James North

Intrathecal Ziconotide for Neuropathic Pain: A Review

Neuropathic pain is a considerable burden that affects activities of daily living. The management of neuropathic pain can be challenging because of multiple etiologies and complex manifestations. Ziconotide is a nonopioid intrathecal (IT) analgesic option for patients with neuropathic pain refractory to conventional treatments. The objective of this article is to review the published literature on ziconotide for the treatment of neuropathic pain. Relevant publications were identified through searches of all years of 6 databases, which included PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Search terms used were ziconotide, SNX‐111, MVIIA, Prialt, and neuropathic pain. Publications were included if ziconotide was intrathecally administered (either alone or in combination with other IT agents) to treat neuropathic pain of any etiology and if pain assessment was an outcome measure. Data extracted included study design, IT drug doses, pain outcome measures, and adverse events (AEs). Twenty‐eight articles met the inclusion criteria: 5 were preclinical studies and 23 were clinical studies. In the preclinical studies, ziconotide demonstrated antiallodynic effects on neuropathic pain. Data from double‐blind, placebo‐controlled (DBPC) trials indicated that patients with neuropathic pain reported a mean percent improvement in pain score with ziconotide monotherapy that ranged from 15.7% to 31.6%. A low starting dose and slow titration of ziconotide resulted in an improved safety profile in the aforementioned trials. Common AEs associated with ziconotide include nausea and/or vomiting, dizziness, confusion, urinary retention, and somnolence. Evidence from DBPC trials, open‐label studies, case series, and case studies suggests that ziconotide, as either monotherapy or in combination with other IT drugs, is a potential therapeutic option for patients with refractory neuropathic pain. Additional studies are needed to establish the long‐term efficacy and safety of ziconotide for neuropathic pain.

A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Transdiscal Radiofrequency, Biacuplasty for Treatment of Discogenic Lower Back Pain

OBJECTIVE The aim was to compare the efficacy of intradiscal biacuplasty (IDB) with that of placebo treatment for discogenic low back pain. DESIGN This is a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Subjects were randomized on a 1:1 basis to IDB and sham groups. Follow-ups were conducted at 1, 3, and 6 months. Subjects and coordinators were blinded to randomization until 6 months. Of the 1,894 subjects screened, 64 subjects were enrolled, and 59 were treated: 29 randomized to IDB and 30 to sham. All subjects had a history of chronic low back pain for longer than 6 months. INTERVENTIONS Two cooled radiofrequency (RF) electrodes placed in a bipolar manner in affected discs to lesion the nociceptive fibers of the annulus fibrosus. The sham procedure was identical to the active treatment except that probes were not directly inserted into the disc space, and RF energy was not actively delivered. RESULTS The principal outcome measures were physical function, pain, disability, and opioid usage. Patients in the IDB group exhibited statistically significant improvements in physical function (P = 0.029), pain (P = 0.006), and disability (P = 0.037) at 6-month follow-up as compared to patients who received sham treatment. Treatment patients reported a reduction of 16 mg daily intake of opioids at 6 months; however, the results were not statistically different from sham patients. CONCLUSIONS The results suggest that the clinical benefits observed in this study are the result of non-placebo treatment effects afforded by IDB. IDB should be recommended to select the patients with chronic discogenic low back pain. (Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT00750191.).

Treatment of post-amputation pain with peripheral nerve stimulation.

Present treatment methods are often unsatisfactory in reducing post‐amputation pain. Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) could reduce the pain, but it is rarely used because present methods require invasive surgical access and precise placement of the leads in close proximity (≤2 mm) with the nerve.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for the Treatment of Postamputation Pain—A Case Report

Many amputees suffer from postamputation pain, which can be extremely debilitating, decrease quality of life, increase the risk of depression, and negatively affect interpersonal relationships and the ability to work. Present methods of treatment, including medications, are often unsatisfactory in reducing postamputation pain. Electrical stimulation of the nerve innervating the painful area could reduce the pain, but peripheral nerve stimulation is rarely used to treat postamputation pain because present methods require invasive surgical access and precise placement of the leads in close proximity (≤ 2 mm) with the nerve. The present study investigated a novel approach to peripheral nerve stimulation in which a lead was placed percutaneously a remote distance (> 1 cm) away from the femoral nerve in a patient with severe residual limb pain (RLP) 33 years following a below‐knee amputation. Electrical stimulation generated ≥ 75% paresthesia coverage, reduced RLP by > 60%, and improved quality of life outcomes as measured by the pain interference scale of the Brief Pain Inventory‐Short Form (100% reduction in pain interference), Pain Disability Index (74% reduction in disability), and the Patient Global Impression of Change (very much improved) during a 2‐week home trial. There were no adverse events. The ability to generate significant paresthesia coverage and pain relief with a single lead inserted percutaneously and remotely from the target nerve holds promise for providing relief of postamputation pain.

