Tim J. Lamer

Complications of Lumbar Facet Radiofrequency Denervation

Study Design. Retrospective. Objective. To assess the incidence of complications associated with fluoroscopically guided percutaneous radiofrequency denervation of the lumbar facet joints. Summary of Background Data. Based on the results of previous efficacy studies, complications associated with facet joint radiofrequency denervation procedures appear to be rare. No formal safety assessment for this procedure has been performed to date. Methods. We conducted retrospective chart reviews to identify complications that occurred within 8 weeks of facet joint radiofrequency denervation procedures performed at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville during a 5-year period. Only procedures that included radiofrequency electrode placement between the L1 transverse process and the sacral ala were included. The chart of each patient was reviewed and adjudicated by a panel of 4 physicians before being classified as a complication. Results. Ninety-two patients received a total of 616 radiofrequency lesions during 116 separate denervation procedures. An average of 5 ± 3 lesions were performed during each radiofrequency denervation procedure. Six minor complications were identified, yielding a 1.0% overall incidence of minor complications per radiofrequency site. Complications included: 3 cases of localized pain lasting more than 2 weeks (0.5%) and 3 cases of neuritic pain lasting less than 2 weeks (0.5%). No cases of infection, new motor deficits, or new sensory deficits were identified. Conclusions. Fluoroscopically guided percutaneous radiofrequency denervation of the lumbar facets is associated with an overall 1.0% incidence of minor complications per lesion site.

Complex Regional Pain Syndrome

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), formerly known as reflex sympathetic dystrophy, is a regional, posttraumatic, neuropathic pain problem that most often affects 1 or more limbs. Like most medical conditions, early diagnosis and treatment increase the likelihood of a successful outcome. Accordingly, patients with clinical signs and symptoms of CRPS after an injury should be referred immediately to a physician with expertise in evaluating and treating this condition. Physical therapy is the cornerstone and first-line treatment for CRPS. Mild cases respond to physical therapy and physical modalities. Mild to moderate cases may require adjuvant analgesics, such as anticonvulsants and/or antidepressants. An opioid should be added to the treatment regimen if these medications do not provide sufficient analgesia to allow the patient to participate in physical therapy. Patients with moderate to severe pain and/or sympathetic dysfunction require regional anesthetic blockade to participate in physical therapy. A small percentage of patients develop refractory, chronic pain and require long-term multidisciplinary treatment, including physical therapy, psychological support, and pain-relieving measures. Pain-relieving measures include medications, sympathetic/somatic blockade, spinal cord stimulation, and spinal analgesia.

Contemporary Management of Neuropathic Pain for the Primary Care Physician

Neuropathic pain (NP), caused by a primary lesion or dysfunction in the nervous system, affects approximately 4 million people in the United States each year. It is associated with many diseases, including diabetic peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, human immunodeficiency virus-related disorders, and chronic radiculopathy. Major pathophysiological mechanisms include peripheral sensitization, sympathetic activation, disinhibition, and central sensitization. Unlike most acute pain conditions, NP is extremely difficult to treat successfully with conventional analgesics. This article introduces a contemporary management approach, that is, one that incorporates nonpharmacological, pharmacological, and interventional strategies. Some nonpharmacological management strategies include patient education, physical rehabilitation, psychological techniques, and complementary medicine. Pharmacological strategies include the use of first-line agents that have been supported by randomized controlled trials. Finally, referral to a pain specialist may be indicated for additional assessment, interventional techniques, and rehabilitation. Integrating a comprehensive approach to NP gives the primary care physician and patient the greatest chance for success.

An evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of cervical radiculopathy from degenerative disorders

