Pain on injection of propofol: a comparison of methylene blue and lidocaine

Protein-protein interaction-based high throughput screening for adenylyl cyclase 1 inhibitors: Design, implementation, and discovery of a novel chemotype

Genetic and preclinical studies have implicated adenylyl cyclase 1 (AC1) as a potential target for the treatment of chronic inflammatory pain. AC1 activity is increased following inflammatory pain stimuli and AC1 knockout mice show a marked reduction in responses to inflammatory pain. Previous drug discovery efforts have centered around the inhibition of AC1 activity in cell-based assays. In the present study, we used an in vitro approach focused on inhibition of the protein-protein interaction (PPI) between Ca²⁺/calmodulin (CaM) and AC1, an interaction that is required for activation of AC1. We developed a novel fluorescence polarization (FP) assay focused on the PPI between an AC1 peptide and CaM and used this assay to screen over 23,000 compounds for inhibitors of the AC1-CaM PPI. Next, we used a cellular NanoBiT assay to validate 21 FP hits for inhibition of the AC1-CaM PPI in a cellular context with full-length proteins. Based on efficacy, potency, and selectivity for AC1, hits 12, 13, 15, 18, 20, and 21 were prioritized. We then tested these compounds for inhibition of AC1 activity in cyclic AMP (cAMP) accumulation assays, using HEK293 cells stably expressing AC1. Hit 15 contained a dithiophene scaffold and was of particular interest because it shared structural similarities with our recently reported benzamide series of AC1 inhibitors. We next tested a small set of 13 compounds containing the dithiophene scaffold for structure-activity relationship studies. Although many compounds were non-selective, we observed trends for tuning AC1/AC8 selectivity based on heterocycle type and substituents. Having an ethyl on the central thiophene caused the scaffold to be more selective for AC8. Cyclization of the alkyl substituent fused to the thiophene significantly reduced activity and also shifted selectivity toward AC8. Notably, combining the fused cyclohexane-thiophene ring system with a morpholine heterocycle significantly increased potency at both AC1 and AC8. Through designing a novel FP screen and NanoBiT assay, and evaluating hits in cAMP accumulation assays, we have discovered a novel, potent, dithiophene scaffold for inhibition of the AC1- and AC8-CaM PPI. We also report the most potent fully efficacious inhibitor of AC8 activity known to-date.

Methylene blue prevents osteoarthritis progression and relieves pain in rats via upregulation of Nrf2/PRDX1

Oxidative stress-related cartilage degeneration, synovitis, and joint pain play vital roles in the progress of osteoarthritis (OA). Anti-oxidative stress agents not only prevent structural damage progression but also relieve OA-related pain. In this study, we investigated the therapeutic effect of methylene blue (MB), a classical and important anti-oxidant with strong neural affinity. Experimental OA was established in rats by radial transection of medial collateral ligament and medial meniscus (MCLT + MMT) of the right knee joint. The OA rats received intra-articular injection of MB (1 mg/kg) every week starting one week after surgery. We showed that MB administration exerted significant cartilage protection, synovitis inhibition as well as pain relief in OA rats. In human chondrocytes and fibroblast-like synoviocytes, MB significantly attenuated tert-butyl hydroperoxide (TBHP)-induced inflammatory response and oxidative stress. We demonstrated that these effects of MB resulted from dual targets of important antioxidant enzymes, Nrf2 and PRDX1, which also mutually reinforcing and participated in an interaction. Furthermore, we found that calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a neural inflammatory mediator, was accumulated around the vessel in synovium and subchondral bone in OA rats and in TBHP-treated primary cortical neurons; MB administration significantly inhibited CGRP expression through upregulation of Nrf2 and PRDX1. Taken together, these results suggest that MB ameliorates oxidative stress via Nrf2/PRDX1 regulation to prevent progression and relieve pain of OA.

