Lamotrigine for acute and chronic pain

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of antiepileptic drugs for classical trigeminal neuralgia: a Bayesian network meta-analysis protocol

INTRODUCTION

Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) affects 4 to 28.9/100 000 people worldwide, and antiepileptic drugs such as carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine are the firstline treatment options. However, the efficacy and safety of other antiepileptic drugs remain unclear due to insufficient direct comparisons.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and acceptability of all currently available antiepileptic agents for the treatment of patients with classical TN.

METHODS

We will search the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases for unpublished or undergoing research listed in registry platforms. We will include all randomised controlled trials comparing two different antiepileptic drugs or one antiepileptic drug with placebo in patients with classical TN. The primary outcomes will be the proportion of responders and the number of subjects who dropout during the treatment. The secondary outcomes will include the two primary outcomes but in the follow-up period, changes in the self-reporting assessment scale for neuralgia and quality of life assessment. In terms of network meta-analysis, we will fit our model to a Bayesian framework using the JAGS and pcnetmeta packages of the R project.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol will not disseminate any private patient data. The results of this review will be disseminated through peer reviewed publication.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016048640.

Orofacial Pain: Pharmacologic Paradigms for Therapeutic Intervention

Pain is a universal experience with profound effects on the physiology, psychology, and sociology of the population. Orofacial pain (OFP) conditions are especially prevalent and can be severely debilitating to a patient's health-related quality of life. Evidence-based clinical trials suggest that pharmacologic therapy may significantly improve patient outcomes either alone or when used as part of a comprehensive treatment plan for OFP. The aim of this article is to provide therapeutic options from a pharmacologic perspective to treat a broad spectrum of OFP. Clinical-based systemic and topical applied pharmaceutical approaches are presented to treat the most common OFP syndromes.

Update on neuropathic pain treatment for trigeminal neuralgia. The pharmacological and surgical options

Trigeminal neuralgia is a syndrome of unilateral, paroxysmal, stabbing facial pain, originating from the trigeminal nerve. Careful history of typical symptoms is crucial for diagnosis. Most cases are caused by vascular compression of the trigeminal root adjacent to the pons leading to focal demyelination and ephaptic axonal transmission. Brain imaging is required to exclude secondary causes. Many medical and surgical treatments are available. Most patients respond well to pharmacotherapy; carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine are first line therapy, while lamotrigine and baclofen are considered second line treatments. Other drugs such as topiramate, levetiracetam, gabapentin, pregabalin, and botulinum toxin-A are alternative treatments. Surgical options are available if medications are no longer effective or tolerated. Microvascular decompression, gamma knife radiosurgery, and percutaneous rhizotomies are most promising surgical alternatives. This paper reviews the medical and surgical therapeutic options for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia, based on available evidence and guidelines.

Non-antiepileptic drugs for trigeminal neuralgia

BACKGROUND

Trigeminal neuralgia was defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain as a sudden, usually unilateral, severe, brief, stabbing recurrent pain in the distribution of one or more branches of the fifth cranial nerve. Standard treatment is with anti-epileptic drugs. Non-antiepileptic drugs have been used in the management of trigeminal neuralgia since the 1970s. This is an update of a review first published in 2006 and previously updated in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the efficacy and tolerability of non-antiepileptic drugs for trigeminal neuralgia.

SEARCH METHODS

On 20 May 2013, for this updated review, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (2013, Issue 4), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to May 2013), LILACS (January 1982 to May 2013) and the Chinese Biomedical Retrieval System (1978 to May 2013). We searched clinical trials registries for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included double-blind, randomised controlled trials in which the active drug was used either alone or in combination with other non-antiepileptic drugs for at least two weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors decided which trials fitted the inclusion criteria and independently graded risk of bias. We assessed the quality of the evidence according to the GRADE criteria for this update.

