-
Cureus Dec 2022A painful or non-painful trigeminal nerve lesion brought on by trauma that exhibits symptoms and/or clinical evidence of trigeminal nerve dysfunction is known as painful... (Review)
Review
A painful or non-painful trigeminal nerve lesion brought on by trauma that exhibits symptoms and/or clinical evidence of trigeminal nerve dysfunction is known as painful post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathy (PTTN). In relation to this, the term post-traumatic persistent dentoalveolar pain (PDAP) is an idiopathic condition of chronic neuropathic origin that manifests as a diagnostic challenge for dental practitioners. Neuropathic pain is defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) as "pain initiated or caused by a primary lesion or dysfunction in the nervous system." PDAP is located primarily in the teeth and jaws. This study systematically reviews how likely it is to get painful PTTN if the patient received endodontic therapy and the duration between doing root canal therapy (RCT) and getting PTTN. A systematic review was carried out using key search terms from PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) with English as the only permitted language. There were strict inclusion requirements. The 10 articles that were included showed a prevalence of an endodontic procedure anywhere from three to 48 months following post-endodontic treatment, and it mainly affects females in their mid-40s with no variation regarding the areas, whether it is in the maxilla or mandible. The lack of information about the association between RCT and PTTN led practitioners to make wrong diagnoses, which made the patient unwilling to seek further help. So, in this review, we identified some visible characteristics that can help in that process.
PubMed: 36686068
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.32675 -
Clinical Rehabilitation Mar 2024Three-phase graded motor imagery (limb laterality, explicit motor imagery, and mirror therapy) has been successful in chronic pain populations. However, when applied to...
OBJECTIVE
Three-phase graded motor imagery (limb laterality, explicit motor imagery, and mirror therapy) has been successful in chronic pain populations. However, when applied to phantom limb pain, an amputation-related pain, investigations often use mirror therapy alone. We aimed to explore evidence for graded motor imagery and its phases to treat phantom limb pain.
DATA SOURCES
A scoping review was conducted following the JBI Manual of Synthesis and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Thirteen databases, registers, and websites were searched.
REVIEW METHODS
Published works on any date prior to the search (August 2023) were included that involved one or more graded motor imagery phases for participants ages 18+ with amputation and phantom limb pain. Extracted data included study characteristics, participant demographics, treatment characteristics, and outcomes.
RESULTS
Sixty-one works were included representing 19 countries. Most were uncontrolled studies (31%). Many participants were male (75%) and had unilateral amputations (90%) of varying levels, causes, and duration. Most works examined one treatment phase (92%), most often mirror therapy (84%). Few works (3%) reported three-phase intervention. Dosing was inconsistent across studies. The most measured outcome was pain intensity (95%).
CONCLUSION
Despite the success of three-phase graded motor imagery in other pain populations, phantom limb pain research focuses on mirror therapy, largely ignoring other phases. Participant demographics varied, making comparisons difficult. Future work should evaluate graded motor imagery effects and indicators of patient success. The represented countries indicate that graded motor imagery phases are implemented internationally, so future work could have a widespread impact.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Amputation, Surgical; Amputees; Imagery, Psychotherapy; Pain Management; Phantom Limb
PubMed: 37849299
DOI: 10.1177/02692155231204185 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2017Neuropathic pain, which is caused by a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system, may be central or peripheral in origin. Neuropathic pain often includes... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Neuropathic pain, which is caused by a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system, may be central or peripheral in origin. Neuropathic pain often includes symptoms such as burning or shooting sensations, abnormal sensitivity to normally painless stimuli, or an increased sensitivity to normally painful stimuli. Neuropathic pain is a common symptom in many diseases of the nervous system. Opioid drugs, including morphine, are commonly used to treat neuropathic pain. Most reviews have examined all opioids together. This review sought evidence specifically for morphine; other opioids are considered in separate reviews.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of morphine for chronic neuropathic pain in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase for randomised controlled trials from inception to February 2017. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and online clinical trial registries.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, double-blind trials of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing morphine (any route of administration) with placebo or another active treatment for neuropathic pain, with participant-reported pain assessment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality and potential bias. Primary outcomes were participants with substantial pain relief (at least 50% pain relief over baseline or very much improved on Patient Global Impression of Change scale (PGIC)), or moderate pain relief (at least 30% pain relief over baseline or much or very much improved on PGIC). Where pooled analysis was possible, we used dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) or harmful outcome (NNH). We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE and created 'Summary of findings' tables.