-
BMC Neurology Mar 2019Aim to quantitatively analyze the clinical effectiveness for motor cortex stimulation (MCS) to refractory pain.
BACKGROUND
Aim to quantitatively analyze the clinical effectiveness for motor cortex stimulation (MCS) to refractory pain.
METHODS
The literatures were systematically searched in database of Cocharane library, Embase and PubMed, using relevant strategies. Data were extracted from eligible articles and pooled as mean with standard deviation (SD). Comparative analysis was measured by non-parametric t test and linear regression model.
RESULTS
The pooled effect estimate from 12 trials (n = 198) elucidated that MCS shown the positive effect on refractory pain, and the total percentage improvement was 35.2% in post-stroke pain and 46.5% in trigeminal neuropathic pain. There is no statistical differences between stroke involved thalamus or non-thalamus. The improvement of plexus avulsion (29.8%) and phantom pain (34.1%) was similar. The highest improvement rate was seen in post-radicular plexopathy (65.1%) and MCS may aggravate the pain induced by spinal cord injury, confirmed by small sample size. Concurrently, Both the duration of disease (r = 0.233, p = 0.019*) and the time of follow-up (r = 0.196, p = 0.016*) had small predicative value, while age (p = 0.125) had no correlation to post-operative pain relief.
CONCLUSIONS
MCS is conducive to the patients with refractory pain. The duration of disease and the time of follow-up can be regarded as predictive factor. Meanwhile, further studies are needed to reveal the mechanism of MCS and to reevaluate the cost-benefit aspect with better-designed clinical trials.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Humans; Motor Cortex; Pain Measurement; Pain, Intractable; Phantom Limb; Treatment Outcome; Trigeminal Neuralgia
PubMed: 30925914
DOI: 10.1186/s12883-019-1273-y -
Systematic Reviews Mar 2017Dysvascular partial foot amputation (PFA) is a common sequel to advanced peripheral vascular disease. Helping inform difficult discussions between patients and... (Review)
Review
Outcomes of dysvascular partial foot amputation and how these compare to transtibial amputation: a systematic review for the development of shared decision-making resources.
BACKGROUND
Dysvascular partial foot amputation (PFA) is a common sequel to advanced peripheral vascular disease. Helping inform difficult discussions between patients and practitioners about the level of PFA, or the decision to have a transtibial amputation (TTA) as an alternative, requires an understanding of the current research evidence on a wide range of topics including wound healing, reamputation, quality of life, mobility, functional ability, participation, pain and psychosocial outcomes, and mortality. The aim of this review was to describe a comprehensive range of outcomes of dysvascular PFA and compare these between levels of PFA and TTA.
METHODS
The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015029186). A systematic search of the literature was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, psychINFO, AMED, CINAHL, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health, and Web of Science. These databases were searched using MeSH terms and keywords relating to different amputation levels and outcomes of interest. Peer reviewed studies of original research-irrespective of the study design-were included if published in English between 1 January 2000, and 31 December 2015, and included discrete cohort(s) with dysvascular PFA or PFA and TTA. Outcomes of interest were rate of wound healing and complications, rate of ipsilateral reamputation, quality of life, functional ability, mobility, pain (i.e., residual limb or phantom pain), psychosocial outcomes (i.e., depression, anxiety, body image and self-esteem), participation, and mortality rate. Included studies were independently appraised by two reviewers. The McMaster Critical Review Forms were used to assess methodological quality and identify sources of bias. Data were extracted based on the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group's data extraction template by a primary reviewer and checked for accuracy and clarity by a second reviewer. Findings are reported as narrative summaries given the heterogeneity of the literature, except for mortality and ipsilateral reamputation where data allowed for proportional meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Twenty-nine unique articles were included in the review, acknowledging that some studies reported multiple outcomes. Eighteen studies reported all-cause proportionate mortality. A smaller number of studies reported outcomes related to functional ability (two), mobility (four), quality of life (three), ipsilateral reamputation (six) as well as wound healing and complications (four). No studies related to pain, participation or psychosocial outcomes met the inclusion criteria. Subjects were typically older and male and had diabetes among other comorbidities. More detailed information about the cohorts such as race or sociodemographic factors were reported in an ad hoc manner. Common sources of bias included contamination, co-intervention, or lack of operational definition for some outcomes (e.g., wound healing) as illustrative examples.