Methylene Blue-Based Nano and Microparticles: Fabrication and Applications in Photodynamic Therapy

Methylene blue (MB) has been used in the textile industry since it was first extracted by the German chemist Heinrich Caro. Its pharmacological properties have also been applied toward the treatment of certain diseases such as methemoglobinemia, ifosfamide-induced encephalopathy, and thyroid conditions requiring surgery. Recently, the utilization of MB as a safe photosensitizer in photodynamic therapy (PDT) has received attention. Recent findings demonstrate that photoactivated MB exhibits not only anticancer activity but also antibacterial activity both in vitro and in vivo. However, due to the hydrophilic nature of MB, it is difficult to create MB-embedded nano- or microparticles capable of increasing the clinical efficacy of the PDT. This review aims to summarize fabrication techniques for MB-embedded nano and microparticles and to provide both in vitro and in vivo examples of MB-mediated PDT, thereby offering a future perspective on improving this promising clinical treatment modality. We also address examples of MB-mediated PDT in both cancer and infection treatments. Both in-vitro and in-vivo studies are summarized here to document recent trends in utilizing MB as an effective photosensitizer in PDT. Lastly, we discuss how developing efficient MB-carrying nano- and microparticle platforms would be able to increase the benefits of PDT.

Efficacy of Pre-Treatment with Remimazolam on Prevention of Propofol-Induced Injection Pain in Patients Undergoing Abortion or Curettage: A Prospective, Double-Blinded, Randomized and Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Background

Propofol-induced injection pain (PIP) is a well-known problem in general anesthesia. We hypothesized that pre-treatment with remimazolam prevents PIP in patients undergoing abortion or curettage.

Materials and Methods

In this prospective, single-center, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial, adult patients aged 18 to 60 undergoing abortion or curettage were randomly assigned to three groups. Group Lido received system lidocaine (a bolus of 0.5 mg kg⁻¹, iv). Group Remi received remimazolam (a bolus of 0.1 mg kg⁻¹, iv). Group NS received identical volumes of 0.9% normal saline. Sixty seconds after the injection of lidocaine, remimazolam or saline, patients were injected with propofol at a rate of 12 mL/min until the loss of consciousness. The primary outcome was the incidence of PIP at the time of induction using 4-point scale. Secondary outcomes included propofol-induced injection pain, vital signs, the characteristics of anesthesia and surgery, and adverse events.

Results

The incidence of patients with PIP was higher in group NS than that in group Lido and group Remi (75.7, 44.3, and 42.9%, respectively, p < 0.001). The percentages of patients with moderate PIP were higher in group NS than that in group Lido and group Remi (20.0, 2.9, and 1.4%, respectively, p < 0.001). Moreover, the consumption of propofol and the incidence of adverse event (hypoxemia and chin lifting) in group Remi were lower than that in group NS and Lido, and less patients got physical movement and cough in group Remi. The recovery time in group NS was longer than that in group Lido and Remi.

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that pre-treatment with remimazolam reduced the incidence and intensity of PIP in abortion or curettage patients, equivalent to that of lidocaine without severe adverse effects.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (identifier: ChiCTR2100041805).

Median Effective Dose of Lidocaine for the Prevention of Pain Caused by the Injection of Propofol Formulated with Medium- and Long-Chain Triglycerides Based on Lean Body Weight

OBJECTIVE

To determine the median effective dose (ED50) of prophylactic intravenous lidocaine for the prevention of propofol medium-chain triglyceride/long-chain triglyceride (MCT/LCT) emulsion injection pain.

DESIGN

Prospective trial, Dixon up-and-down sequential method.

SETTING

Operating room of a single hospital.

PATIENTS

Thirty patients aged 18-65 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status I or II who were scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia (GA) were included.

INTERVENTIONS

The initial dose of prophylactic lidocaine before propofol MCT/LCT emulsion injection was set at 0.5 mg/kg lean body weight (LBW). The lidocaine dose was adjusted according to the degree of patients' injection pain using the Dixon up-and-down sequential method.

MEASUREMENTS

The ED50 and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of lidocaine were calculated using the Dixon-Massey formula. Vital signs and adverse effects were recorded. In the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), patients were asked if they recalled feeling any injection pain with visual analog scale (VAS) evaluation.

RESULTS

The ED50 of lidocaine for the prevention of propofol MCT/LCT emulsion injection pain was 0.306 mg/kg LBW (95% CI, 0.262-0.357 mg/kg LBW). No adverse reactions to lidocaine occurred. In the PACU, 90.9% of patients who experienced injection pain recalled this pain (VAS score, 2.8±1.8).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic intravenous lidocaine (0.306 mg/kg LBW) effectively prevented propofol MCT/LCT emulsion injection pain in 50% of patients scheduled for elective surgery under GA with no adverse reaction occurring.