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified five randomised, double-blind, cross-over studies with treatment periods of four to seven weeks, involving 236 participants in suitably characterised neuropathic pain; 152 (64%) participants completed all treatment periods. Oral morphine was titrated to maximum daily doses of 90 mg to 180 mg or the maximum tolerated dose, and then maintained for the remainder of the study. Participants had experienced moderate or severe neuropathic pain for at least three months. Included studies involved people with painful diabetic neuropathy, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia criteria, phantom limb or postamputation pain, and lumbar radiculopathy. Exclusions were typically people with other significant comorbidity or pain from other causes.Overall, we judged the studies to be at low risk of bias, but there were concerns over small study size and the imputation method used for participants who withdrew from the studies, both of which could lead to overestimation of treatment benefits and underestimation of harm.There was insufficient or no evidence for the primary outcomes of interest for efficacy or harm. Four studies reported an approximation of moderate pain improvement (any pain-related outcome indicating some improvement) comparing morphine with placebo in different types of neuropathic pain. We pooled these data in an exploratory analysis. Moderate improvement was experienced by 63% (87/138) of participants with morphine and 36% (45/125) with placebo; the risk difference (RD) was 0.27 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 0.38, fixed-effects analysis) and the NNT 3.7 (2.6 to 6.5). We assessed the quality of the evidence as very low because of the small number of events; available information did not provide a reliable indication of the likely effect, and the likelihood that the effect will be substantially different was very high. A similar exploratory analysis for substantial pain relief on three studies (177 participants) showed no difference between morphine and placebo.All-cause withdrawals in four studies occurred in 16% (24/152) of participants with morphine and 12% (16/137) with placebo. The RD was 0.04 (-0.04 to 0.12, random-effects analysis). Adverse events were inconsistently reported, more common with morphine than with placebo, and typical of opioids. There were two serious adverse events, one with morphine, and one with a combination of morphine and nortriptyline. No deaths were reported. These outcomes were assessed as very low quality because of the limited number of participants and events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There was insufficient evidence to support or refute the suggestion that morphine has any efficacy in any neuropathic pain condition.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Analgesics, Opioid; Chronic Pain; Humans; Middle Aged; Morphine; Neuralgia; Numbers Needed To Treat; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28530786
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011669.pub2 -
Brain Research Bulletin May 2019Several studies have applied transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in the attempt to further explore the pathophysiological mechanisms of phantom-limb pain (PLP) and...
Several studies have applied transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in the attempt to further explore the pathophysiological mechanisms of phantom-limb pain (PLP) and non-painful phantom sensations (PS). We performed a systematic review of available evidence of this emerging technology in this indication. We identified studies which report a reduced intracortical inhibition and increased intracortical facilitation in the hemisphere contralateral to the PLP. TMS mapping revealed a significant lateralization of the center of gravity and an enlargement of the excitable area on the hemisphere contralateral to the amputation. N-Methyl-d-Aspartate-mediated mechanisms influence the changes of intracortical inhibition and facilitation occurring after limb amputation; however, these cortical excitability changes and PLP are independent of each other. TMS can also influence brain function if applied repetitively. A few studies have begun to therapeutically use repetitive TMS (rTMS) to relief PLP and non-painful PS. rTMS of the contralateral parietal cortex lead to a transient reduction in pain intensity. High frequency rTMS applied over the contralateral motor cortex (M1) or low frequency rTMS over the unaffected hemisphere might also induce significant clinical improvement in PLP. On the other hand, serum beta-endorphin increased significantly after real stimulation over contralateral M1. This systematic review illustrates that TMS technique is an emerging tool to gain insights to pathophysiological aspects of pain and non-painful phantom phenomena. Moreover, TMS could support appropriate patient selection for different therapies and may also have therapeutic utility in subjects with PLP or PS, though the evidence is still very preliminary and well-designed studies in larger cohort of patients are warranted.
Topics: Adult; Evoked Potentials, Motor; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Motor Cortex; N-Methylaspartate; Parietal Lobe; Phantom Limb; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
PubMed: 30862485
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainresbull.2019.03.001 -
Disability and Rehabilitation Feb 2024To summarize the research on the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) therapy for the management of phantom limb pain (PLP).
PURPOSE
To summarize the research on the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) therapy for the management of phantom limb pain (PLP).
METHODS
Three databases (SCOPUS, Ovid Embase, and Ovid MEDLINE) were searched for studies investigating the use of VR therapy for the treatment of PLP. Original research articles fulfilling the following criteria were included: (i) patients 18 years and older; (ii) all etiologies of amputation; (iii) any level of amputation; (iv) use of immersive VR as a treatment modality for PLP; (v) self-reported objective measures of PLP before and after at least one VR session; (vi) written in English.