Clinical Outcomes of 1 kHz Subperception Spinal Cord Stimulation in Implanted Patients With Failed Paresthesia-Based Stimulation: Results of a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

Pain relief via spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has historically revolved around producing paresthesia to replace pain, with success measured by the extent of paresthesia‐pain overlap. In a recent murine study, by Shechter et al., showed the superior efficacy of high frequency SCS (1 kHz and 10 kHz) at inhibiting the effects of mechanical hypersensitivity compared to sham or 50 Hz stimulation. In the same study, authors report there were no differences in efficacy between 1 kHz and 10 kHz delivered at subperception stimulation strength (80% of motor threshold). Therefore, we designed a randomized, 2 × 2 crossover study of low frequency supra‐perception SCS vs. subperception SCS at 1 kHz frequency in order to test whether subperception stimulation at 1 kHz was sufficient to provide effective pain relief in human subjects.

Intrathecal clonidine and adenosine: effects on pain and sensory processing in patients with chronic regional pain syndrome.

Abstract Chronic pain may be accompanied by hyperalgesia and allodynia, and analgesic interventions may reduce these hypersensitivity phenomena. Preclinical data suggest that intrathecal clonidine and adenosine reduce hypersensitivity, but only clonidine reduces pain; therefore, we tested the effects of these interventions in patients with chronic pain. Twenty-two subjects with pain and hyperalgesia in a lower extremity from complex regional pain syndrome were recruited in a double-blind crossover study to receive intrathecal clonidine, 100 &mgr;g, or adenosine, 2 mg. Primary outcome measure was proportion with ≥30% reduction in pain 2 hours after injection, and secondary measures were pain report, areas of hypersensitivity, and temporal summation to heat stimuli. Treatments did not differ in the primary outcome measure (10 met success criterion after clonidine administration and 5 after adenosine administration), although they did differ in pain scores over time, with clonidine having a 3-fold greater effect (P = 0.014). Both drugs similarly reduced areas of hyperalgesia and allodynia by approximately 30% and also inhibited temporal summation. The percentage change in pain report did not correlate with the percentage change in areas of hyperalgesia (P = 0.09, r2 = 0.08) or allodynia (P = 0.24, r2 = 0.24) after drug treatment. Both intrathecal clonidine and adenosine acutely inhibit experimentally induced and clinical hypersensitivity in patients with chronic regional pain syndrome. Although these drugs do not differ in analgesia by the primary outcome measure, their difference in effect on pain scores over time and lack of correlation between effect on pain and hypersensitivity suggest that analgesia does not parallel antihyperalgesia with these treatments.

Radiofrequency Intradiscal Biacuplasty for Treatment of Discogenic Lower Back Pain: A 12-Month Follow-Up

INTRODUCTION Discogenic low back pain (LBP) affects a considerable number of patients suffering from chronic LBP. Recently, a growing interest has emerged in minimally invasive treatment options for discogenic LBP. Intradiscal biacuplasty (IDB), which uses cooled radiofrequency technology to ablate nociceptors in the posterior aspect of the intervertebral disc, is one such option. We previously presented 6-month results of a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled study. Now, we present the unblinded, 12-month follow-up data for treatment patients and 6-month data for cross-over subjects from the original sham group. METHODS Physical function, pain relief, and disability were assessed using the Short Form-36, numerical rating scale, and Oswestry Disability Index, respectively. Subjects were unblinded at 6 months, and those initially randomized to sham procedure were given the option to cross over to IDB. RESULTS Twenty-two out of 27 subjects in the original active treatment group were followed until 12 months and had clinically significant improvements in physical function (Δ = 22) and pain (Δ = -2.9). Out of 30 subjects originally in the sham group, 24 chose to cross over, and 20 cross-over patients completed follow-up at 6 months. In cross-over patients, improvements in physical function and pain did not differ statistically from those of patients originally randomized to IDB treatment. No complications or adverse events related to the procedure were reported. CONCLUSIONS Clinically significant improvements after IDB initially reported at 6 months were maintained at 9 and 12 months. The cross-over subjects had similar improvement in all outcome measures at all observed time points.

Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) with Anatomically Guided (3D) Neural Targeting Shows Superior Chronic Axial Low Back Pain Relief Compared to Traditional SCS—LUMINA Study

Background The aim of this study was to determine whether spinal cord stimulation (SCS) using 3D neural targeting provided sustained overall and low back pain relief in a broad routine clinical practice population. Study Design and Methods This was a multicenter, open-label observational study with an observational arm and retrospective analysis of a matched cohort. After IPG implantation, programming was done using a patient-specific, model-based algorithm to adjust for lead position (3D neural targeting) or previous generation software (traditional). Demographics, medical histories, SCS parameters, pain locations, pain intensities, disabilities, and safety data were collected for all patients. Results A total of 213 patients using 3D neural targeting were included, with a trial-to-implant ratio of 86%. Patients used seven different lead configurations, with 62% receiving 24 to 32 contacts, and a broad range of stimulation parameters utilizing a mean of 14.3 (±6.1) contacts. At 24 months postimplant, pain intensity decreased significantly from baseline (ΔNRS = 4.2, N = 169, P  < 0.0001) and even more in in the severe pain subgroup (ΔNRS = 5.3, N = 91, P  < 0.0001). Axial low back pain also decreased significantly from baseline to 24 months (ΔNRS = 4.1, N = 70, P  < 0.0001, on the overall cohort and ΔNRS = 5.6, N = 38, on the severe subgroup). Matched cohort comparison with 213 patients treated with traditional SCS at the same centers showed overall pain responder rates of 51% (traditional SCS) and 74% (neural targeting SCS) and axial low back pain responder rates of 41% and 71% in the traditional SCS and neural targeting SCS cohorts, respectively. Lastly, complications occurred in a total of 33 of the 213 patients, with a 1.6% lead replacement rate and a 1.6% explant rate. Conclusions Our results suggest that 3D neural targeting SCS and its associated hardware flexibility provide effective treatment for both chronic leg and chronic axial low back pain that is significantly superior to traditional SCS.

Opioid-Induced Constipation Survey in Patients with Chronic Noncancer Pain.

Chronic pain patients relying on chronic opioid therapy are often challenged with opioid‐induced constipation (OIC), a difficult condition to treat that has a significant psychosocial impact on those who are affected (Bruner et al., J Pain Res, 8, 2015, 289). Unlike other side effects of opioids, OIC does not resolve over time during chronic opioid use, and treatments used for functional constipation often fail to provide adequate symptom relief (Nelson and Camilleri, Therap Adv Gastroenterol, 8, 2015, 206). Estimates of the prevalence of OIC vary. It has been reported that 15% to 90% of opioid users are affected by OIC (Gaertner et al., J Clin Gastroenterol, 49, 2015, 9; Wan et al., Am Health Drug Benefits, 8, 2015, 93; Coyne et al., Clinicoecon Outcomes Res, 6, 2014, 269). In addition, a recent rise in opioid prescriptions by nonpain specialists has contributed to the increase in opioid‐related side effects, such as OIC (Nelson and Camilleri, Therap Adv Gastroenterol, 8, 2015, 206; Tuteja et al., Neurogastroenterol Motil, 22, 2010, 424). We conducted a survey on OIC through PainPathways magazine in fall of 2014 and in spring of 2015. Survey results showed the prevalence of depression and the modification of opioid dosage were higher than previously thought. Additionally, we found that discussions with healthcare workers regarding OIC do not take place regularly. Our results re‐emphasize the need for a consensus on OIC‐specific diagnostic criteria, evidence‐based treatment strategies, outcome metrics, and education about OIC for both prescribers and patients to improve clinical outcome as well as patient satisfaction.

Intrathecal Clonidine via Lumbar Puncture Decreases Blood Pressure in Patients With Poorly Controlled Hypertension

Oral clonidine is used to treat hypertension but often produces sedation and severe dry mouth; intrathecal clonidine is used to treat chronic pain but may produce hypotension. This clinical feasibility study was conducted to determine if intrathecal clonidine decreases blood pressure in patients with poorly controlled hypertension.