MAIN RESULTS

In this 2013 update, we updated the searches, but identified only two new ongoing studies. The review includes four trials involving 139 participants. The primary outcome measure in each was pain relief. Three trials compared one of the oral non-antiepileptic drugs tizanidine, tocainide or pimozide with carbamazepine. The quality of evidence for all outcomes for which data were available was low. In a trial of tizanidine involving 12 participants (one dropped out due to unrelated disease), one of five participants treated with tizanidine and four of six treated with carbamazepine improved (risk ratio (RR) 0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 1.89). Few side effects were noted with tizanidine. For pimozide, there was evidence of greater efficacy than carbamazepine at six weeks. Up to 83% of participants reported adverse effects but these did not lead to withdrawal; the report did not provide comparable data for carbamazepine. Limited data meant that we could not assess the effects of tocainide; however, data from non-randomised studies (not included in this review) indicate that serious haematological adverse events can occur. A trial involving 47 participants compared 0.5% proparacaine hydrochloride eyedrops with placebo but did not show any significant benefits, again according to low-quality evidence. The report did not mention adverse events. The proparacaine trial was at low risk of bias; the other trials were at unclear risk of bias overall.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence that the effect of tizanidine is not significantly different than that of carbamazepine in treating trigeminal neuralgia. Pimozide is more effective than carbamazepine, although the evidence is of low quality and the data did not allow comparison of adverse event rates. There is also low-quality evidence that 0.5% proparacaine hydrochloride eye drops have no benefit over placebo. Limitations in the data for tocainide prevent any conclusions being drawn. There is insufficient evidence from randomised controlled trials to show significant benefit from non-antiepileptic drugs in trigeminal neuralgia. More research is needed.

Lamotrigine for chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane review entitled Lamotrigine for acute and chronic pain published in Issue 2, 2007, and updated in Issue 2, 2011. Some antiepileptic medicines have a place in the treatment of neuropathic pain (pain due to nerve damage). This updated review adds no new additional studies looking at evidence for lamotrigine as an effective treatment for chronic neuropathic pain or fibromyalgia. The update uses higher standards of evidence than previously.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy of lamotrigine in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia, and to evaluate adverse effects reported in the studies.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of lamotrigine for chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia (including cancer pain) from MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). We ran searches for the original review in 2006, in 2011 for the first update, and subsequent searches in August 2013 for this update. We sought additional studies from the reference lists of the retrieved papers. The original review and first update included acute pain, but no acute pain studies were identified.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs investigating the use of lamotrigine (any dose, by any route, and for any study duration) for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain or fibromyalgia. Assessment of pain intensity or pain relief, or both, using validated scales. Participants were adults aged 18 and over. We included only full journal publication articles.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality. We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. The first tier used data where studies reported the outcome of at least 50% pain reduction from baseline, lasted at least eight weeks, had a parallel group design, included 200 or more participants in the comparison, and reported an intention-to-treat analysis. First-tier studies did not use last observation carried forward (LOCF) or other imputational methods for dropouts. The second tier used data that failed to meet this standard and second-tier results were therefore subject to potential bias.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve included studies in 11 publications (1511 participants), all with chronic neuropathic pain: central post-stroke pain (1), chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain (1), diabetic neuropathy (4), HIV-related neuropathy (2), mixed neuropathic pain (2), spinal cord injury-related pain (1), and trigeminal neuralgia (1). We did not identify any additional studies. Participants were aged between 26 and 77 years. Study duration was two weeks in one study and at least six weeks in the remainder; eight were of eight-week duration or longer.No study provided first-tier evidence for an efficacy outcome. There was no convincing evidence that lamotrigine is effective in treating neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia at doses of 200 mg to 400 mg daily. Almost 10% of participants taking lamotrigine reported a skin rash.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Large, high-quality, long-duration studies reporting clinically useful levels of pain relief for individual participants provided no convincing evidence that lamotrigine is effective in treating neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia at doses of about 200 to 400 mg daily. Given the availability of more effective treatments including antiepileptics and antidepressant medicines, lamotrigine does not have a significant place in therapy based on the available evidence. The adverse effect profile of lamotrigine is also of concern.

An observational trial to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam in trigeminal neuralgia

OBJECTIVE

To explore the efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam in medical treatment of trigeminal neuralgia.

BACKGROUND

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are considered as first-line treatment for trigeminal neuralgia, although their use is often limited due to incomplete efficacy and tolerability. Newer AEDs with improved safety profile may be useful in this disorder.

METHODS

Patients suffering from trigeminal neuralgia (either primary or secondary) refractory to previous treatments were recruited to be treated with levetiracetam (3-4 g/day) for 16 weeks as add-on therapy, after a 2-week baseline period. Rescue medication was allowed in both the baseline and treatment phases. The primary efficacy measure was the number of attacks per day. The patients' efficacy evaluation, the patients' global evaluation for both safety and efficacy, changes in the Hamilton Depression Scale, the Hamilton Anxiety Scale, and the Quality of Life Measure Short Form-36 were secondary parameters.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients were included in the analysis. After treatment and compared to the baseline phase, the number of daily attacks decreased by 62.4%. All secondary parameters changed significantly with the exception of the Quality of Life Measure Short Form-36 score. Seven patients withdrew from the study. Five patients (21.7%) reported side effects and 2 withdrew.

