Angela Mailis1, Paul Taenzer. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. angela.mailis@uhn.on.ca
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Special Interest Group of the Canadian Pain Society has produced consensus-based guidelines for the pharmacological management of neuropathic pain. The society aimed to generate an additional guideline for other forms of neuropathic pain treatments. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations for neuropathic pain interventional treatments. METHODS: A task force was created and engaged the Institute of Health Economics in Edmonton, Alberta, to survey the literature pertaining to multiple treatments. Sufficient literature existed on four interventions only: spinal cord stimulation; epidural injections; intravenous infusions; and nerve blocks. A comprehensive search was conducted for systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials and evidence-based clinical practice guidelines; a critical review was generated on each topic. A modified United States Preventive Services Task Force tool was used for quality rating and grading of recommendations. RESULTS: Investigators reviewed four studies of spinal cord stimulation, 19 studies of intravenous infusions, 14 studies of epidural injections and 16 studies of nerve blocks that met the inclusion criteria. The task force chairs rated the quality of evidence and graded the recommendations. Feedback was solicited from the members of the task force. CONCLUSION: There is sufficient evidence to support recommendations for some of these interventions for selected neuropathic pain conditions. This evidence is, at best, moderate and is often limited or conflicting. Pain practitioners are encouraged to explore evidence-based treatment options before considering unproven treatments. Full disclosure of risks and benefits of the available options is necessary for shared decision making and informed consent.
BACKGROUND: The Special Interest Group of the Canadian Pain Society has produced consensus-based guidelines for the pharmacological management of neuropathic pain. The society aimed to generate an additional guideline for other forms of neuropathic pain treatments. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations for neuropathic pain interventional treatments. METHODS: A task force was created and engaged the Institute of Health Economics in Edmonton, Alberta, to survey the literature pertaining to multiple treatments. Sufficient literature existed on four interventions only: spinal cord stimulation; epidural injections; intravenous infusions; and nerve blocks. A comprehensive search was conducted for systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials and evidence-based clinical practice guidelines; a critical review was generated on each topic. A modified United States Preventive Services Task Force tool was used for quality rating and grading of recommendations. RESULTS: Investigators reviewed four studies of spinal cord stimulation, 19 studies of intravenous infusions, 14 studies of epidural injections and 16 studies of nerve blocks that met the inclusion criteria. The task force chairs rated the quality of evidence and graded the recommendations. Feedback was solicited from the members of the task force. CONCLUSION: There is sufficient evidence to support recommendations for some of these interventions for selected neuropathic pain conditions. This evidence is, at best, moderate and is often limited or conflicting. Pain practitioners are encouraged to explore evidence-based treatment options before considering unproven treatments. Full disclosure of risks and benefits of the available options is necessary for shared decision making and informed consent.
Authors: F Ambrosio; G Finco; C Mattia; R Mediati; F Paoletti; F Coluzzi; Q Piacevoli; G Savoia; B Amantea; C Aurilio; C Bonezzi; D Camaioni; M Chiefari; A Costantini; M Evangelista; S Ischia; E Mondello; E Polati; W Raffaeli; A F Sabato; G Varrassi; M Visentin; R Tufano Journal: Minerva Anestesiol Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 3.051
Authors: Salahadin Abdi; Sukdeb Datta; Andrea M Trescot; David M Schultz; Rajive Adlaka; Sairam L Atluri; Howard S Smith; Laxmaiah Manchikanti Journal: Pain Physician Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Kathleen Hempenstall; Turo J Nurmikko; Robert W Johnson; Roger P A'Hern; Andrew S C Rice Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2005-07-26 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Dwight Moulin; Aline Boulanger; A J Clark; Hance Clarke; Thuan Dao; G A Finley; Andrea Furlan; Ian Gilron; Allan Gordon; Patricia K Morley-Forster; Barry J Sessle; Pamela Squire; Jennifer Stinson; Paul Taenzer; Ana Velly; Mark A Ware; Erica L Weinberg; Owen D Williamson Journal: Pain Res Manag Date: 2014 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.037
Authors: Steven P Cohen; Anuj Bhatia; Asokumar Buvanendran; Eric S Schwenk; Ajay D Wasan; Robert W Hurley; Eugene R Viscusi; Samer Narouze; Fred N Davis; Elspeth C Ritchie; Timothy R Lubenow; William M Hooten Journal: Reg Anesth Pain Med Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 6.288