Pharmacological control of pain during propofol injection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

A research was performed to review the effect of pharmacological interventions to control the propofol injection pain.

METHODS

A search of databases was performed. Randomized clinical trials comparing pharmacological interventions with placebo or active compound to reduce of propofol injection pain were selected. The outcome was the frequency of pain. Data were analyzed in three subgroups according to type of control. Random effect model was used to calculate relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Fifty-two articles with 105 studies on 7315 adults were included. The incidence of pain in intervention and control group was 40.91% and 66.27%. Combination therapy with two drugs (RR = 0.29 95% CI = (0.11, 0.75)), opioids (RR = 0.39 95% CI = (0.28, 0.54)) and 5 HT3 antagonists (RR = 0.39 95% CI = (0.30, 0.50)) were the most effective interventions compared to placebo. Combination therapy was the most effective intervention compared to lidocaine as control (RR = 0.51 95% CI = (0.46, 0.55)). Opioids were the most effective intervention compared to long chain triglyceride propofol as control (RR = 0.27 95% CI = (0.15, 0.49)).

CONCLUSION

Pretreatment with two different drugs, opioids and surprisingly 5 HT3 antagonists were the most effective interventions compared to placebo. Combination therapy was the most effective versus lidocaine as control.

Comparison Between Intravenous Nalbuphine and Lidocaine in Reducing Propofol-Induced Injection Pain During Gastroscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction

Intravenous propofol anesthesia is widely used in painless endoscopy. However, propofol injection pain is a common adverse effect. This study investigated the effects of nalbuphine and lidocaine in reducing propofol-induced injection pain.

Methods

In this double-blind, randomized study, 330 patients were randomly divided into three groups by using a random number table: the nalbuphine group (N), lidocaine group (L), and control group (C). The N, L, and C groups received either 0.1 mg/kg nalbuphine, 0.5 mg/kg lidocaine, or an equivalent volume of normal saline, respectively, as pretreatment drug. Then propofol was manually injected. The primary outcome of this study was the incidence of propofol-induced injection pain, and secondary outcomes included the severity of propofol-induced injection pain, vital signs, and adverse events, including hypotension, bradycardia (< 50 beats/min), hypoxemia (SpO₂ < 90%), drowsiness, physical movement, and cough.

Results

The percentages of patients with propofol injection pain were higher in group C than in group N and group L (64, 34, and 27%, respectively, p < 0.05). The percentage of patients with severe pain after propofol injection was significantly higher in group C than in group N and group L (12, 1, and 0%, respectively, p < 0.05). The doses of propofol in group C and group L were significantly higher than that in group N. More patients suffered hypoxemia in group N than in group C and group L. Then, less patients got physical movement and cough in group N.

Conclusions

Pretreatment with nalbuphine 0.1 mg/kg was effective in reducing propofol-induced injection pain and propofol consumption. Propofol combined with nalbuphine can be safely and effectively used during gastroscopy.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; ChiCTR1900025438.

Methylene blue relieves the development of osteoarthritis by upregulating lncRNA MEG3

Methylene blue (MB) is a long-term inhibitor of peripheral nerve axons, thereby alleviating or permanently eliminating pain. However, it remains unknown whether MB is safe and effective method of treating osteoarthritis (OA). MB was injected into the knee joints of rabbits and they were monitored for any histological structural changes. The results revealed no evident changes in the histological structure of the normal knee joint following injection of 1 mg/kg MB at 1, 4, 8 and 24 weeks post-injection. Compared with the vehicle control, MB treatment significantly enhanced the weight distribution and significantly decreased the swelling ratio of the rabbits. Additionally, levels of long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) maternally expressed 3 (MEG3) mRNA were significantly increased following treatment with MB, but the protein expression of P2X purinoceptor 3 (P2X3) was significantly suppressed compared with the vehicle control. The levels of interleukin (IL) 6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)α, IL-1β and IL-8 were significantly suppressed following MB treatment, indicating that MB protects against OA progression. It was also revealed that MEG3 overexpression significantly suppresses levels of P2X3 protein. ELISA indicated that the MEG3-induced reduction of IL-6, TNFα, IL-1β and IL-8 expression was significantly reversed following P2X3 overexpression. Therefore, the results of the present study demonstrated that MB is an effective method of treating OA-associated pain by upregulating lncRNA MEG3 levels. Additionally, lncRNA MEG3 relieves the OA-associated pain and inflammation in a rabbit model of OA by inhibiting P2X3 expression.

