Sensory Symptom Profiles and Co-Morbidities in Painful Radiculopathy

Painful radiculopathies (RAD) and classical neuropathic pain syndromes (painful diabetic polyneuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia) show differences how the patients express their sensory perceptions. Furthermore, several clinical trials with neuropathic pain medications failed in painful radiculopathy. Epidemiological and clinical data of 2094 patients with painful radiculopathy were collected within a cross sectional survey (painDETECT) to describe demographic data and co-morbidities and to detect characteristic sensory abnormalities in patients with RAD and compare them with other neuropathic pain syndromes. Common co-morbidities in neuropathic pain (depression, sleep disturbance, anxiety) do not differ considerably between the three conditions. Compared to other neuropathic pain syndromes touch-evoked allodynia and thermal hyperalgesia are relatively uncommon in RAD. One distinct sensory symptom pattern (sensory profile), i.e., severe painful attacks and pressure induced pain in combination with mild spontaneous pain, mild mechanical allodynia and thermal hyperalgesia, was found to be characteristic for RAD. Despite similarities in sensory symptoms there are two important differences between RAD and other neuropathic pain disorders: (1) The paucity of mechanical allodynia and thermal hyperalgesia might be explained by the fact that the site of the nerve lesion in RAD is often located proximal to the dorsal root ganglion. (2) The distinct sensory profile found in RAD might be explained by compression-induced ectopic discharges from a dorsal root and not necessarily by nerve damage. These differences in pathogenesis might explain why medications effective in DPN and PHN failed to demonstrate efficacy in RAD

Fibromyalgia and neuropathic pain - differences and similarities. A comparison of 3057 patients with diabetic painful neuropathy and fibromyalgia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patients with diabetic neuropathy (DPN) and fibromyalgia differ substantially in pathogenetic factors and the spatial distribution of the perceived pain. We questioned whether, despite these obvious differences, similar abnormal sensory complaints and pain qualities exist in both entities. We hypothesized that similar sensory symptoms might be associated with similar mechanisms of pain generation. The aims were (1) to compare epidemiological features and co-morbidities and (2) to identify similarities and differences of sensory symptoms in both entities.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The present multi-center study compares epidemiological data and sensory symptoms of a large cohort of 1434 fibromyalgia patients and 1623 patients with painful diabetic neuropathy. Data acquisition included standard demographic questions and self-report questionnaires (MOS sleep scale, PHQ-9, Pain<it>DETECT</it>). To identify subgroups of patients with characteristic combinations of symptoms (sensory profiles) a cluster analysis was performed using all patients in both cohorts.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Significant differences in co-morbidities (depression, sleep disturbance) were found between both disorders. Patients of both aetiologies chose very similar descriptors to characterize their sensory perceptions. Burning pain, prickling and touch-evoked allodynia were present in the same frequency. Five subgroups with distinct symptom profiles could be detected. Two of the subgroups were characteristic for fibromyalgia whereas one profile occurred predominantly in DPN patients. Two profiles were found frequently in patients of both entities (20-35%).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>DPN and fibromyalgia patients experience very similar sensory phenomena. The combination of sensory symptoms - the sensory profile - is in most cases distinct and almost unique for each one of the two entities indicating aetiology-specific mechanisms of symptom generation. Beside the unique aetiology-specific sensory profiles an overlap of sensory profiles can be found in 20-35% of patients of both aetiologies.</p

Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Pregabalin Treatment for Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: Findings from seven randomized, controlled trials across a range of doses

OBJECTIVE—To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of pregabalin across the effective dosing range, to determine differences in the efficacy of three times daily (TID) versus twice daily (BID) dosage schedules, and to use time-to-event analysis to determine the time to onset of a sustained therapeutic effect using data from seven trials of pregabalin in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN)

Pregabalin, celecoxib, and their combination for treatment of chronic low-back pain

Background - The efficacy and safety of the association of celecoxib [a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor] and pregabalin (commonly used to control neuropathic pain), compared with monotherapy of each, were evaluated for the treatment of chronic low-back pain, a condition known to be due to neuropathic as well as nociceptive pain mechanisms. Materials and methods - In this prospective randomized trial, 36 patients received three consecutive 4-week treatment regimes, randomly assigned: celecoxib plus placebo, pregabalin plus placebo, and celecoxib plus pregabalin. All patients were assessed by using a visual analogue scale (VAS, 0\u2013100 mm) and the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) pain scale by an investigator blinded to the administered pharmacological treatment. Results - Celecoxib and pregabalin were effective in reducing low-back pain when patients were pooled according to LANSS score. The association of celecoxib and pregabalin was more effective than either monotherapy in a mixed population of patients with chronic low-back pain and when data were pooled according to LANSS score. Adverse effects of drug association and monotherapies were similar, with reduced drug consumption in the combined therapy. Conclusions - Combination of celecoxib and pregabalin is more effective than monotherapy for chronic low-back pain, with similar adverse effects

Tools for Assessing Neuropathic Pain

Giorgio Cruccu and Andrea Truini discuss a new pain assessment tool published in PLoS Medicine called Standardized Evaluation of Pain and they review other tools to assess neuropathic pain

