Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain
-
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for the treatment of neuropathic pain is supported by good-quality randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective case studies, and observational case series that confirm its efficacy and safety. SCS has been successfully used in various refractory neuropathic pain conditions, including failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), neuropathic back and leg pain, and complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) types I and II. According to the Harbour and Miller Scale (2001), the evidence for SCS in FBSS has been classified as grade B, while that for CRPS type I has been classified as grade A. ⋯ Trial stimulation, which is relatively inexpensive and completely reversible, provides predictive value for long-term efficacy and increases the cost-effectiveness of permanent implantation. Studies consistently report that over time, SCS is potentially cost saving to the healthcare system. At present, SCS is considered a "last resort" in the treatment of refractory neuropathic pain, yet evidence suggests that early intervention with SCS results in greater efficacy and, in the case of FBSS, should be considered before re-operation.
-
Radiofrequency is a minimally invasive, target-selective technique that has been in clinical use for more than 25 years and has demonstrated success at reducing pain in several chronic pain conditions, including trigeminal neuralgia, chronic low back pain, postherpetic neuralgia, and complex regional pain syndrome. However, the success of radiofrequency in chronic pain has not been adequately reproduced in good-quality, randomized controlled trials, and its use in the management of neuropathic pain is under some debate. ⋯ Nevertheless, clinical experience suggests that radiofrequency may be a useful tool in the overall management of refractory neuropathic pain. Pulsed radiofrequency in particular is a minimally destructive procedure that may offer new opportunities and a broader perspective for therapy with radiofrequency.
-
Neural blockade is widely used in clinical practice to alleviate acute or chronic pain, including neuropathic pain. However, to date there is little controlled evidence to confirm the efficacy of nerve blocks in neuropathic pain. ⋯ Sympathectomy is recommended for the treatment of neuropathic pain only after careful consideration of its usefulness, effectiveness, and risk of adverse effects. Current evidence and clinical experience suggest that neural blockade could be a useful adjunct in the management of refractory neuropathic pain, but further well-controlled studies would be of great benefit to support this type of therapy.
-
Optimal management of patients with chronic neuropathic pain requires a multidisciplinary approach that may include surgery. Yet despite the fact that lumbosacral spinal surgery, for example, is performed in thousands of patients every year, there is very little controlled clinical data to support its use or that of other surgical techniques in the treatment of chronic nonmalignant pain, especially neuropathic pain. ⋯ However, before considering a surgical procedure, a nonsurgical approach should have been tried and the suitability of the patient must be carefully assessed. To fully establish the role of surgery in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain, further well-designed, prospective, controlled trials are essential.
-
Intrathecal drug delivery (IDD) is a proven and effective treatment alternative in carefully selected patients with chronic pain that cannot be controlled by a well-tailored drug regime and/or spinal cord stimulation (SCS), and may be specifically trialed in patients who fail to respond to SCS. While the lack of randomized controlled trials is often perceived as a limitation of IDD, many studies attest to the efficacy of this therapy, and a number are large-scale and with follow-up periods of up to five years. Good to excellent pain relief is achieved in many patients who have failed more conservative therapies, and there is often a reduced need for analgesia. ⋯ Some patients are able to return to work. The benefits of IDD (including a potent analgesic response with a more stable therapeutic drug level, decreased latency, increased duration of action, and decreased pharmacological complications) mean that side effects such as nausea, vomiting, sedation, and constipation are reduced. In addition, IDD demonstrates long-term cost-effectiveness when compared to conventional pain therapies, addressing a concern that affects many physicians in clinical practice today.