Charles Argoff

Assessment: Botulinum neurotoxin in the treatment of autonomic disorders and pain (an evidence-based review): report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology.

Objective: To perform an evidence-based review of the safety and efficacy of botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) in the treatment of autonomic and urologic disorders and low back and head pain. Methods: A literature search was performed including MEDLINE and Current Contents for therapeutic articles relevant to BoNT and the selected indications. Authors reviewed, abstracted, and classified articles based on the quality of the study (Class I–IV). Conclusions and recommendations were developed based on the highest level of evidence and put into current clinical context. Results: The highest quality literature available for the respective indications was as follows: axillary hyperhidrosis (two Class I studies); palmar hyperhidrosis (two Class II studies); drooling (four Class II studies); gustatory sweating (five Class III studies); neurogenic detrusor overactivity (two Class I studies); sphincter detrusor dyssynergia in spinal cord injury (two Class II studies); chronic low back pain (one Class II study); episodic migraine (two Class I and two Class II studies); chronic daily headache (four Class II studies); and chronic tension-type headache (two Class I studies). Recommendations: Botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) should be offered as a treatment option for the treatment of axillary hyperhidrosis and detrusor overactivity (Level A), should be considered for palmar hyperhidrosis, drooling, and detrusor sphincter dyssynergia after spinal cord injury (Level B), and may be considered for gustatory sweating and low back pain (Level C). BoNT is probably ineffective in episodic migraine and chronic tension-type headache (Level B). There is presently no consistent or strong evidence to permit drawing conclusions on the efficacy of BoNT in chronic daily headache (mainly transformed migraine) (Level U). While clinicians’ practice may suggest stronger recommendations in some of these indications, evidence-based conclusions are limited by the availability of data.

Evidence-based guideline update: Pharmacologic treatment for episodic migraine prevention in adults Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society

Objective: To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for the preventive treatment of migraine headache. The clinical question addressed was: What pharmacologic therapies are proven effective for migraine prevention? Methods: The authors analyzed published studies from June 1999 to May 2009 using a structured review process to classify the evidence relative to the efficacy of various medications available in the United States for migraine prevention. Results and Recommendations: The author panel reviewed 284 abstracts, which ultimately yielded 29 Class I or Class II articles that are reviewed herein. Divalproex sodium, sodium valproate, topiramate, metoprolol, propranolol, and timolol are effective for migraine prevention and should be offered to patients with migraine to reduce migraine attack frequency and severity (Level A). Frovatriptan is effective for prevention of menstrual migraine (Level A). Lamotrigine is ineffective for migraine prevention (Level A).

Practice Parameter: The diagnostic evaluation and treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (an evidence-based review): Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the European Federation of Neurological Societies

Background: Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a common cause of facial pain. Purpose: To answer the following questions: 1) In patients with TN, how often does routine neuroimaging (CT, MRI) identify a cause? 2) Which features identify patients at increased risk for symptomatic TN (STN; i.e., a structural cause such as a tumor)? 3) Does high-resolution MRI accurately identify patients with neurovascular compression? 4) Which drugs effectively treat classic and symptomatic trigeminal neuralgia? 5) When should surgery be offered? 6) Which surgical technique gives the longest pain-free period with the fewest complications and good quality of life? Methods: Systematic review of the literature by a panel of experts. Conclusions: In patients with trigeminal neuralgia (TN), routine head imaging identifies structural causes in up to 15% of patients and may be considered useful (Level C). Trigeminal sensory deficits, bilateral involvement of the trigeminal nerve, and abnormal trigeminal reflexes are associated with an increased risk of symptomatic TN (STN) and should be considered useful in distinguishing STN from classic trigeminal neuralgia (Level B). There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the usefulness of MRI to identify neurovascular compression of the trigeminal nerve (Level U). Carbamazepine (Level A) or oxcarbazepine (Level B) should be offered for pain control while baclofen and lamotrigine (Level C) may be considered useful. For patients with TN refractory to medical therapy, Gasserian ganglion percutaneous techniques, gamma knife, and microvascular decompression may be considered (Level C). The role of surgery vs pharmacotherapy in the management of TN in patients with MS remains uncertain.

Evidence-based guideline update: NSAIDs and other complementary treatments for episodic migraine prevention in adults Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society

OBJECTIVE To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for the preventive treatment of migraine headache. The clinical question addressed was: Are nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or other complementary treatments effective for migraine prevention? METHODS The authors analyzed published studies from June 1999 to May 2009 using a structured review process to classify the evidence relative to the efficacy of various medications for migraine prevention. RESULTS The author panel reviewed 284 abstracts, which ultimately yielded 49 Class I or Class II articles on migraine prevention; of these 49, 15 were classified as involving nontraditional therapies, NSAIDs, and other complementary therapies that are reviewed herein. RECOMMENDATIONS Petasites (butterbur) is effective for migraine prevention and should be offered to patients with migraine to reduce the frequency and severity of migraine attacks (Level A). Fenoprofen, ibuprofen, ketoprofen, naproxen, naproxen sodium, MIG-99 (feverfew), magnesium, riboflavin, and subcutaneous histamine are probably effective for migraine prevention (Level B). Treatments considered possibly effective are cyproheptadine, Co-Q10, estrogen, mefenamic acid, and flurbiprofen (Level C). Data are conflicting or inadequate to support or refute use of aspirin, indomethacin, omega-3, or hyperbaric oxygen for migraine prevention. Montelukast is established as probably ineffective for migraine prevention (Level B).

