WikiMSK:Featured Journal Article/1 February 2023: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:49, 22 February 2023

Featured Open Access Journal Article for 1 February 2023

Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: Practical Diagnostic and Treatment Guidelines, 5th Edition

Pain Medicine

ABSTRACT - There have been some modest recent advancements in the research of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, yet the amount and quality of the work in this complicated multifactorial disease remains low (with some notable exceptions; e.g., the recent work on the dorsal root ganglion stimulation). The semi-systematic (though in some cases narrative) approach to review is necessary so that we might treat our patients while waiting for “better research.” This semi-systematic review was conducted by experts in the field, (deliberately) some of whom are promising young researchers supplemented by the experience of “elder statesman” researchers, who all mention the system they have used to examine the literature. What we found is generally low- to medium-quality research with small numbers of subjects; however, there are some recent exceptions to this. The primary reason for this paucity of research is the fact that this is a rare disease, and it is very difficult to acquire a sufficient sample size for statistical significance using traditional statistical approaches. Several larger trials have failed, probably due to using the broad general diagnostic criteria (the “Budapest” criteria) in a multifactorial/multi-mechanism disease. Responsive subsets can often be identified in these larger trials, but not sufficient to achieve statistically significant results in the general diagnostic grouping. This being the case the authors have necessarily included data from less compelling protocols, including trials such as case series and even in some instances case reports/empirical information. In the humanitarian spirit of treating our often desperate patients with this rare syndrome, without great evidence, we must take what data we can find (as in this work) and tailor a treatment regime for each patient.

Full text

<Featured Journal Article/1 January 2023

Featured Journal Article/1 March 2023>

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{FeaturedJournalArticle
 |Date=2023-02-01
-|Title=Trigeminal neuralgia: A practical guide
+|Title=Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: Practical Diagnostic and Treatment Guidelines, 5th Edition
-|Journal=Practical Neurology
+|Journal=Pain Medicine
-|Abstract=Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is a highly disabling disorder characterised by very severe, brief and electric shock like recurrent episodes of facial pain. New diagnostic criteria, which subclassify TN on the basis of presence of trigeminal neurovascular conflict or an underlying neurological disorder, should be used as they allow better characterisation of patients and help in decision-making regarding medical and surgical treatments. MR imaging, including high-resolution trigeminal sequences, should be performed as part of the diagnostic work- up. Carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine are drugs of first choice. Lamotrigine, gabapentin, pregabalin, botulinum toxin type A and baclofen can be used either alone or as add-on therapy. Surgery should be considered if the pain is poorly controlled or the medical treatments are poorly tolerated. Trigeminal microvascular decompression is the first-line surgery in patients with trigeminal neurovascular conflict while neuroablative surgical treatments can be offered if MR imaging does not show any neurovascular contact or where patients are considered too frail for microvascular decompression or do not wish to take the risk
+|File name=CRPS guidelines 5th edition.pdf
-|File name=Trigeminal Neuralgia - Lambru 2021.pdf
+|Abstract=There have been some modest recent advancements in the research of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, yet the amount and quality of the work in this complicated multifactorial disease remains low (with some notable exceptions; e.g., the recent work on the dorsal root ganglion stimulation). The semi-systematic (though in some cases narrative) approach to review is necessary so that we might treat our patients while waiting for “better research.” This semi-systematic review was conducted by experts in the field, (deliberately) some of whom are promising young researchers supplemented by the experience of “elder statesman” researchers, who all mention the system they have used to examine the literature. What we found is generally low- to medium-quality research with small numbers of subjects; however, there are some recent exceptions to this. The primary reason for this paucity of research is the fact that this is a rare disease, and it is very difficult to acquire a sufficient sample size for statistical significance using traditional statistical approaches. Several larger trials have failed, probably due to using the broad general diagnostic criteria (the “Budapest” criteria) in a multifactorial/multi-mechanism disease. Responsive subsets can often be identified in these larger trials, but not sufficient to achieve statistically significant results in the general diagnostic grouping. This being the case the authors have necessarily included data from less compelling protocols, including trials such as case series and even in some instances case reports/empirical information. In the humanitarian spirit of treating our often desperate patients with this rare syndrome, without great evidence, we must take what data we can find (as in this work) and tailor a treatment regime for each patient.
 }}