CONCLUSIONS

Levetiracetam may be effective and safe in trigeminal neuralgia treatment. Confirmation in a randomized controlled study is needed.

Refractory trigeminal neuralgia. Non-surgical treatment options

The guidelines on trigeminal neuralgia management published by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and the European Federation of Neurological Societies (EFNS) recommended that patients unresponsive to carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine be offered the surgical option. However, because some patients may not be willing to resort to surgery, we searched the literature for treatment in refractory trigeminal neuralgia. We found other oral treatments, intranasal spray, subcutaneous injections, various kinds of peripheral nerve blocks and injections of botulinum toxin. On the basis of the available evidence we suggest that no oral treatment other than carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine is useful. Among the other options, there is increasingly strong evidence that botulinum toxin injections are efficacious and may be offered before surgery or to those unwilling to undergo surgery.

Mechanisms of neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain is a disease of global burden. Its symptoms include spontaneous and stimulus-evoked painful sensations. Several maladaptive mechanisms underlying these symptoms have been elucidated in recent years: peripheral sensitization of nociception, abnormal excitability of afferent neurons, central sensitization comprising pronociceptive facilitation, disinhibition of nociception and central reorganization processes, and sympathetically maintained pain. This review aims to illustrate these pathophysiological principles, focussing on molecular and neurophysiological findings. Finally therapeutic options based on these findings are discussed.

Neuromodulators for pain management in rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

Pain management is a high priority for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Despite deficiencies in research data, neuromodulators have gained widespread clinical acceptance as adjuvants in the management of patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to determine the efficacy and safety of neuromodulators in pain management in patients with RA. Neuromodulators included in this review were anticonvulsants (gabapentin, pregabalin, phenytoin, sodium valproate, lamotrigine, carbamazepine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, tiagabine and topiramate), ketamine, bupropion, methylphenidate, nefopam, capsaicin and the cannabinoids.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a computer-assisted search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, 4th quarter), MEDLINE (1950 to week 1 November 2010), EMBASE (Week 44, 2010) and PsycINFO (1806 to week 2 November 2010). We also searched the 2008 and 2009 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) conference abstracts and performed a handsearch of reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials which compared any neuromodulator to another therapy (active or placebo, including non-pharmacological therapies) in adult patients with RA that had at least one clinically relevant outcome measure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two blinded review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the trials. Meta-analyses were used to examine the efficacy of a neuromodulator on pain, depression and function as well as their safety.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials with high risk of bias were included in this review. Two trials evaluated oral nefopam (52 participants) and one trial each evaluated topical capsaicin (31 participants) and oromucosal cannabis (58 participants).The pooled analyses identified a significant reduction in pain levels favouring nefopam over placebo (weighted mean difference (WMD) -21.16, 95% CI -35.61 to -6.71; number needed to treat (NNT) 2, 95% CI 1.4 to 9.5) after two weeks. There were insufficient data to assess withdrawals due to adverse events. Nefopam was associated with significantly more adverse events (RR 4.11, 95% CI 1.58 to 10.69; NNTH 9, 95% CI 2 to 367), which were predominantly nausea and sweating.In a mixed population trial, qualitative analysis of patients with RA showed a significantly greater reduction in pain favouring topical capsaicin over placebo at one and two weeks (MD -23.80, 95% CI -44.81 to -2.79; NNT 3, 95% CI 2 to 47; MD -34.40, 95% CI -54.66 to -14.14; NNT 2, 95% CI 1.4 to 6 respectively). No separate safety data were available for patients with RA, however 44% of patients developed burning at the site of application and 2% withdrew because of this.One small, low quality trial assessed oromucosal cannabis against placebo and found a small, significant difference favouring cannabis in the verbal rating score 'pain at present' (MD -0.72, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.13) after five weeks. Patients receiving cannabis were significantly more likely to suffer an adverse event (risk ratio (RR) 1.82, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.00; NNTH 3, 95% CI 3 to 13). These were most commonly dizziness (26%), dry mouth (13%) and light headedness (10%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently weak evidence that oral nefopam, topical capsaicin and oromucosal cannabis are all superior to placebo in reducing pain in patients with RA. However, each agent is associated with a significant side effect profile. The confidence in our estimates is not strong given the difficulties with blinding, the small numbers of participants evaluated and the lack of adverse event data. In some patients, however, even a small degree of pain relief may be considered worthwhile. Until further research is available, given the relatively mild nature of the adverse events, capsaicin could be considered as an add-on therapy for patients with persistent local pain and inadequate response or intolerance to other treatments. Oral nefopam and oromucosal cannabis have more significant side effect profiles however and the potential harms seem to outweigh any modest benefit achieved.

