The Clinical journal of pain
-
Few randomized controlled trials of oral pharmacotherapy have been performed in patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). The prevalence of CRPS is uncertain. Severe and advanced cases of CRPS are easily recognized but difficult to treat and constitute a minority compared with those who meet minimum criteria for the diagnosis. ⋯ Each has shown a broad enough spectrum of analgesic activity to be cautiously recommended for treatment of CRPS until adequate randomized controlled trials settle the issue. The relative benefit of oral medications compared with the widely used treatments of intensive physical therapy, nerve blocks, sympathectomy, intraspinally administered drugs, and neuromodulatory therapies (eg, spinal cord stimulation) remains uncertain. In summary, treatment of CRPS has received insufficient study and remains largely empirical.
-
This review will discuss the relevant history of the taxonomy and eventual development of diagnostic criteria of what is currently called complex regional pain syndrome. The authors will take their discussion through the early days (at which time the disorder was called reflex sympathetic dystrophy) through consensus-developing conferences to the current conceptualization of the criteria as published by the International Association for the Study of Pain's Task Force on Taxonomy in 1994. The authors will also mention the recent work of the closed workshop held in Budapest in 2004, where clinical and research criteria were proposed; these criteria were published in 2005. The review will also address issues of staging and subtyping the syndrome, as well as a discussion of the salient signs, symptoms, and tests appropriate for use in the diagnosis.
-
This review summarizes current information about diagnosis and treatment of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) in children. Although it has been widely held that CRPS in children is intrinsically different from adults, there appear to be relatively few differences. However, there is a marked preponderance of lower extremity cases in children. ⋯ Clinical judgment dictates the extent of medication or interventional therapy added to the treatment to facilitate rehabilitation. In many ways, the approach to the treatment of children mirrors that of adults, with perhaps greater restraint in the use of medications and invasive procedures. The rehabilitation of children with CRPS, like that of adults with CRPS, needs further rigorous investigation.
-
Review
Diagnosis and minimally invasive treatment of lumbar discogenic pain--a review of the literature.
Diagnosis and treatment of lumbar discogenic pain due to internal disc disruption (IDD) remains a challenge. It accounts for 39% of patients with low back pain. The mechanism of discogenic pain remains unclear and its clinical presentation is atypical. ⋯ Minimally invasive treatments provide alternatives for discogenic pain with the appeal of cost-effectiveness and, possibly, less long-term side effects. However, the value of most of these therapies is yet to be established. More basic science and clinical studies are needed to improve the clinical efficacy of minimally invasive treatments.
-
Comparative Study
A systematic review of pain drawing literature: should pain drawings be used for psychologic screening?
The use of pain drawings to identify the psychologic "state" of patients has been advocated. They are used for psychologic screening before considering treatments, such as surgery. For pain drawings to be clinically useful as a psychologic screen they need good positive and negative predictive values. We systematically reviewed the literature that directly compared pain drawing scoring systems with measures of psychologic state. ⋯ We conclude that the available data do not support the assumption that unusual pain drawings or extensive marking indicate disturbed psychologic state. There is no high quality evidence to support pain-drawing use as a psychologic assessment tool; therefore, pain drawings are not recommended for this purpose.