Background: Spasticity may present as a wide range of symptoms and conditions. With this protean presentation, a consensus regarding the best course of treatment does not exist. Those patients most severely affected may receive significant benefit from intrathecal baclofen delivery. However, this therapy may itself lead to patient injury in the event of withdrawal. Objective: Withdrawal from intrathecal baclofen may devolve rapidly into a situation in which the patient may incur significant morbidity and even death. A focused, prompt treatment plan would afford the patient the best possible outcome. Methods: The medical literature was reviewed for reports of plans of treatment of baclofen withdrawal and the results obtained. The nature of this problem does not lend itself to a typical study design, depending on case reports and basic pharmacological science application. The paucity of such reports severely limits categorical comparison of patient characteristics and clinical circumstances. Clinical situations, patient characteristics, and therapies were considered and compared. Outcomes of the varied treatments were evaluated for efficacy. Results: Inaccurate diagnoses, delayed correct diagnoses, and the absence of a consistent, treatment plan contributed to widely disparate outcomes. Prompt, correct diagnosis and intensive care unit-based continuous benzodiazepine infusion with titration led to a controlled clinical situation and maximized patient outcomes. Conclusions: Patients going through withdrawal from intrathecal baclofen achieved best outcomes when treated with a continuous infusion and titration of an intravenous benzodiazepine. A well-defined treatment protocol employing this management, reporting serial outcomes, would enable further refinement of the treatment of this clinical problem.
Background: Spasticity may present as a wide range of symptoms and conditions. With this protean presentation, a consensus regarding the best course of treatment does not exist. Those patients most severely affected may receive significant benefit from intrathecal baclofen delivery. However, this therapy may itself lead to patient injury in the event of withdrawal. Objective: Withdrawal from intrathecal baclofen may devolve rapidly into a situation in which the patient may incur significant morbidity and even death. A focused, prompt treatment plan would afford the patient the best possible outcome. Methods: The medical literature was reviewed for reports of plans of treatment of baclofen withdrawal and the results obtained. The nature of this problem does not lend itself to a typical study design, depending on case reports and basic pharmacological science application. The paucity of such reports severely limits categorical comparison of patient characteristics and clinical circumstances. Clinical situations, patient characteristics, and therapies were considered and compared. Outcomes of the varied treatments were evaluated for efficacy. Results: Inaccurate diagnoses, delayed correct diagnoses, and the absence of a consistent, treatment plan contributed to widely disparate outcomes. Prompt, correct diagnosis and intensive care unit-based continuous benzodiazepine infusion with titration led to a controlled clinical situation and maximized patient outcomes. Conclusions: Patients going through withdrawal from intrathecal baclofen achieved best outcomes when treated with a continuous infusion and titration of an intravenous benzodiazepine. A well-defined treatment protocol employing this management, reporting serial outcomes, would enable further refinement of the treatment of this clinical problem.