Pregabalin in patients with central neuropathic pain: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of a flexible-dose regimen

Usefulness of Mirogabalin in Central Neuropathic Pain After Stroke: Post Hoc Analysis of a Phase 3 Study by Stroke Type and Location

INTRODUCTION

Central post-stroke pain (CPSP) is a common type of central neuropathic pain (CNeP) that can occur following the onset of stroke. The oral gabapentinoid mirogabalin besylate (mirogabalin) is a selective α2δ ligand that is effective for the treatment of CNeP, including CPSP. However, it is unknown whether the analgesic effect of mirogabalin on CPSP varies in patients with different background factors.

METHODS

This was a post hoc subgroup analysis of a multinational, open-label, long-term phase 3 study of mirogabalin for the treatment of CNeP conducted between March 2019 and December 2020. Data from patients with CPSP were stratified by type of stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic), stroke location (thalamus, putamen, brainstem, or other), presence/absence of motor weakness, median time since stroke (≥ 59 or < 59 months), and median duration of CPSP (≥ 55.5 or < 55.5 months). Efficacy was assessed with the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were recorded.

RESULTS

This subanalysis included all 94 patients with CPSP from the phase 3 study; all were Japanese, and the mean age was 65.3 years. The least squares mean change [95% confidence interval] in SF-MPQ visual analog scale (VAS) score from baseline at week 52 (last observation carried forward) was - 17.0 [- 22.1, - 11.9] mm. Among the subgroups, least squares mean changes in SF-MPQ VAS scores were not different. Most TEAEs were mild or moderate; severe TEAEs occurred in six patients (6.4%). Somnolence (25.5%), peripheral edema (13.8%), dizziness (11.7%), and weight gain (6.4%) were the most common ADRs, and the types and frequencies of ADRs were similar among subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Mirogabalin was generally effective and well tolerated in patients with CPSP, regardless of background factors such as stroke type or location, presence/absence of motor weakness, time since stroke, and duration of CPSP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration number NCT03901352.

Central Neuropathic Pain

OBJECTIVE

This article provides an approach to the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of central neuropathic pain.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Recent studies of the pathophysiology of central neuropathic pain, including evidence of changes in the expression of voltage-gated sodium channels and N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, may provide the basis for new therapies. Other areas of current research include the role of cannabinoid-receptor activity and microglial cell activation in various animal models of central neuropathic pain. New observations regarding changes in primary afferent neuronal activity in central neuropathic pain and the preliminary observation that peripheral nerve blocks may relieve pain due to central neuropathic etiologies provide new insights into both the mechanism and treatment of central neuropathic pain.

ESSENTIAL POINTS

In the patient populations treated by neurologists, central neuropathic pain develops most frequently following spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, or stroke. A multimodal, individualized approach to the management of central neuropathic pain is necessary to optimize pain relief and may require multiple treatment trials to achieve the best outcome.

Advancements in Modern Treatment Approaches for Central Post-Stroke Pain: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Central post-stroke pain (CPSP) poses a multifaceted challenge in medical practice, necessitating a thorough and multidisciplinary approach for its diagnosis and treatment. This review examines current methods for addressing CPSP, highlighting both pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies. It covers the mechanisms and clinical effectiveness of these treatments in managing CPSP and emphasizes the importance of personalized treatment plans, given the varied causes of CPSP.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent advancements have illuminated diverse treatment modalities for CPSP. Pharmacotherapy spans from conventional analgesics to anticonvulsants and antidepressants, tailored to mitigate the neuropathic characteristics of CPSP. Non-pharmacological interventions, including physical therapy and psychological strategies, are pivotal in managing CPSP's chronic nature. For cases resistant to standard treatments, advanced interventions such as nerve blocks and surgical procedures like deep brain stimulation (DBS) or motor cortex stimulation (MCS) are considered. Additionally, innovative technologies such as neuromodulation techniques and personalized medicine are emerging as promising avenues to enhance therapeutic outcomes and improve quality of life for individuals grappling with CPSP.

SUMMARY

Modern approaches in managing CPSP require an interdisciplinary and patient-centric approach. Customizing treatment plans to address the specific etiology and symptoms of CPSP is crucial. Pharmacotherapy remains fundamental, encompassing medications such as anticonvulsants and antidepressants tailored to manage neuropathic pain. Integrating non-pharmacological interventions is crucial for providing comprehensive care. Additionally, investigating innovative technologies and personalized medicine presents promising opportunities to enhance treatment results and elevate the quality of life for those suffering from CPSP. Ultimately, an integrated approach that acknowledges the multifaceted nature of CPSP is essential for effective management and patient well-being.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in central post-stroke pain: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Background

The rehabilitation of central post-stroke pain (CPSP) is a complex clinical challenge, and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been widely applied in the research of neurofunctional recovery following stroke. However, there is currently no reliable evidence-based medicine supporting the efficacy of rTMS in central post-stroke pain. This review aims to evaluate the effects of rTMS on central post-stroke pain.