Assessment: Use of epidural steroid injections to treat radicular lumbosacral pain Report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

Based on the available evidence, the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment subcommittee concluded that 1) epidural steroid injections may result in some improvement in radicular lumbosacral pain when assessed between 2 and 6 weeks following the injection, compared to control treatments (Level C, Class I-III evidence). The average magnitude of effect is small and generalizability of the observation is limited by the small number of studies, highly selected patient populations, few techniques and doses, and variable comparison treatments; 2) in general, epidural steroid injection for radicular lumbosacral pain does not impact average impairment of function, need for surgery, or provide long-term pain relief beyond 3 months. Their routine use for these indications is not recommended (Level B, Class I-III evidence); 3) there is insufficient evidence to make any recommendation for the use of epidural steroid injections to treat radicular cervical pain (Level U).

Diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain: clinical and quality-of-life issues.

Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is estimated to be present in 50% of people living with diabetes mellitus (DM). Comorbidities of DM, such as macrovascular and microvascular changes, also Interact with DPN and affect its course. In patients with DM, DPN Is the leading cause of foot ulcers, which in turn are a major cause of amputation in the United States. Although most patients with DPN do not have pain, approximately 11% of patients with DPN have chronic, painful symptoms that diminish quality of life, disrupt sleep, and can lead to depression. Despite the number of patients affected by DPN pain, little consensus exists about the pathophysiology, best diagnostic tools, and primary treatment choices. This article reviews the current knowledge about and presents recommendations for diagnostic assessment of DPN pain based on a review of the literature.

A focused review on the use of botulinum toxins for neuropathic pain

Abstract: Understanding the pathophysiology of a pain syndrome is helpful in selecting appropriate treatment strategies. Nociceptive pain is related to damage to tissues due to thermal, chemical, mechanical, or other types of irritants. Neuropathic pain results from injury to the peripheral or central nervous system. Common examples of neuropathic pain include postherpetic neuralgia, diabetic neuropathy, complex regional pain syndrome, and pain associated with spinal cord injuries. Nociceptive pain may have similar clinical characteristics to neuropathic pain. It is also possible for acute nociceptive pain to become neuropathic in nature, as with myofascial pain syndrome. A clear benefit of botulinum toxin therapy for treatment of neuropathic pain disorders is that it often relieves pain symptoms. Although the precise mechanism of pain relief is not completely understood, the injection of botulinum toxin may reduce various substances that sensitize nociceptors. As a result, botulinum toxin types A and B are now being actively studied in nociceptive and neuropathic pain disorders to better define their roles as analgesics.

Consensus Guidelines: Treatment Planning and Options

Despite the number of patients affected by diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP), little consensus exists about the pathophysiology, best diagnostic tools, and primary treatment choices. Theories about the causes of DPNP are inextricably linked with the causes of diabetic neuropathies, yet most patients with such neuropathies do not experience pain. The factors that differentiate patients with pain from those without remain unknown and are the subject of much research. When choosing treatment for patients with DPNP, physicians are confronted with a myriad of choices, none of which has been shown to be effective for all patients. This article reviews the evidence for these treatments and attempts to guide physicians in choosing those treatments based on evidence from well-designed clinical trials to support their use. Two agents, duloxetine and pregabalin, are formally approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of DPNP. In addition, several other agents, including the tricyclic class of antidepressants, have been effective in clinical trials. Ultimately, treatment choice must also include consideration of adverse effects, individual patient factors such as comorbidities, and often cost.

The coexistence of neuropathic pain, sleep, and psychiatric disorders: a novel treatment approach.

The diagnosis and treatment of neuropathic pain may be complicated by comorbid conditions such as sleep disturbances, depression, and anxiety. The interrelationship between the index neuropathic pain state and these comorbidities is complex: comorbid conditions exacerbate pain, and in turn, pain exacerbates the comorbid conditions. Because comorbidities can negatively impact response to pain treatment, healthcare providers should assess comorbidities as part of the diagnostic work-up, and management strategies should be designed to treat the whole patient, not just the pain. Theoretically, therapies that not only reduce pain, but also improve sleep and reduce anxiety and depression can provide multiple benefits without the risk of increased side effects inherent in combination therapy. Anticonvulsants and antidepressants have demonstrated efficacy in improving neuropathic pain and positively impacting comorbid sleep and mood disturbances. Novel anticonvulsants that can address one or more comorbidities in addition to pain may represent viable treatment options for patients with neuropathic pain.

Quantitative sensory testing and mapping a review of nonautomated quantitative methods for examination of the patient with neuropathic pain

ObjectivesDespite a growing interest in neuropathic pain, neurologists and pain specialists do not have a standard, validated, office examination for the evaluation of neuropathic pain signs to complement the neurologic, musculoskeletal, and general physical examinations. An office neuropathic pain examination focused on quantifying sensory features of neuropathic pain, ranging from deficits to allodynia and hyperalgesia, and evoked by a physiologically representative array of stimuli, will be an essential tool to monitor treatment effectiveness and for clinical investigation into the mechanisms and management of neuropathic pain. Such an examination should include mapping of areas of stimulus-evoked neuropathic pain and standardized, reproducible quantitative sensory testing (QST) of tactile, punctuate, pressure, and thermal modalities. MethodsWe review quantitative sensory testing methodology in general and specific tests for the evaluation of neuropathic pain phenomena. ResultsNumerous quantitative sensory testing techniques for dynamic mechanical, pressure, vibration, and thermal sensory testing and mapping have been described. We propose a comprehensive neuropathic pain evaluation protocol that is based upon these available techniques. ConclusionsA comprehensive neuropathic pain evaluation protocol is essential for further advancement of clinical research in neuropathic pain. A protocol that uses tools readily available in clinical practice, when established and validated, can be used widely and thus accelerate data collection for clinical research and increase clinical awareness of the features of neuropathic pain.