CONCLUSIONS
Aside from mortality, there was limited evidence regarding outcomes of dysvascular PFA, particularly how outcomes differ between levels of PFA and TTA. Acknowledging that there is considerable uncertainty given the small body of literature on many topics where the risk of bias is high, the available evidence suggests that a large proportion of people with PFA experience delayed wound healing and ipsilateral reamputation. People with TTA have increased risk of mortality compared to those with PFA, which may reflect that those considered suitable candidates for TTA have more advanced systemic disease that also increases the risk of dying. Mobility and quality of life may be similar in people with PFA and TTA.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
CRD42015029186.
Topics: Activities of Daily Living; Amputation, Surgical; Decision Making; Foot; Humans; Mobility Limitation; Peripheral Vascular Diseases; Quality of Life; Research Design
PubMed: 28288686
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0433-7 -
Plastic Surgery (Oakville, Ont.) May 2024Painful neuromas are a common postoperative complication of limb amputation often treated with secondary reinnervation. Surgical reinnervation include Targeted Muscle...
Targeted Muscle Reinnervation and Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interfaces Versus Standard Management in the Treatment of Limb Amputation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Painful neuromas are a common postoperative complication of limb amputation often treated with secondary reinnervation. Surgical reinnervation include Targeted Muscle Reinnervation (TMR) and Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interface (RPNI), and can be primary and secondary. The aim of this review is to assess the effects of primary TMR/RPNI at the time of limb amputation on the incidence and intensity of post-operative neuroma and pain. This review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021264360). A search of the following databases was performed in June 2021: Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL. Unpublished trials were searched using clinicaltrials.gov. All randomized and non-randomized studies assessing amputation with a reinnervation strategy (TMR, RPNI) were included. Outcomes evaluated included the incidences of painful neuroma, phantom limb pain (PLP), residual limb pain (RLP), as well as severity of pain, and Pain intensity, behavior, and interference (PROMIS). Eleven studies were included in this systematic review, and five observational studies for quantitative synthesis. Observational study evidence suggests that TMR/RPNI results in a statistically significant reduction in incidence, pain scores and PROMIS scores of PLP and RLP. Decreased incidence of neuromas favored primary TMR/RPNI, but this did not achieve statistical significance (p = 0.07). Included studies had moderate to critical risk of bias. The observational data suggests that primary TMR/RPNI reduces incidence, pain scores and PROMIS scores of PLP and RLP. Going forward, randomized trials are warranted to evaluate this research question, particularly to improve the certainty of evidence.
PubMed: 38681253
DOI: 10.1177/22925503221107462 -
The Pan African Medical Journal 2024During the 1970s, scientists first used botulinum toxin to treat strabismus. While testing on monkeys, they noticed that the toxin could also reduce wrinkles in the... (Review)
Review
During the 1970s, scientists first used botulinum toxin to treat strabismus. While testing on monkeys, they noticed that the toxin could also reduce wrinkles in the glabella area. This led to its widespread use in both medical and cosmetic fields. The objective of the study was to evaluate the potential use of Botox in managing post-operative contracture after below-knee amputation. We conducted a systematic review In Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar using the MESH terms Botox, botulinum toxin, post-operative contracture, amputation, and below knee amputation. Our goal was to evaluate the potential use of Botox to manage post-operative contracture in patients who have undergone below-knee amputation. Our findings show evidence in the literature that Botox can effectively manage stump hyperhidrosis, phantom pain, and jumping stump, but no clinical trial has been found that discusses the use of Botox for post-operative contracture. Botox has been used in different ways to manage spasticity. Further studies and clinical trials are needed to support the use of Botox to manage this complication.