Hyoscine N-Butylbromide for Preventing Propofol Injection Pain: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled and Double-Blind Study

OBJECTIVE

In this study, the aim was to investigate the effect of hyoscine N-butylbromide (HnBB) pretreatment on pain during propofol injection.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled and double-blind trial, 60 patients scheduled to undergo routine outpatient surgery under general anesthesia were randomly allocated to 2 groups, the HnBB (n = 30) and sodium chloride (n = 30) groups. Twenty seconds after the injection of 20 mg HnBB or 0.9 % sodium chloride, a 50-mg dose of propofol was injected in 2-3 s. Ten seconds later, the pain intensity was assessed using a 4-point scale: no pain (0), mild (1), moderate (2), and severe (3) pain. The Student t test was used for the analysis of parametric data and the Pearson χ2 test for categorical data.

RESULTS

The occurrence of pain in the HnBB group (43.3%) was significantly lower than the control group (73.3%) (p < 0.018). Of the 30 patients in each group, 10 in the control group and 3 in the HnBB group experienced severe pain (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pretreatment with 20 mg HnBB significantly reduced propofol injection pain compared to placebo.

Pain on propofol injection: Causes and remedies

Pain on propofol injection (POPI) is a minor problem that all anesthetists face every day. Introduction of several new formulations and hundreds of clinical trials have failed to find its remedy with just one intervention in all patients. This article highlights the causes of POPI and interventions that are used to eliminate this pain in current practice. Relevant articles from Medline and Embase databases were searched and included in this descriptive review with the following conclusions: (1) POPI is due to irritation of venous adventitia leading to release of mediators such as kininogen from kinin cascade. (2) When two or more drugs or measures are used, the incidence of POPI decreases considerably. Hence, the approach to eliminating POPI should be multimodal. (3) Any regimen that includes a drug having local anesthetic effect combined with central sedative/analgesic and rapid injection into a large vein should definitely reduce the risk of POPI to negligible levels.

Nitric Oxide and Related Aspects Underlying Angina

Increased number of patients affected by metabolic syndrome (MS) has prompted the necessity of better understanding what is involved in such syndrome. Nevertheless, the establishment of promising therapies depends on the knowledge about the interaction of molecules within MS. In such context, Nitric Oxide (NO) emerges from a bulk of works relating its roles on aspects of MS, including cardiovascular diseases, their symptoms and comorbidities, which are thought to be triggered by similar sources. NO, nitric oxide synthase and enzymatic chains are keys for those disease and symptoms processes. NO has been separately described as part of hypertensive, ischemic and pain signaling. Although there are similar pathways likely shared for generating cardiovascular symptoms such angina, they are barely associated to NO in literature. The present review aims to clarify the patterns of NO alteration in metabolic syndrome directly concerned to cardiovascular symptoms, especially angina.

Comparative evaluation of the effect of remifentanil and 2 different doses of esmolol on pain during propofol injection: A double-blind, randomized clinical consort study

BACKGROUND

Propofol is associated with pain during injection, which is stressful to patients. The present study was designed to investigate the analgesic effect of pretreatment with remifentanil and esmolol in minimizing propofol injection pain, compared with placebo.

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind, prospective trial, 120 patients, scheduled for elective dental surgery under general anesthesia, were randomized to 1 of the 4 treatment arms (n = 30 each) receiving normal saline, remifentanil 0.35 μg/kg, esmolol 0.5 mg/kg, and 1 mg/kg before administration of propofol. During injection of 1% propofol 0.5 mg/kg, pain was evaluated by a 4-point score (0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe). Any adverse effects such as hypotension and bradycardia were recorded during the perioperative periods.

RESULTS

In all, 120 patients completed this study. There were no significant differences in terms of demographic data. The incidence of pain on injection of propofol was 11 (36.7%) with remifentanil 0.35 μg/kg, 12 (40%) with esmolol 0.5 mg/kg, and 11 (36.7%) with esmolol 1 mg/kg, compared with 25 (83.3%) with normal saline (respectively, P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the incidence of pain between groups with remifentanil 0.35 μg/kg, and esmolol 0.5 mg/kg and 1 mg/kg. There were no emergence reactions such as hypotension and bradycardia in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Pretreatment with esmolol 0.5 mg/kg and 1 mg/kg and remifentanil 0.35 μg/kg equally decreased pain during propofol injection.