Abstract Background context The North American Spine Society (NASS) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Cervical Radiculopathy from Degenerative Disorders provides evidence-based recommendations on key clinical questions concerning the diagnosis and treatment of cervical radiculopathy from degenerative disorders. The guideline addresses these questions based on the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of May 2009. The guideline’s recommendations assist the practitioner in delivering optimum efficacious treatment of and functional recovery from this common disorder. Purpose Provide an evidence-based educational tool to assist spine care providers in improving quality and efficiency of care delivered to patients with cervical radiculopathy from degenerative disorders. Study design Systematic review and evidence-based clinical guideline. Methods This report is from the Cervical Radiculopathy from Degenerative Disorders Work Group of the NASS’ Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline Development Committee. The work group consisted of multidisciplinary spine care specialists trained in the principles of evidence-based analysis. Each member of the group formatted a series of clinical questions to be addressed by the group. The final questions agreed on by the group are the subjects of this report. A literature search addressing each question using a specific search protocol was performed on English language references found in MEDLINE, EMBASE (Drugs and Pharmacology), and four additional evidence-based databases. The relevant literature was then independently rated by a minimum of three reviewers using the NASS-adopted standardized levels of evidence. An evidentiary table was created for each of the questions. Final recommendations to answer each clinical question were arrived at via work group discussion, and grades were assigned to the recommendations using standardized grades of recommendation. In the absence of Levels I to IV evidence, work group consensus statements have been developed using a modified nominal group technique, and these statements are clearly identified as such in the guideline. Results Eighteen clinical questions were formulated, addressing issues of natural history, diagnosis, and treatment of cervical radiculopathy from degenerative disorders. The answers are summarized in this article. The respective recommendations were graded by the strength of the supporting literature, which was stratified by levels of evidence. Conclusions A clinical guideline for cervical radiculopathy from degenerative disorders has been created using the techniques of evidence-based medicine and best available evidence to aid both practitioners and patients involved with the care of this condition. The entire guideline document, including the evidentiary tables, suggestions for future research, and all references, is available electronically at the NASS Web site ( www.spine.org ) and will remain updated on a timely schedule.

The Use of Spinal Cord Stimulation in Refractory Abdominal Visceral Pain: Case Reports and Literature Review

Abstract:  Patients will commonly seek medical attention for refractory abdominal pain. The many causes of abdominal pain include pathologies of the gastrointestinal, genitourinary, musculoskeletal, and nervous systems. Unfortunately, a large number of patients will develop chronic abdominal pain that is recalcitrant to definitive therapies and nonspecific treatments such as cognitive‐behavioral, physical, and pharmacologic therapies. Although spinal cord stimulation is classically used for neuropathic and ischemic conditions, a growing number of reports describe its efficacy in visceral disease. We describe our experience with spinal cord stimulation in two patients with refractory abdominal pain. Although the exact etiology in these complex patients is not defined, it is theorized that visceral hypersensitivity is at least one component. Finally, we will summarize the applicable literature in order to explain a possible mechanism of analgesia in visceral disease.

Treatment of Cancer-Related Pain: When Orally Administered Medications Fail

OBJECTIVE To summarize the available pain-relieving interventions other than oral medications for cancer-related pain. DESIGN The pertinent literature is reviewed, and the various options for treating pain in patients with cancer are discussed. MATERIAL AND METHODS The appropriate situations for use of parenteral administration of opioids, spinal analgesia, neural blockade, and neurosurgical treatment are outlined, and the potential problems and complications associated with these techniques are described. RESULTS The basic approach to the management of pain in patients with cancer is to begin treatment with less potent analgesic agents early and to progress toward use of more potent pharmaceutical agents, adjuvant drugs, and invasive procedures as needed for alleviation of pain. With parenteral administration of opioids, the dosage can be adjusted rapidly, and therapy can be continued even though a patient may have gastrointestinal dysfunction. A portable ambulatory infusion pump can be used in selected patients. The major advantage of spinal opioid analgesia is the intense analgesia provided with minimal side effects. The potential complications and the availability of treatment alternatives have limited the use of neurolytic blocks, which usually provide only temporary relief of pain. In carefully selected patients with pancreatic or other upper gastrointestinal neoplasms, however, neurolytic celiac plexus and splanchnic nerve blocks are effective. Patients who fail to respond to conservative interventions may be candidates for neurosurgical procedures, such as spinal cord, cortical, or brain-stem stimulation or neuroablative operations (most commonly, cordotomy). CONCLUSION Cancer-related pain continues to be a major problem, and clinicians should be aware of the availability of effective treatment strategies and techniques. When orally administered medications fail to control pain or cause excessive side effects, patients should be referred to an appropriate specialist or medical center for consideration of other pain-relieving techniques.