Pain thresholds and intensities of CRPS type I and neuropathic pain in respect to sex

Abstract Background and aims Healthy women have generally been found to have increased experimental pain perception and chronic pain has a higher prevalence in female as compared to male patients. However, no study has investigated whether pain intensity and pain perception thresholds are distinct or similar between sexes within various chronic pain entities. We investigated whether average pain intensities and pain thresholds assessed using quantitative sensory testing (QST) differed between women and men suffering from three distinct chronic pain conditions: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS type I), peripheral nerve injury (PNI) or polyneuropathy (PNP), as compared to paired healthy volunteers. Methods QST data of 1252 patients (669 female, 583 male) with PNI (n=342), PNP (n=571) or CRPS (n=339), and average pain intensity reports from previously published studies were included. Absolute and z-values (adjusted for age and body region) of cold, heat, pressure (PPT) and pinprick pain thresholds were compared in generalized linear models with aetiology, duration of underlying pain disease and average pain intensity as fixed effects. Results Average pain intensity during the past four weeks did not differ between women and men, in both mean and range. In women absolute pain thresholds for cold, heat and pinprick were lower than in males across all diagnoses (pPeer reviewe

A pilot randomised double blind controlled trial of the efficacy of purified fatty acids for the treatment of women with endometriosis-associated pain (PurFECT):study protocol

Abstract Background Endometriosis affects 6–10% of women and is associated with debilitating pelvic pain. It costs the UK > £2.8 billion per year in loss of productivity. Endometriosis can be managed by surgical excision or medically by ovarian suppression. However, ~ 75% symptoms recur after surgery and available medical treatments have undesirable side effects and are contraceptive. Omega-3 purified fatty acids (PUFA) have been shown in animal models to reduce factors that are thought to lead to endometriosis-associated pain, have minimal side effects, and no effects on fertility. This paper presents a protocol for a two-arm, pilot parallel randomised controlled trial (RCT) which aims to inform the planning of a future multicentre trial to evaluate the efficacy of Omega-3 PUFA in the management of endometriosis-associated pain in women. Methods The study will recruit women with endometriosis over a 12-month period in the National Health Service (NHS) Lothian, UK, and randomise them to 8 weeks of treatment with Omega-3 PUFA or comparator (olive oil). The primary objective is to assess recruitment and retention rates. The secondary objectives are to determine the effectiveness/acceptability to participants of the proposed methods of recruitment/randomisation/treatments/questionnaires, to inform the sample size calculation and to refine the research methodology for a future large randomised controlled trial. Response to treatment will be monitored by pain scores and questionnaires assessing physical and emotional function compared at baseline and 8 weeks. Discussion We recognise that there may be potential difficulties in mounting a large randomised controlled trial for endometriosis to assess Omega-3 PUFA because they are a dietary supplement readily available over the counter and already used by women with endometriosis. We have therefore designed this pilot study to assess practical feasibility and following the ‘Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials’ recommendations for the design of chronic pain trials. Trial registration ISRCTN4420234

Laparoscopic treatment of isolated superficial peritoneal endometriosis for managing chronic pelvic pain in women:study protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial (ESPriT1)

Background: Endometriosis (where endometrial-like tissue is found outside the uterus) affects ~ 176 million women worldwide and can lead to debilitating pelvic pain. Three subtypes of endometriosis exist, with ~ 80% of women having superficial peritoneal endometriosis (SPE). Endometriosis is diagnosed by laparoscopy and, if SPE is found, gynaecologists usually remove it surgically. However, many women get limited pain relief from surgical removal of SPE. We plan to undertake a future large trial where women who have only SPE found at initial laparoscopy are randomly allocated to have surgical removal (excision or ablation) of SPE, or not. Ultimately, we want to determine whether surgical removal improves overall symptoms and quality of life, or whether surgery is of no benefit, exacerbates symptoms, or even causes harm. The primary objective of this feasibility study is to determine what proportion of women with suspected SPE undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy will agree to randomisation. The secondary objectives are to determine if there are differences in key prognostic parameters between eligible women that agree to be randomised and those that decline; how many women having laparoscopy for investigation of chronic pelvic pain are eligible for the trial; the range of treatment effects and variability in outcomes and the most acceptable methods of recruitment, randomisation and assessment tools. Methods: We will recruit up to 90 women with suspected SPE undergoing diagnostic laparoscopy over a 9-month recruitment period in four Scottish hospitals and randomise them 1:1 to either diagnostic laparoscopy alone (with a sham port to achieve blinding of the allocation) or surgical removal of endometriosis. Baseline characteristics, e.g. age, index of social deprivation, ethnicity, and intensity/duration of pain will be collected. Participants will be followed up by online questionnaires assessing pain, physical and emotional function at baseline, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months. Discussion: Recruitment to a randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of surgery for endometriosis may be challenging because of preconceived ideas about treatment success amongst patients and clinicians. We have designed this study to assess feasibility of recruitment and to inform the design of our future definitive trial. Trial registration: ClincicalTrials.gov, NCT04081532 Status: Recruiting