Methods

Following the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted searches on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wan Fang Data Knowledge Service Platform. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of rTMS in treating central post-stroke pain, and conducted screening based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Characteristics of the included RCTs were extracted. The heterogeneity of the trials was assessed using the I2 statistic. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 17 software. Bias risk and methodological quality were evaluated using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and the Pedro scale.

Results

A total of six randomized controlled trials involving 288 patients met our inclusion criteria. In our analysis, rTMS was more effective in treating patients with CPSP compared to the placebo group (SMD=-1.15, 95% CI: -1.69, -0.61, P < 0.001). Furthermore, results from subgroup analysis indicated no statistically significant difference in the improvement of pain for durations exceeding 6 months when comparing rTMS to conventional treatment (SMD=-0.80, 95% CI: -1.63, 0.03, P = 0.059).

Conclusion

TMS can alleviate pain in CPSP patients and improve their motor function, but its effects on depression, anxiety, and MEP-latency are not significant.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, CRD42024497530.

Central neuropathic pain

Central neuropathic pain arises from a lesion or disease of the central somatosensory nervous system such as brain injury, spinal cord injury, stroke, multiple sclerosis or related neuroinflammatory conditions. The incidence of central neuropathic pain differs based on its underlying cause. Individuals with spinal cord injury are at the highest risk; however, central post-stroke pain is the most prevalent form of central neuropathic pain worldwide. The mechanisms that underlie central neuropathic pain are not fully understood, but the pathophysiology likely involves intricate interactions and maladaptive plasticity within spinal circuits and brain circuits associated with nociception and antinociception coupled with neuronal hyperexcitability. Modulation of neuronal activity, neuron-glia and neuro-immune interactions and targeting pain-related alterations in brain connectivity, represent potential therapeutic approaches. Current evidence-based pharmacological treatments include antidepressants and gabapentinoids as first-line options. Non-pharmacological pain management options include self-management strategies, exercise and neuromodulation. A comprehensive pain history and clinical examination form the foundation of central neuropathic pain classification, identification of potential risk factors and stratification of patients for clinical trials. Advanced neurophysiological and neuroimaging techniques hold promise to improve the understanding of mechanisms that underlie central neuropathic pain and as predictive biomarkers of treatment outcome.

Chronic pregabalin treatment protects against spreading depolarization and alters hippocampal synaptic characteristics in a model of familial hemiplegic migraine-type 1

Familial hemiplegic migraine type-1 (FHM-1) is a form of migraine with aura caused by mutations in the P/Q-type (Cav2.1) voltage-gated calcium channel. Pregabalin, used clinically in the treatment of chronic pain and epilepsy, inhibits P/Q-type calcium channel activity and recent studies suggest that it may have potential for the treatment of migraine. Spreading Depolarization (SD) is a neurophysiological phenomenon that can occur during migraine with aura by propagating a wave of silenced neuronal function through cortex and sometimes subcortical brain structures. Here, utilizing an optogenetic stimulation technique optimized to allow for non-invasive initiation of cortical SD, we demonstrate that chronic pregabalin administration [12 mg/kg/day (s.c.)] in vivo increased the threshold for cortical spreading depolarization in transgenic mice harboring the clinically-relevant Cav2.1S218L mutation (S218L). In addition, chronic pregabalin treatment limited subcortical propagation of recurrent spreading depolarization events to the striatum and hippocampus in both wild-type and S218L mice. To examine contributing underlying mechanisms of action of chronic pregabalin, we performed whole-cell patch-clamp electrophysiology in CA1 neurons in ex vivo brain slices from mice treated with chronic pregabalin vs vehicle. In WT mice, chronic pregabalin produced a decrease in spontaneous excitatory postsynaptic current (sEPSC) amplitude with no effect on frequency. In contrast, in S218L mice chronic pregabalin produced an increase in sEPSC amplitude and decreased frequency. These electrophysiological findings suggest that in FHM-1 mice chronic pregabalin acts through both pre- and post-synaptic mechanisms in CA1 hippocampal neurons to elicit FHM-1 genotype-specific inhibitory action. The results highlight the potential of chronic pregabalin to limit recurrent SD to subcortical brain structures during pathophysiological events in both the genetically-normal and FHM-1 brain. The work further provides insights into FHM-1 pathophysiology and the potential for chronic pregabalin treatment to prevent SD in migraineurs.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in central post-stroke pain: current status and future perspective

Central post-stroke pain (CPSP) is an incapacitating disorder that impacts a substantial proportion of stroke survivors and can diminish their quality of life. Conventional therapies for CPSP, including tricyclic antidepressants, anticonvulsants, and opioids, are frequently ineffective, necessitating the investigation of alternative therapeutic strategies. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is now recognized as a promising noninvasive pain management method for CPSP. rTMS modulates neural activity through the administration of magnetic pulses to specific cortical regions. Trials analyzing the effects of rTMS on CPSP have generated various outcomes, but the evidence suggests possible analgesic benefits. In CPSP and other neuropathic pain conditions, high-frequency rTMS targeting the primary motor cortex (M1) with figure-eight coils has demonstrated significant pain alleviation. Due to its associaton with analgesic benefits, M1 is the most frequently targeted area. The duration and frequency of rTMS sessions, as well as the stimulation intensity, have been studied in an effort to optimize treatment outcomes. The short-term pain relief effects of rTMS have been observed, but the long-term effects (> 3 months) require further investigation. Aspects such as stimulation frequency, location, and treatment period can influence the efficacy of rTMS and ought to be considered while planning the procedure. Standardized guidelines for using rTMS in CPSP would optimize therapy protocols and improve patient outcomes. This review article provides an up-to-date overview of the incidence, clinical characteristics, outcome of rTMS in CPSP patients, and future perspective in the field.