Gynecologic management of neuropathic pain

Obstetrician/gynecologists often are the initial management clinicians for pelvic neuropathic pain. Although treatment may require comprehensive team management and consultation with other specialists, there are a few critical and basic steps that can be performed during an office visit that offer the opportunity to improve quality of life significantly in this patient population. A key first step is a thorough clinical examination to map the pain site physically and to identify potentially involved nerves. Only limited evidence exists about how best to manage neuropathic pain; generally, a combination of surgical, manipulative, or pharmacologic methods should be considered. Experimental methods to characterize more precisely the nature of the nerve dysfunction exist to diagnose and treat neuropathic pain; however, additional scientific evidence is needed to recommend these options unanimously. In the meantime, an approach that was adopted from guidelines of the International Association for the Study of Pain has been tailored for gynecologic pain.

Assessment of the quality of postherpetic neuralgia treatment information on the Internet

The objective of this study was to assess the quality of websites presenting treatment information for postherpetic neuralgia. The term "postherpetic neuralgia treatment" was searched using the Google and Yahoo search engines. Fifty websites from each were evaluated using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmarks, the Health on the Net (HON) seal, and the DISCERN instrument. The treatments suggested on each website were compared with 3 recognized first-line treatment options (antidepressants, anticonvulsants, and topical lidocaine). Less than half of the included websites fulfilled all JAMA benchmark requirements. Less than one-third of the websites displayed the HON seal. The DISCERN instrument evaluation revealed that most websites were of moderate quality. Commercial websites tended to be inferior in comparison to noncommercial websites. Most websites recommended at least 2 of the 3 recommended treatments as well as several second- and third-line treatments. One-third to one-half of websites recommended a nonbeneficial treatment. In conclusion, many different postherpetic neuralgia treatments are found on the Internet and patients may be left separating recommended treatments from nonrecommended treatments without help from their healthcare providers.

PERSPECTIVE

This study examined the quality of websites related to postherpetic neuralgia treatment. The results demonstrated that most websites offering advice on postherpetic neuralgia treatment are of only moderate quality and often offer treatment suggestions that are nonbeneficial. Patients and providers must use caution when taking advice from these sites.

Treatment options in trigeminal neuralgia

The incidence of trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is 4.3 per 100,000 persons per year, with a slightly higher incidence for women (5.9/100,000) compared with men (3.4/100,000). There is a lack of certainty regarding the aetiology and pathophysiology of TN. The treatment of TN can be very challenging despite the numerous options patients and physicians can choose from. This multitude of treatment options poses the question as to which treatment fits which patient best. The preferred medical treatment for TN consists of anticonvulsant drugs, muscle relaxants and neuroleptic agents. Large-scale placebo-controlled clinical trials are scarce. For patients refractory to medical therapy, Gasserian ganglion percutaneous techniques, gamma knife surgery and microvascular decompression are the most promising invasive treatment options.

Use of opioids in long-term management of temporomandibular joint dysfunction

The long-term treatment of patients with chronic temporomandibular joint dysfunction has been challenging. The long-term use of opioids in these patients can be neither supported nor refuted based on current evidence. However, evidence is available to support the long-term use of opioids in other chronic noncancer pain states with reduced pain, improved function, and improved quality of life. One group of patients with chronic temporomandibular joint pain, for whom both noninvasive and invasive treatment has failed, might benefit from long-term opioid medication. The choices include morphine, fentanyl, oxycodone, tramadol, hydrocodone, and methadone. Adjunct medication, including antidepressant and anticonvulsant drugs, can also be used. The safety of these medications has been well established, but the potential for adverse drug-related behavior does exist, requiring appropriate patient selection, adequate monitoring, and intervention when needed.