RESULTS
A total of 15 studies were included for analysis. Fourteen studies reported decreases in objective pain scores following a single VR session or a VR intervention consisting of multiple sessions. Moreover, combining VR with tactile stimulation had a larger beneficial effect on PLP compared with VR alone.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the current literature, VR therapy has the potential to be an effective treatment modality for the management of PLP. However, the low quality of studies, heterogeneity in subject population and intervention type, and lack of data on long-term relief make it difficult to draw definitive conclusions.IMPLICATION FOR REHABILITATIONVirtual reality (VR) therapy has emerged as a new potential treatment option for phantom limb pain (PLP) that circumvents some limitations of mirror therapy.VR therapy was shown to decrease PLP following a single VR session as well as after an intervention consisting of multiple sessions.The addition of vibrotactile stimuli to VR therapy may lead to larger decreases in PLP scores compared with VR therapy alone.
Topics: Humans; Phantom Limb; Amputation, Surgical; Treatment Outcome; Pain Management; Virtual Reality
PubMed: 36724203
DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2023.2172222 -
Prosthetics and Orthotics International Mar 2024Chronic pain following amputation is debilitating. Due to its mechanisms in modulating muscle contraction and pain, botulinum toxin has been investigated as a treatment...
Chronic pain following amputation is debilitating. Due to its mechanisms in modulating muscle contraction and pain, botulinum toxin has been investigated as a treatment option for phantom limb pain (PLP) and residual limb pain (RLP). The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of botulinum toxin injection in the management of PLP and RLP following major limb amputation using a systematic review of the literature. The databases Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane were searched from inception through October 30, 2023. The search identified 50 articles; 37 underwent full-text review, and 11 were included in the final review. Eighty-nine individuals with pain were investigated by the included studies; 53 had RLP and 63 had PLP. There was significant variation in botulinum toxin type, injection method, and dosage. Twenty-one (53.9%) and 27 (64.3%) participants had improvement in PLP and RLP following botulinum toxin injection, respectively. Therefore, there is potential for use of botulinum toxin for the treatment of PLP and RLP. However, due to the minimal number of studies, small sample sizes, and heterogenous methodologies, our ability to conclude with certainty the efficacy of botulinum toxin injection on the treatment of PLP and RLP following amputation is limited.
PubMed: 38517393
DOI: 10.1097/PXR.0000000000000344 -
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive &... Mar 2022Pain after amputation can be known as residual limb pain (RLP) or phantom limb pain (PLP); however, both can be disabling in daily life with reported incidences of 8%... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pain after amputation can be known as residual limb pain (RLP) or phantom limb pain (PLP); however, both can be disabling in daily life with reported incidences of 8% for finger amputations and up to 85% for major limb amputations. The current treatment is focused on reducing the pain after neuropathic pain occurs. However, surgical techniques to prevent neuropathic pain after amputation are available and effective, but they are underutilized. The purpose of the review is to investigate the effects of techniques during amputation to prevent neuropathic pain.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed in multiple databases (Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, and Google Scholar) and following the PRISMA guidelines. Studies that reported surgical techniques to prevent neuropathic pain during limb amputation were included.
RESULTS
Of the 6188 selected studies, 13 eligible articles were selected. Five articles reported techniques for finger amputation: neurovascular island flap, centro-central union (CCU), and epineural ligatures, and flaps. For finger amputations, the use of prevention techniques resulted in a decrease of incidences from 8% to 0-3% with CCU being the most beneficial. For major limb amputations, the incidences for RLP were decreased to 0 to 55% with TMR and RPNI and compared to 64-91% for the control group. Eight articles reported techniques for amputations on major limbs: targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR), targeted nerve implantation, concomitant nerve coaptation, and regenerative peripheral nerve interface (RPNI).
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the current literature, we state that during finger and major limb amputation, the techniques to prevent neuropathic pain and PLP should be performed.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Humans; Muscle, Skeletal; Neuralgia; Phantom Limb; Upper Extremity
PubMed: 34955394
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2021.11.076 -
European Journal of Vascular and... Aug 2021Controlling pain after major lower limb amputation (MLLA) is of critical importance to patients and clinicians. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Controlling pain after major lower limb amputation (MLLA) is of critical importance to patients and clinicians. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effect of perineural catheters (PNCs) on post-operative pain, post-operative morphine requirement, in-hospital mortality, long term phantom limb pain, and chronic stump pain.
METHODS
A systematic review using PubMed, EMBASE via OVID and the Cochrane library from database inception (1946) to 20 October 2020 was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies involving patients undergoing MLLA which reported on post-operative morphine requirement, pain scores, in-hospital mortality, phantom limb pain (PLP), and chronic stump pain were included. Studies comparing PNC use with epidural or wound site local anaesthetic infusions were excluded. Outcome data were extracted from individual studies and meta-analysis was performed using a random effects (Mantel-Haenszel) model for dichotomous data using an odds ratio (OR) summary statistic with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and with an inverse variance random effects model for continuous data using a standardised mean difference (SMD) summary statistic with 95% CIs. Sensitivity analyses were performed for post-operative pain scores and post-operative morphine requirement. Study quality was assessed using the Downs and Black score, and outcomes were assessed using the GRADE tool.