Topics: Humans; Botulinum Toxins, Type A; Amputation, Surgical; Contracture; Amputation Stumps; Muscle Spasticity; Joint Dislocations; Neuromuscular Agents
PubMed: 38558551
DOI: 10.11604/pamj.2024.47.26.42249 -
Pain Research & Management 2015Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a common complication after amputation, affecting up to 80% of the amputee population. However, only 5% to 10% of amputees have severe PLP... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a common complication after amputation, affecting up to 80% of the amputee population. However, only 5% to 10% of amputees have severe PLP impacting daily function. The present report details the management of severe, treatment-resistant PLP in a 72-year-old man with a traumatic left transradial amputation and a comorbid complication of heterotopic ossification (HO).
OBJECTIVE
To describe a case of PLP with HO and the possible role of calcitonin in the treatment of both conditions.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature regarding the management of PLP.
RESULTS
Seventeen articles that directly addressed PLP were identified; 11 were randomized controlled trials. All involved small samples and follow-up ranged from 6 h to one year, with the majority limited to six weeks.
DISCUSSION
In the present case, medication management was limited by side effects, lack of response and the patient's desire to avoid long-term medication. Investigations revealed HO, which was suspected to envelop the median nerve in the proximal forearm. After several unsuccessful medication trials, the literature was reviewed in search of common variables between HO formation and persistent PLP. Ultimately, the biochemical effects associated with nerve injury were identified to be a possible factor in both HO and PLP development. Calcitonin's proposed mechanisms of action may help to manage HO and PLP at multiple stages of disease development and maintenance. In the present case, a four-week trial of intranasal calcitonin was successful, with pain control lasting at least 18 months.
CONCLUSION
The present case report provided a review of the current literature in PLP pharmacological management and the current understanding of the etiology of PLP and HO, as well as how the two may coexist. It also provided an opportunity to discuss the proposed mechanisms of action of calcitonin in the management of PLP and HO.
Topics: Aged; Amputation, Surgical; Bone Density Conservation Agents; Calcitonin; Databases, Bibliographic; Humans; Male; Ossification, Heterotopic; Pain Measurement; Phantom Limb; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26291126
DOI: 10.1155/2015/782948 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2019Chronic pain, considered to be pain lasting more than three months, is a common and often difficult to treat condition that can significantly impact upon function and...
BACKGROUND
Chronic pain, considered to be pain lasting more than three months, is a common and often difficult to treat condition that can significantly impact upon function and quality of life. Treatment typically includes pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches. Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) is an adjunct non-pharmacological treatment commonly recommended by clinicians and often used by people with pain.
OBJECTIVES
To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of TENS to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine).To provide an overview of evidence from Cochrane Reviews of the safety of TENS when used to reduce pain in adults with chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine).To identify possible sources of inconsistency in the approaches taken to evaluating the evidence related to TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) in the Cochrane Library with a view to recommending strategies to improve consistency in methodology and reporting.To highlight areas of remaining uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of TENS for chronic pain (excluding headache or migraine) with a view to recommending strategies to reduce any uncertainty.
