Literature DB >> 26090758

Pain relief with lidocaine 5% patch in localized peripheral neuropathic pain in relation to pain phenotype: a randomised, double-blind, and placebo-controlled, phenotype panel study.

Dyveke T Demant1, Karen Lund, Nanna B Finnerup, Jan Vollert, Christoph Maier, Märtha S Segerdahl, Troels S Jensen, Søren H Sindrup.   

Abstract

In neuropathic pain with irritable nociceptor (IN) phenotype, upregulation of sodium channels on nociceptors is supposed to be an important pain mechanism that may be targeted by topical sodium channel blockade. This randomised, double-blind, phenotype panel, crossover study with 4-week treatment periods of lidocaine 5% patch and placebo was performed to search for phenotype differences in effect. The primary efficacy measure was the total pain intensity on an 11-point numeric rating scale, and the primary objective was to compare the effect of lidocaine in patients with and without IN phenotype as defined by hypersensitivity and preserved small-fibre function determined by quantitative sensory testing. Forty-six patients with neuropathic pain due to nerve injury or postherpetic neuralgia were randomised. The modified intention-to-treat population comprised 15 patients with irritable nociceptor and 25 patients with nonirritable nociceptor. In the total sample, lidocaine reduced pain by 0.3 numeric rating scale points (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.1-0.5) and pain-related sleep disturbance by 0.6 points (95% CI: 0.4-0.8) more than placebo (P = 0.007 and P < 0.001) and relieved pain by 0.4 verbal score (-1-5) points more (P = 0.036). For these measures, there was no significant interaction between treatment and phenotype, but there was a significant interaction for pain paroxysms (0.8, 95% CI: 0.4-1.2, P < 0.001) and deep aching pain (0.6, 95% CI: 0.1-1.0, P = 0.013). In conclusion, lidocaine 5% patch had an effect on peripheral neuropathic pain, and it may be most efficacious in patients with IN phenotype. The lack of significant phenotype differences may be caused by too low statistical power.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26090758     DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000266

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain        ISSN: 0304-3959            Impact factor:   6.961


  28 in total

Review 1.  Neuropathic Pain After Spinal Cord Injury: Challenges and Research Perspectives.

Authors:  Rani Shiao; Corinne A Lee-Kubli
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 7.620

2.  Clinical benefits, referral practice and cost implications of an in-hospital pain service: results of a service evaluation in a London teaching hospital.

Authors:  Maya Sussman; Elizabeth Goodier; Izabella Fabri; Jessica Borrowman; Sarah Thomas; Charlotte Guest; Carsten Bantel
Journal:  Br J Pain       Date:  2016-10-11

3.  Neuropathic Pain in Pediatric Oncology: A Clinical Decision Algorithm.

Authors:  Doralina L Anghelescu; Jessica Michala Tesney
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 3.022

Review 4.  [Pain in patients with paraplegia].

Authors:  G Landmann; E-C Chang; W Dumat; A Lutz; R Müller; A Scheel-Sailer; K Schwerzmann; N Sigajew; A Ljutow
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.107

Review 5.  Design and conduct of confirmatory chronic pain clinical trials.

Authors:  Nathaniel Katz
Journal:  Pain Rep       Date:  2020-12-18

Review 6.  A Mechanism-Based Approach to Physical Therapist Management of Pain.

Authors:  Ruth L Chimenti; Laura A Frey-Law; Kathleen A Sluka
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2018-05-01

Review 7.  Alternatives to Opioids in the Pharmacologic Management of Chronic Pain Syndromes: A Narrative Review of Randomized, Controlled, and Blinded Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Andrea L Nicol; Robert W Hurley; Honorio T Benzon
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 5.108

8.  Usefulness of laser-evoked potentials and quantitative sensory testing in the diagnosis of neuropathic spinal cord injury pain: a multiple case study.

Authors:  G Landmann; M F Berger; L Stockinger; E Opsommer
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2017-01-24       Impact factor: 2.772

9.  Test-Retest and Inter-Examiner Reliability of a Novel Bedside Quantitative Sensory Testing Battery in Postherpetic Neuralgia Patients.

Authors:  Ajay D Wasan; Benedict J Alter; Robert R Edwards; Charles E Argoff; Nalini Sehgal; David Walk; Toby Moeller-Bertram; Mark S Wallace; Misha Backonja
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 5.820

10.  Reliability and Validity of the Boston Bedside Quantitative Sensory Testing Battery for Neuropathic Pain.

Authors:  Alexandra E Koulouris; Robert R Edwards; Kathleen Dorado; Kristin L Schreiber; Asimina Lazaridou; Sharika Rajan; Jeffrey White; Jenniffer Garcia; Christopher Gibbons; Roy Freeman
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 3.750

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.