RESULTS
Ten studies reporting on 731 patients were included, with 350 patients receiving a PNC and 381 receiving standard care. PNC use is associated with a reduction in post-operative pain (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.58 - -0.01, p = .040, I = 54%, GRADE quality of evidence: low) and post-operative morphine requirements (SMD -0.63, 95% CI -1.03 - -0.23, p = .002, I = 75%, GRADE quality of evidence: moderate), although the effect of PNC on reduced post-operative morphine requirements is lost on sensitivity analysis of randomised trials only (p = .40). No demonstrable effect was found on in-hospital mortality, PLP, or chronic stump pain (GRADE quality of evidence: low).
CONCLUSION
PNC use in amputees is associated with a significant reduction in post-operative pain scores and post-operative morphine requirements, although this latter finding is lost on sensitivity analysis of randomised trials only.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Amputation Stumps; Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthetics, Local; Catheters; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Lower Extremity; Morphine; Pain Measurement; Pain, Postoperative; Peripheral Nerves; Phantom Limb
PubMed: 34088614
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.03.008 -
Disability and Rehabilitation Sep 2022Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a chronic neuropathic pain condition of a missing limb following amputation. Pain management is multi-modal, including various... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a chronic neuropathic pain condition of a missing limb following amputation. Pain management is multi-modal, including various non-pharmacological therapies. The purpose of this scoping review was to investigate the evidence surrounding current non-pharmacological treatment modalities for PLP and provide insight into their clinical feasibility.
METHOD
A systematic search was conducted using four databases (Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, and CINAHL) following the PRISMA-ScR method. Results from papers meeting the inclusion criteria were charted to summarize findings, demographics, and use of neuroimaging.
RESULTS
A total of 3387 papers were identified, and full texts of 142 eligible papers were assessed. Eleven treatment modalities for PLP were identified with varying levels of evidence. Overall, there were 25 RCTs, 58 case reports, and 59 a combination of pilot, quasi-experimental, observational, and other study designs.
CONCLUSIONS
Currently, the evidence surrounding most treatment modalities is limited and only a fraction of studies are supported by strong evidence. The findings of this review demonstrated a clear need to conduct more rigorous research with diverse study designs to better understand which modalities provide the most benefit and to incorporate neuroimaging to better determine the neural correlates of PLP and mechanisms of various treatments.Implications for RehabilitationPhantom limb pain (PLP) is a prevalent and debilitating condition following amputation and health care professionals should incorporate an evidence-based pain management protocol into their rehabilitation program.There exist a number of different non-pharmacological therapies to address PLP, however the scientific rigor and levels of evidence vary across modalities.Prescription of interventions for PLP should consider individual patient differences, accessibility to the patient, and quite possibly, a multi-modal approach, particularly for those who also experience residual limb pain.Imagery-based therapies provide the highest level of current evidence based on robust and large randomized control trials, are readily accessible, and are thus most recommended for relief of PLP.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Amputees; Humans; Imagery, Psychotherapy; Pain Management; Phantom Limb
PubMed: 34293999
DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2021.1948116 -
EFORT Open Reviews Sep 2019The majority of included studies (8 out of 11, = 54) supported the concept of considering amputation for selected, unresponsive cases of complex regional pain syndrome... (Review)
Review
The majority of included studies (8 out of 11, = 54) supported the concept of considering amputation for selected, unresponsive cases of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) as a justifiable alternative to an unsuccessful multimodality nonoperative option.Of patients who underwent amputation, 66% experienced improvement in quality of life (QOL) and 37% were able to use a prosthesis, 16% had an obvious decline in QOL and for 12% of patients, no clear details were given, although it was suggested by authors that these patients also encountered deterioration after amputation.Complications of phantom limb pain, recurrence of CRPS and stump pain were predominant risks and were noticed in 65%, 45% and 30% of cases after amputation, respectively and two-thirds of patients were satisfied.Amputation can be considered by clinicians and patients as an option to improve QOL and to relieve agonizing, excruciating pain of severe, resistant CRPS at a specialized centre after multidisclipinary involvement but it must be acknowledged that evidence is limited, and the there are risks of aggravating or recurrence of CRPS, phantom pain and unpredictable consequences of rehabilitation.Amputation, if considered for resistant CRPS, should be carried out at specialist centres and after MDT involvement before and after surgery. It should only be considered if requested by patients with poor quality of life who have failed to improve after multiple treatment modalities.Further high quality and comprehensive research is needed to understand the severe form of CRPS which behaves differently form less severe stages. Cite this article: 2019;4:533-540. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.190008.
PubMed: 31598331
DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.190008