METHODS
Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), in the Cochrane Library, across all years up to Issue 11 of 12, 2018.Selection of reviewsTwo authors independently screened the results of the electronic search by title and abstract against inclusion/exclusion criteria. We included all Cochrane Reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of TENS in people with chronic pain. We included reviews if they investigated the following: TENS versus sham; TENS versus usual care or no treatment/waiting list control; TENS plus active intervention versus active intervention alone; comparisons between different types of TENS; or TENS delivered using different stimulation parameters.Data extraction and analysisTwo authors independently extracted relevant data, assessed review quality using the AMSTAR checklist and applied GRADE judgements where required to individual reviews. Our primary outcomes included pain intensity and nature/incidence of adverse effects; our secondary outcomes included disability, health-related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine reviews investigating TENS use in people with defined chronic pain or in people with chronic conditions associated with ongoing pain. One review investigating TENS for phantom or stump-associated pain in people following amputation did not have any included studies. We therefore extracted data from eight reviews which represented 51 TENS-related RCTs representing 2895 TENS-comparison participants entered into the studies.The included reviews followed consistent methods and achieved overall high scores on the AMSTAR checklist. The evidence reported within each review was consistently rated as very low quality. Using review authors' assessment of risk of bias, there were significant methodological limitations in included studies; and for all reviews, sample sizes were consistently small (the majority of studies included fewer than 50 participants per group).Six of the eight reviews presented a narrative synthesis of included studies. Two reviews reported a pooled analysis.Primary and secondary outcomes One review reported a beneficial effect of TENS versus sham therapy at reducing pain intensity on a 0 to 10 scale (MD -1.58, 95% CI -2.08 to -1.09, P < 0.001, I² = 29%, P = 0.22, 5 studies, 207 participants). However the quality of the evidence was very low due to significant methodological limitations and imprecision. A second review investigating pain intensity performed a pooled analysis by combining studies that compared TENS to sham with studies that compared TENS to no intervention (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.34, P = 0.001, I² = 83%, P < 0.001). This pooled analysis was judged as offering very low quality evidence due to significant methodological limitations, large between-trial heterogeneity and imprecision. We considered the approach of combining sham and no intervention data to be problematic since we would predict these different comparisons may be estimating different true effects. All remaining reviews also reported pain intensity as an outcome measure; however the data were presented in narrative review form only.Due to methodological limitation and lack of useable data, we were unable to offer any meaningful report on the remaining primary outcome regarding nature/incidence of adverse effects, nor for the remaining secondary outcomes: disability, health-related quality of life, analgesic medication use and participant global impression of change for any comparisons.We found the included reviews had a number of inconsistencies when evaluating the evidence from TENS studies. Approaches to assessing risk of bias around the participant, personnel and outcome-assessor blinding were perhaps the most obvious area of difference across included reviews. We also found wide variability in terms of primary and secondary outcome measures, and inclusion/exclusion criteria for studies varied with respect to including studies which assessed immediate effects of single interventions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found the methodological quality of the reviews was good, but quality of the evidence within them was very low. We were therefore unable to conclude with any confidence that, in people with chronic pain, TENS is harmful, or beneficial for pain control, disability, health-related quality of life, use of pain relieving medicines, or global impression of change. We make recommendations with respect to future TENS study designs which may meaningfully reduce the uncertainty relating to the effectiveness of this treatment in people with chronic pain.
Topics: Adult; Chronic Pain; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation
PubMed: 30776855
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011890.pub2 -
The Journal of Pain 2000The purpose of this article was to systematically review the literature in order to assess (1) the current indications for surgical sympathectomy and (2) the incidence...
The purpose of this article was to systematically review the literature in order to assess (1) the current indications for surgical sympathectomy and (2) the incidence of late complications collectively and per indication. All types of upper or lower limb surgical sympathectomies are included. An extensive search strategy looked for controlled trials and observational studies or case series with an english abstract. Out of 1,024 abstracts from MEDLINE and 221 from EMBASE, 135 articles reporting on 22,458 patients and 42,061 procedures (up to april 1998) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Weighted means were used to control for heterogeneity of data. No controlled trials were found. The main indication was primary hyperhidrosis in 84.3% of the patients. Compensatory hyperhidrosis occurred in 52.3%, gustatory sweating in 32.3%, phantom sweating in 38.6%, and horner's syndrome in 2.4% of patients, respectively, with cervicodorsal sympathectomy, more often after open approach. Neuropathic complications (after cervicodorsal and lumbar sympathectomy) occurred in 11.9% of all patients. Compensatory hyperhidrosis occurred 3 times more often if the indication was palmar hyperhidrosis instead of neuropathic pain (52.3% versus 18.2%), whereas neuropathic complications occurred 3 times more often if the treatment was for neuropathic pain instead of palmar hyperhidrosis (25.2% versus 9.8%). Surgical sympathectomy, irrespective of approach, is accompanied by several potentially disabling complications. Detailed informed consent is recommended when surgical sympathectomy is contemplated.
PubMed: 14622605
DOI: 10.1054/jpai.2000.19408