Treatment of central post-stroke pain with oral ketamine

&NA; Case report of 68 year old female with central post‐stroke pain successfully treated with oral ketamine. The patients pain was refractory to conventional pain treatments and she had persistent right hemi‐body neuropathic pain with allodynia and hyperalgesia. An intravenous ketamine trial, followed by oral ketamine with titration to 50mg three times a day was beneficial in decreasing allodynia and hyperalgesia, as well as improving functional capabilities. Known side effects including dysphoria, hallucinations, and paranoid feelings were attenuated with benzodiazepines.

An evidence-based clinical guideline for the use of antithrombotic therapies in spine surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT The objective of the North American Spine Society (NASS) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline on antithrombotic therapies in spine surgery was to provide evidence-based recommendations to address key clinical questions surrounding the use of antithrombotic therapies in spine surgery. The guideline is intended to address these questions based on the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of February 2008. The goal of the guideline recommendations was to assist in delivering optimum, efficacious treatment with the goal of preventing thromboembolic events. PURPOSE To provide an evidence-based, educational tool to assist spine surgeons in minimizing the risk of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). STUDY DESIGN Systematic review and evidence-based clinical guideline. METHODS This report is from the Antithrombotic Therapies Work Group of the NASS Evidence-Based Guideline Development Committee. The work group was composed of multidisciplinary spine care specialists, all of whom were trained in the principles of evidence-based analysis. Each member of the group was involved in formatting a series of clinical questions to be addressed by the group. The final questions agreed on by the group are the subject of this report. A literature search addressing each question and using a specific search protocol was performed on English language references found in MEDLINE, EMBASE (Drugs and Pharmacology), and four additional, evidence-based databases. The relevant literature was then independently rated by at least three reviewers using the NASS-adopted standardized levels of evidence. An evidentiary table was created for each of the questions. Final grades of recommendation for the answers to each clinical question were arrived at via Web casts among members of the work group using standardized grades of recommendation. When Level I to IV evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation to answer a specific clinical question, expert consensus was arrived at by the work group through the modified nominal group technique and is clearly identified as such in the guideline. RESULTS Fourteen clinical questions were formulated, addressing issues of incidence of DVT and PE in spine surgery and recommendations regarding utilization of mechanical prophylaxis and chemoprophylaxis in spine surgery. The answers to these 14 clinical questions are summarized in this article. The respective recommendations were graded by the strength of the supporting literature that was stratified by levels of evidence. CONCLUSIONS A clinical guideline addressing the use of antithrombotic therapies in spine surgery has been created using the techniques of evidence-based medicine and using the best available evidence as a tool to assist spine surgeons in minimizing the risk of DVT and PE. The entire guideline document, including the evidentiary tables, suggestions for future research, and all references, is available electronically at the NASS Web site (www.spine.org) and will remain updated on a timely schedule.

Minimally Invasive Procedures for Disorders of the Lumbar Spine

In the past decade, there has been a substantial increase in interest in minimally invasive procedures in all areas of medicine, particularly for spinal disorders. Some of these techniques represent notable advances in spinal care and have major roles in the care of patients with back-related symptoms. Other techniques appear to offer no benefit and in some cases may be less effective than conventional treatments. Percutaneous lumbar diskectomy techniques hold considerable promise; however, lumbar microdiskectomy is the gold standard for surgical treatment of lumbar disk protrusion with radiculopathy. Intradiskal electrothermal therapy is emerging as a useful option for selected patients with intractable mechanical back pain whose only other option historically has been a spinal fusion. Percutaneous fusion techniques are in their infancy and may prove to be beneficial for these patients as well. Percutaneous vertebral augmentation, including vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty, has become the treatment of choice for many patients with intractable back pain secondary to vertebral insufficiency fractures. Spinal injections are important for evaluating and managing spinal pain and can be extremely useful diagnostically and therapeutically. This multidisciplinary review outlines the status of these procedures and offers suggestions for their use in patient care.

Interscalene blocks for chronic upper extremity pain

A study of 25 patients was carried out to determine the efficacy of interscalene block (ISB) for the treatment of chronic upper extremity pain. An RSD score was used to categorize these patients. Seventeen of the 25 patients had less pain after ISB, and 14 also had increased range of motion of the affected limb. Patients with reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD)/causalgia, as well as other chronic pain conditions, improved. ISB was compared with stellate ganglion block (SGB) in patients undergoing both treatments. ISB seemed to be at least as effective as SGB for treatment of RSD/causalgia and may have some advantages over SGB. The role of somatic and sympathetic blockade is discussed.