Trigeminal Neuralgia - A Debilitating Facial Pain

Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is characterised by sudden usually unilateral severe, brief, stabbing, recurrent episodes of pain in the distribution of one or more branches of the trigeminal nerve.Diagnosis is largely based on clinical history due to the current lack of objective investigations.MRI can identify those patients who have TN secondary to an underlying pathology such as multiple sclerosis.The first line medical management remains carbamazepine, with oxcarbazepine being the second choice medication.Both percutaneous techniques targeting the Gasserian ganglion and microvascular decompression can be considered effective in the management of TN. Microvascular decompression is considered to provide on average, the longest pain free period post surgery.There are a number of TN associations and support groups which provide a valued service to patients and clinicians.Due to a dearth of high quality studies in many aspects of the condition, TN requires further research to be conducted.

Lamotrigine for acute and chronic pain

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 2, 2007. Some antiepileptic medicines have a place in the treatment of neuropathic pain (pain due to nerve damage). This updated review adds five new additional studies looking at evidence for Lamotrigine as an effective treatment for acute and chronic pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of the antiepileptic drug lamotrigine in acute and chronic pain.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of lamotrigine in acute, and chronic pain (including cancer pain) were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL up to January 2011. Additional studies were sought from the reference list of the retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs investigating the use of lamotrigine (any dose, by any route, and for any study duration) for the treatment of acute or chronic pain. Assessment of pain intensity or pain relief, or both, using validated scales. Participants were adults aged 18 and over. Only full journal publication articles were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Dichotomous data (ideally for the outcome of at least 50% pain relief) were used to calculate relative risk with 95% confidence intervals. Meta-analysis was undertaken using a fixed-effect model. Numbers needed to treat to benefit (NNTs) were calculated as the reciprocal of the absolute risk reduction. For unwanted effects, the NNT becomes the number needed to harm (NNH) and was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve included studies in 11 publications (1511 participants), all with chronic neuropathic pain: central post stroke pain (1), chemotherapy induced neuropathic pain (1), diabetic neuropathy (4), HIV related neuropathy (2), mixed neuropathic pain (2), spinal cord injury related pain (1), and trigeminal neuralgia (1); none investigated lamotrigine in acute pain. The update had five additional studies (1111 additional participants). Participants were aged between 26 and 77 years. Study duration was 2 weeks in one study and at least 6 weeks in the remainder; eight were of eight week duration or longer. There is no convincing evidence that lamotrigine is effective in treating acute or chronic pain at doses of about 200-400 mg daily. Almost 10% of participants taking lamotrigine reported a skin rash.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The additional studies tripled participant numbers providing data for analysis, and new, more stringent criteria for outcomes and analysis were used; conclusions about lamotrigine's lack of efficacy in chronic pain did not change. Given availability of more effective treatments including antiepileptics and antidepressant medicines, lamotrigine does not have a significant place in therapy based on available evidence.

Non-antiepileptic drugs for trigeminal neuralgia

BACKGROUND

Non-antiepileptic drugs have been used in the management of trigeminal neuralgia since the 1970s.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to systematically review the efficacy and tolerability of non-antiepileptic drugs for trigeminal neuralgia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

For this updated review we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (30 April 2010). We also searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2), MEDLINE (January 1966 to April 2010), EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2010), LILACS (January 1982 to April 2010) and the Chinese Biomedical Retrieval System (1978 to April 2010). We handsearched 10 Chinese journals.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for double-blind randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials in which the active drug was used for at least two weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors decided which trials fitted the inclusion criteria and independently graded risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials involving 139 participants were included. The primary outcome measure in each was pain relief. Three trials with an unclear risk of bias compared one of the non-antiepileptic drugs tizanidine, tocainide or pimozide with carbamazepine. In a trial of tizanidine involving 12 participants (one dropped out due to unrelated disease) one of five treated with tizanidine and four of six treated with carbamazepine improved, risk ratio 0.30 (95% CI 0.05 to 1.89). Few side effects were noted with tizanidine. In a study involving 12 participants there was an improvement in mean pain scores with tocainide similar to that with carbamazepine, but significant side effects limited its use. In the pimozide study more participants improved on pimozide (48/48) than with carbamazepine (27/48) (risk ratio 1.76, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.26). Up to 83% of participants reported adverse effects but these did not lead to withdrawal from the study. A trial with low risk of bias involving 47 participants compared 0.5% proparacaine hydrochloride eyedrops with placebo but did not show any significant benefits or side effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Of the four studies identified, one had low and three an unclear risk of bias. There is insufficient evidence from randomized controlled trials to show significant benefit from non-antiepileptic drugs in trigeminal neuralgia. More research is needed.