Lidocaine for reducing propofol-induced pain on induction of anaesthesia in adults

BACKGROUND

Pain on propofol injection is an untoward effect and this condition can reduce patient satisfaction. Intravenous lidocaine injection has been commonly used to attenuate pain on propofol injection. Although many studies have reported that lidocaine was effective in reducing the incidence and severity of pain, nevertheless, no systematic review focusing on lidocaine for preventing high-intensity pain has been published.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to determine the efficacy and adverse effects of lidocaine in preventing high-intensity pain on propofol injection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 To October 2014), Ovid EMBASE (1988 to October 2014), LILACS (1992 to October 2014) and searched reference lists of articles.We reran the search in November 2015. We found 11potential studies of interest, those studies were added to the list of 'Studies awaiting classification' and will be fully incorporated into the formal review findings when we update the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using intravenous lidocaine injection as an intervention to decrease pain on propofol injection in adults. We excluded studies without a placebo or control group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We collected selected studies with relevant criteria. We identified risk of bias in five domains according to the following criteria: random sequence generation, allocation concealment, adequacy of blinding, completeness of outcome data and selective reporting. We performed meta-analysis by direct comparisons of intervention versus control. We estimated the summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals using the random-effects Mantel-Haenszel method in RevMan 5.3. We used the I(2) statistic to assess statistical heterogeneity. We assessed overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 87 studies, 84 of which (10,460 participants) were eligible for quantitative analysis in the review. All participants, aged 13 years to 89 years, were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-III patients undergoing elective surgery. Each study was conducted in a single centre in high- , middle- and low-income countries worldwide. According to the risk of bias assessment, all except five studies were identified as being of satisfactory methodological quality, allowing 84 studies to be combined in the meta-analysis. Five of the 84 studies were assessed as high risk of bias: one for participant and personnel blinding, one for incomplete outcome data, and three for other potential sources of bias.The overall incidence of pain and high-intensity pain following propofol injection in the control group were 64% (95% CI 60% to 67.9%) and 38.1% (95% CI 33.4% to 43.1%), respectively while those in the lidocaine group were 30.2% (95% CI 26.7% to 33.7%) and 11.8% (95% CI 9.7% to 13.8%). Both lidocaine admixture and pretreatment were effective in reducing pain on propofol injection (lidocaine admixture OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.25, 31 studies, 4927 participants, high-quality evidence; lidocaine pretreatment OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.18, 43 RCTs, 4028 participants, high-quality evidence). Similarly, lidocaine administration could considerably decrease the incidence of pain when premixed with the propofol (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.24, 36 studies, 5628 participants, high-quality evidence) or pretreated prior to propofol injection (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.18, 52 studies, 4832 participants, high-quality evidence). Adverse effects of lidocaine administration were rare. Thrombophlebitis was reported in only two studies (OR not estimated, low-quality evidence). No studies reported patient satisfaction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the quality of the evidence was high. Currently available data from RCTs are sufficient to confirm that both lidocaine admixture and pretreatment were effective in reducing pain on propofol injection. Furthermore, there were no significant differences of effect between the two techniques.

Evaluation of the protein biomarkers and the analgesic response to systemic methylene blue in patients with refractory neuropathic pain: a double-blind, controlled study

Aim

This study was carried out in patients with neuropathic pain in order to assess the analgesic effects and changes in protein biomarkers after the administration of methylene blue (MB), a diaminophenothiazine with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, and with inhibitory effects on nitric oxide.

Materials and methods

Ten patients with chronic refractory neuropathic pain were randomized to receive either MB (10 mg/mL Methylthioninium chloride) 2 mg/kg (MB group) or MB 0.02 mg/kg (control group) infused over 60 minutes. Sensory function and pain (Numerical Rating Scale) were evaluated at baseline and at 60 minutes after the start of the infusion. The patients kept a pain diary during the next 24 hours and for the following 4 days. Plasma and urinary concentrations of 8-isoprostane-prostaglandin F2α (8-iso-PGF2α) and plasma protein biomarkers prior to and after the infusions were measured with radioimmunoassay and with proximity extension assay.

