential bias. We did not carry out any pooled analyses. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS No study satisfied the inclusion criteria. Effects of interventions were not assessed as there were no included studies. We have only very low quality evidence and have no reliable indication of the likely effect. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the suggestion that paracetamol alone, or in combination with codeine or dihydrocodeine, works in any neuropathic pain condition

Withdrawal-associated injury site pain (WISP): a descriptive case series of an opioid cessation phenomenon.

Withdrawal pain can be a barrier to opioid cessation. Yet, little is known about old injury site pain in this context. We conducted an exploratory mixed-methods descriptive case series using a web-based survey and in-person interviews with adults recruited from pain and addiction treatment and research settings. We included individuals who self-reported a past significant injury that was healed and pain-free before the initiation of opioids, which then became temporarily painful upon opioid cessation-a phenomenon we have named withdrawal-associated injury site pain (WISP). Screening identified WISP in 47 people, of whom 34 (72%) completed the descriptive survey, including 21 who completed qualitative interviews. Recalled pain severity scores for WISP were typically high (median: 8/10; interquartile range [IQR]: 2), emotionally and physically aversive, and took approximately 2 weeks to resolve (median: 14; IQR: 24 days). Withdrawal-associated injury site pain intensity was typically slightly less than participants' original injury pain (median: 10/10; IQR: 3), and more painful than other generalized withdrawal symptoms which also lasted approximately 2 weeks (median: 13; IQR: 25 days). Fifteen surveyed participants (44%) reported returning to opioid use because of WISP in the past. Participants developed theories about the etiology of WISP, including that the pain is the brain's way of communicating a desire for opioids. This research represents the first known documentation that previously healed, and pain-free injury sites can temporarily become painful again during opioid withdrawal, an experience which may be a barrier to opioid cessation, and a contributor to opioid reinitiation