Carbamazepine for acute and chronic pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Carbamazepine is used to treat chronic neuropathic pain.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluation of analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of carbamazepine for acute and chronic pain management (except headaches).

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of carbamazepine in acute, chronic or cancer pain were identified, searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, SIGLE and Cochrane CENTRAL to June 2010, reference lists of retrieved papers, and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs reporting the analgesic effects of carbamazepine.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted results and scored for quality. Numbers needed to treat to benefit (NNT) or harm (NNH) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated from dichotomous data for effectiveness, adverse effects and adverse event withdrawal. Issues of study quality, size, duration, and outcomes were examined.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen included studies (12 cross-over design; three parallel-group) with 629 participants.Carbamazepine was less effective than prednisolone in preventing postherpetic neuralgia following acute herpes zoster (1 study, 40 participants). No studies examined acute postoperative pain.Fourteen studies investigated chronic neuropathic pain: two lasted eight weeks, others were four weeks or less (mean 3 weeks, median 2 weeks). Five had low reporting quality. Ten involved fewer than 50 participants; mean and median maximum treatment group sizes were 34 and 29. Outcome reporting was inconsistent.Most placebo controlled studies indicated that carbamazepine was better than placebo. Five studies with 298 participants provided dichotomous results; 70% improved with carbamazepine and 12% with placebo. Carbamazepine at any dose, using any definition of improvement was significantly better than placebo (70% versus 12% improved; 5 studies, 298 participants); relative benefit 6.1 (3.9 to 9.7), NNT 1.7 (1.5 to 2.0). Four studies (188 participants) reporting outcomes equivalent to 50% pain reduction or more over baseline had a similar NNT.With carbamazepine, 66% of participants experienced at least one adverse event, and 27% with placebo; relative risk 2.4 (1.9 to 3.1), NNH 2.6 (2.1 to 3.5). Adverse event withdrawals occurred in12 of 323 participants (4%) with carbamazepine and 0 of 310 with placebo. Serious adverse events were not reported consistently; rashes were associated with carbamazepine. Five deaths occurred in patients on carbamazepine, with no obvious drug association.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Carbamazepine is effective in chronic neuropathic pain, with caveats. No trial was longer than four weeks, of good reporting quality, using outcomes equivalent to at least moderate clinical benefit. In these circumstances, caution is needed in interpretation, and meaningful comparison with other interventions is not possible.

Pharmacological treatment of painful HIV-associated sensory neuropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Significant pain from HIV-associated sensory neuropathy (HIV-SN) affects ∼40% of HIV infected individuals treated with antiretroviral therapy (ART). The prevalence of HIV-SN has increased despite the more widespread use of ART. With the global HIV prevalence estimated at 33 million, and with infected individuals gaining increased access to ART, painful HIV-SN represents a large and expanding world health problem. There is an urgent need to develop effective pain management strategies for this condition.

METHOD AND FINDINGS

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of analgesics in treating painful HIV-SN.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, www.clinicaltrials.gov, www.controlled-trials.com and the reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Prospective, double-blinded, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the pharmacological treatment of painful HIV-SN with sufficient quality assessed using a modified Jadad scoring method.

REVIEW METHODS

Four authors assessed the eligibility of articles for inclusion. Agreement of inclusion was reached by consensus and arbitration. Two authors conducted data extraction and analysis. Dichotomous outcome measures (≥ 30% and ≥ 50% pain reduction) were sought from RCTs reporting interventions with statistically significant efficacies greater than placebo. These data were used to calculate RR and NNT values.

RESULTS

Of 44 studies identified, 19 were RCTs. Of these, 14 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Interventions demonstrating greater efficacy than placebo were smoked cannabis NNT 3.38 95%CI(1.38 to 4.10), topical capsaicin 8%, and recombinant human nerve growth factor (rhNGF). No superiority over placebo was reported in RCTs that examined amitriptyline (100mg/day), gabapentin (2.4 g/day), pregabalin (1200 mg/day), prosaptide (16 mg/day), peptide-T (6 mg/day), acetyl-L-carnitine (1g/day), mexilitine (600 mg/day), lamotrigine (600 mg/day) and topical capsaicin (0.075% q.d.s.).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of efficacy exists only for capsaicin 8%, smoked cannabis and rhNGF. However,rhNGF is clinically unavailable and smoked cannabis cannot be recommended as routine therapy. Evaluation of novel management strategies for painful HIV-SN is urgently needed.