Results

A decrease of the Numerical Rating Scale at 60 minutes in comparison with baseline was observed in the MB (P=0.047) group. The decrease was significant between the MB and the control group on the day of and day after MB infusion (P=0.04 and P=0.008, respectively). There was no difference in systemic protein expressions between groups except for prolactin (PRL) (P=0.02). Three patients demonstrated diminished dynamic mechanical allodynia.

Conclusion

MB decreased the pain levels in patients with chronic therapy-resistant neuropathic pain on the first 2 days after administration. Known as an endocrine modulator on the anterior pituitary gland, MB infusion produced a decrease of PRL. The detailed role of PRL effects in chronic neuropathic pain remains undetermined.

Dexmedetomidine pretreatment alleviates propofol injection pain

OBJECTIVE

The incidence of propofol injection pain during induction of general anesthesia varies from 28% to 90%. This prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated the effect of dexmedetomidine (DEX) for reducing the incidence and severity of propofol injection pain.

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective surgical procedures were randomly allocated into seven groups of 30 patients each. Experimental treatments were intravenously administered over 10 min (total volume 10 mL) prior to intravenous propofol injection, as follows: group I, the control group, was given isotonic saline. Patients in groups II, III, and IV received DEX 0.25 µg/kg, 0.5 µg/kg, or 1.0 µg/kg, respectively, mixed with isotonic saline immediately before propofol injection. Patients in groups V, VI, and VII received DEX as above, but 5 minutes before propofol injection. Propofol consisted of 1% long-chain triglyceride propofol (2.5 mg/kg) injected at 1 mL/s.

RESULTS

Median propofol injection pain score was 0.00 (IQR 0.00-3.00) in patients who received 1.0 µg/kg DEX 5 min before the propofol injection (group VII), and only 1 patient (of 30) in this group received a pain score >2. The median pain score and number of patients with pain scores >2 in group VII were both significantly less than in the control (group I; p = 0.000, both). There were no differences in either mean arterial pressure or heart rate at any time point after DEX injection among the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Pretreatment with intravenous DEX 1 µg/kg 5 min prior to injection of long-chain triglyceride propofol is effective and safe in reducing the incidence and severity of pain due to propofol injection.

Pairwise comparisons with ordered categorical data

Clinical trials frequently involve pairwise comparisons of different treatments to evaluate their relative efficacy. In this study, we examine methods for conducting pairwise tests of treatments with ordered categorical responses. A modified version of the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test based on a logistic regression model assuming proportional odds is a popular choice for comparing two treatments. This paper discusses the extension of this test to pairwise comparisons involving more than two treatments. However, when the proportional odds assumption is not valid, the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney-type test procedure cannot control the overall type I error rate at the prespecified level of significance. We therefore propose a better strategy in which a latent normal model is employed. We presented a simulated comparative study of power and the overall type I error rate to illustrate the superiority of the latent normal model. Examples are also given for illustrative purposes.

Effect of Intradiscal Methylene Blue Injection for the Chronic Discogenic Low Back Pain: One Year Prospective Follow-up Study

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of intradiscal methylene blue (MB) injection in patients with chronic discogenic low back pain.

Method

Twenty patients with discogenic low back pain (4 males, 16 females; mean age 45.6 years) refractory to conservative management were recruited. All subjects underwent MB injection in target lumbar intervertebral discs confirmed by provocative discography. The clinical outcome was assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) at baseline and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment. Successful outcome was described as minimum of 2 points reduction in pain intensity compared with the baseline.

Results

VAS and ODI significantly decreased after one injection. The average VAS and ODI were reduced significantly from 5.1 and 38.0 at baseline to 3.2 and 27.4 at 3 months after injection (p<0.05). However, the mean score of VAS at 12 month follow-up was 4.5 and we could not observe any difference between 12 months after injection and pretreatment. Eleven of twenty patients (55%) reported successful outcomes after intradiscal MB injection at 3 month follow up and the average VAS was reduced by 3.3±1.1 (p<0.05). At the time of 12 month follow up, pain had relapsed in 6 patients who have had satisfactory effect at 3 month follow up. Successful outcome was maintained in only 5 patients (20%) for 1 year.

Conclusion

The intradiscal MB injection is a short-term effective minimally invasive treatment indicated for discogenic back pain but it may lose its effectiveness long-term.