A fMRI evaluation of lamotrigine for the treatment of trigeminal neuropathic pain: pilot study

Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) methods, we evaluated the effects of lamotrigine vs placebo in a double-blind 1:1 randomized trial. Six patients with neuropathic pain were recruited for the study. All subjects had baseline pain >4/10 on a visual analog scale (VAS) and allodynia to brush as inclusion criteria for the study. Patients underwent two fMRI sessions, with half of the subjects receiving placebo first and half receiving drug first (based on the blinding protocol). Lamotrigine decreased their average pain intensity level from 5.6 to 3.5 on a VAS. All subjects had brush, cold, and heat applied to the affected and mirror-unaffected sides of their face. The results show: 1) in a small cohort, lamotrigine had a significant effect on heat VAS but not on the other stimuli; and 2) contrast analysis of fMRI results for heat stimuli applied to the affected face for lamotrigine vs placebo produced an overall decrease in blood oxygen dependent level signal, suggesting a potential inhibitory effect of the drug on predominantly cortical regions (frontal, parietal, and temporal).

Guidelines for the Pharmacological Treatment of Peripheral Neuropathic Pain: Expert Panel Recommendations for the Middle East Region

Neuropathic pain (NeP) has been the focus of extensive basic and clinical research over the past 20 years. This has led to an increased understanding of underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and the development of new therapeutic agents, as well as a clearer definition of the role of established medications. To date there are no published treatment guidelines for NeP in the Middle East. A multidisciplinary panel of Middle East and international experts met to review critically and reach a consensus on how best to apply evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of NeP (mainly peripheral NeP) in the Middle East. The expert panel recommended pregabalin, gabapentin and secondary amine tricyclic antidepressants (nortriptyline and desipramine) as first-line treatments for peripheral NeP. Serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor antidepressants, tramadol and controlled-release opioid analgesics were recommended as second-line treatments. There is a need to increase diagnostic awareness of NeP, use validated screening questionnaires and undertake more treatment research in the Middle East region.

Use of lidocaine patches for neuropathic pain in a comprehensive cancer centre

BACKGROUND

There are few reports of the use of the lidocaine 5% patch (L5%P) for neuropathic pain (NP) in the cancer patient. Within a comprehensive cancer centre, L5%P has been prescribed by the Pain and Palliative Care Service (Peter McCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia) for selected patients with NP since 2001.

OBJECTIVE

To retrospectively audit the use of L5%P within a comprehensive cancer centre.

METHODS

All L5%P prescriptions up to January 2009 were listed and patient medical records were searched to determine neuropathic pain syndromes treated, the presence of allodynia, previous analgesic medications, treatment duration and outcome.

RESULTS

L5%P was prescribed for 97 patients, most frequently for persistent postsurgical NP (n=26), postherpetic neuralgia (n=24) and cancer-related NP (n=18). Six patients had no history of cancer and two patients never applied L5%P. Reviewers classed L5%P analgesic efficacy as 'potent' in 38% of patients with postherpetic neuralgia, 35% of patients with postsurgical pain, 27% of patients with NP after other treatments for cancer and 12% of patients with NP attributed to cancer alone. Allodynia featured in at least 60% of patients. Where allodynia was present, the efficacy of L5%P was assessed as 'potent' in 38% and 'partial' in 24%, but 'ineffective' in 26%, and 'causing worse pain' in 3.4% of patients. Treatment duration extended longer than one month in 52 patients, longer than two months in 29 patients and longer than one year in 13 patients. Therapy was ceased due to skin irritation in seven patients. The outcomes in relation to other reports are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The present data support trials of L5%P for cancer patients with NP syndromes associated with allodynia.

Psychiatric issues in chronic pain

Chronic pain requires comprehensive care. While interdisciplinary approaches are recommended, the role of psychiatrists is often misunderstood. Psychiatrists should be involved with the care of patients with chronic pain as early as possible to maximize outcome. Psychiatrists offer an expertise that specifically addresses important deficiencies in the care of patients with chronic pain: 1) the lack of a detailed formulation, 2) the lumping of all psychopathology, and 3) the failure to effectively use psychopharmacologic treatments. This review provides a framework for formulating the diagnoses and treatments of patients with chronic pain.

Strategies for the diagnosis and treatment of neuropathic pain secondary to diabetic peripheral sensory polyneuropathy

This article proposes a strategy for the diagnosis and treatment of neuropathic pain due to diabetic peripheral sensory neuropathy, based on 15 years of experience in French pain-management centres and on the available literature. In the diabetic patient with chronic pain in the lower limbs, the first step in the diagnostic process is to identify the neuropathic origin of the pain. The second step is to evaluate the patient's medical history and make a rigorous baseline assessment of the neuropathic pain symptoms to determine an effective pain-management strategy. In the third step, adequate and well-tolerated treatment directed towards a variety of painful symptoms is selected, taking into account other co-morbidities such as anxiety and depression. This report reports on the clinical aspects of neuropathic pain exhibited by patients with diabetic sensory polyneuropathy, and the key factors in their diagnosis and treatment, based on the results of meta-analyses and on a recent expert consensus.

Carbamazepine for acute and chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Anticonvulsant drugs have been used in the management of pain since the 1960s. The clinical impression is that they are useful for chronic neuropathic pain, especially when the pain is lancinating or burning.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the analgesic effectiveness and adverse effects of the anticonvulsant medicine carbamazepine for pain management in clinical practice and to identify a clinical research agenda. Migraine and headache studies are not included in this review.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised trials (RCTs) of anticonvulsants in acute, chronic or cancer pain were identified by MEDLINE (1966-2004), EMBASE (1994-2004), SIGLE (1980-2004) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL/CCTR) (Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2003). In addition, 41 medical journals were hand searched for a previous version of this review. Additional reports were identified from the reference list of the retrieved papers, and by contacting investigators. Date of most recent search: November 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials reporting the analgesic effects of carbamazepine in patients, with subjective pain assessment as either the primary or a secondary outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by two independent reviewers, and trials were quality scored. Numbers-needed-to-treat (NNTs) were calculated from dichotomous data for effectiveness, adverse effects and drug-related study withdrawal, for individual studies and for pooled data.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve studies were included (404 participants). Four studies included trigeminal neuralgia patients. Two studies which provided evaluable data yielded an NNT for effectiveness of 1.8 (95%CI 1.4-2.8). For diabetic neuropathy there was insufficient data for an NNT to be calculated.Numbers-needed-to-harm (NNHs) were calculated where possible by combining studies for each drug entity irrespective of the condition treated. The results were, for minor harm, carbamazepine 3.7 (CI 2.4-7.8), NNHs for major harm were not statistically significant for carbamazepine compared with placebo. There is no evidence that carbamazepine is effective for acute pain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence to show that carbamazepine is effective but trials are small.

Drug therapy for chronic idiopathic axonal polyneuropathy

BACKGROUND

Chronic idiopathic axonal polyneuropathy is an insidiously progressive sensory or sensorimotor polyneuropathy that affects elderly people. Although severe disability or handicap does not occur, it reduces quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether drug therapy for chronic idiopathic axonal polyneuropathy reduces disability, ameliorates neurological symptoms and associated impairments, and whether treatment is safe.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane Library (Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Review Group Register, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI, and ACP Journal Club's Best Evidence, from 1981 until December 2002. We also hand searched the reference lists of relevant articles, reviews and textbooks identified electronically, and contacted authors and other experts in the field to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought all randomised or quasi-randomised (alternate or other systematic treatment allocation), unconfounded trials that examined the effects of any drug therapy in patients with chronic idiopathic axonal polyneuropathy at least one year after the onset of treatment. Patients with chronic idiopathic axonal polyneuropathy had to fulfil the following criteria: age 40 years or older, distal sensory or sensorimotor polyneuropathy, absence of systemic or other neurological disease, chronic clinical course not reaching a nadir in less than two months, exclusion of any recognised cause of the polyneuropathy by medical history taking, clinical or laboratory investigations, electrophysiological studies in agreement with axonal polyneuropathy without evidence of demyelinating features. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a significant improvement in disability. Secondary outcomes were change in the mean disability score, change in the proportion of patients who make use of walking aids, change in the mean Medical Research Council sum score, degree of pain relief and/or reduction of other positive sensory symptoms, change in the proportion of patients with pain or other positive sensory symptoms, and frequency of adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently reviewed and extracted details of trial methodology and outcome data of all potentially relevant trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen studies were identified and assessed for possible inclusion in the review, but all were excluded because of insufficient quality or lack of relevance.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Even though chronic idiopathic axonal polyneuropathy has been clearly described and delineated, no adequate randomised or quasi-randomised controlled clinical treatment trials have been performed. In their absence there is no proven efficacious drug therapy.