Inhibition of T-Type Calcium Channels With TTA-P2 Reduces Chronic Neuropathic Pain Following Spinal Cord Injury in Rats

Spinal cord injury (SCI)-induced neuropathic pain (SCI-NP) develops in up to 60 to 70% of people affected by traumatic SCI, leading to a major decline in quality of life and increased risk for depression, anxiety, and addiction. Gabapentin and pregabalin, together with antidepressant drugs, are commonly prescribed to treat SCI-NP, but their efficacy is unsatisfactory. The limited efficacy of current pharmacological treatments for SCI-NP likely reflects our limited knowledge of the underlying mechanism(s) responsible for driving the maintenance of SCI-NP. The leading hypothesis in the field supports a major role for spontaneously active injured nociceptors in driving the maintenance of SCI-NP. Recent data from our laboratory provided additional support for this hypothesis and identified the T-type calcium channels as key players in driving the spontaneous activity of SCI-nociceptors, thus providing a rational pharmacological target to treat SCI-NP. To test whether T-type calcium channels contribute to the maintenance of SCI-NP, male and female SCI and sham rats were treated with TTA-P2 (a blocker of T-type calcium channels) to determine its effects on mechanical hypersensitivity (as measured with the von Frey filaments) and spontaneous ongoing pain (as measured with the conditioned place preference paradigm), and compared them to the effects of gabapentin, a blocker of high voltage-activated calcium channels. We found that both TTA-P2 and gabapentin reduced mechanical hypersensitivity in male and females SCI rats, but surprisingly only TTA-P2 reduced spontaneous ongoing pain in male SCI rats. PERSPECTIVES: SCI-induced neuropathic pain, and in particular the spontaneous ongoing pain component, is notoriously very difficult to treat. Our data provide evidence that inhibition of T-type calcium channels reduces spontaneous ongoing pain in SCI rats, supporting a clinically relevant role for T-type channels in the maintenance of SCI-induced neuropathic pain.

Neuropathic Pain and Spinal Cord Injury: Management, Phenotypes, and Biomarkers

Chronic neuropathic pain after a spinal cord injury (SCI) continues to be a complex condition that is difficult to manage due to multiple underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and the association with psychosocial factors. Determining the individual contribution of each of these factors is currently not a realistic goal; however, focusing on the primary mechanisms may be more feasible. One approach used to uncover underlying mechanisms includes phenotyping using pain symptoms and somatosensory function. However, this approach does not consider cognitive and psychosocial mechanisms that may also significantly contribute to the pain experience and impact treatment outcomes. Indeed, clinical experience supports that a combination of self-management, non-pharmacological, and pharmacological approaches is needed to optimally manage pain in this population. This article will provide a broad updated summary integrating the clinical aspects of SCI-related neuropathic pain, potential pain mechanisms, evidence-based treatment recommendations, neuropathic pain phenotypes and brain biomarkers, psychosocial factors, and progress regarding how defining neuropathic pain phenotypes and other surrogate measures in the neuropathic pain field may lead to targeted treatments for neuropathic pain after SCI.

The safety and efficacy of gabapentinoids in the management of neuropathic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There are increasing concerns regarding the abusive potential of gabapentinoids putting at risk patients with neuropathic pain requiring long-term pain management. The evidence to support this is rather inconcusive.

AIM

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of gabapentinoids in the management of neuropathic pain with a focus on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and categorising the side effects according to the body systems they were affecting.

METHOD

Searches were conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycoINFO, and CINAHL (EBSCO), and included RCTs to identify and critically appraise studies investigating safety and therapeutic effects of gabapentionoids in adults with neuropathic pain. Data extraction was conducted using an established Cochrane form and the risk-of-bias tool was used in the assessment of quality.

RESULTS

50 studies (12,398 participants) were included. The majority of adverse events pertained to the nervous system (7 effects) or psychiatric (3 effects) disorders. There were more adverse effects reported with pregabalin (36 effects) than with gabapentin (22 effects). Six pregabalin studies reported euphoria as a side effect, while no studies reported euphoria with gabapentin. This was the only side effect that may correlate with addictive potential. Gabapentioids were reported to significantly reduce pain compared to placebo.

CONCLUSION

Despite RCTs documenting the adverse events of gabapentionoids on the nervous system, there was no evidence of gabapentinoid use leading to addiction, suggesting an urgent need to design studies investigating their abusive potential.

Pharmacotherapies for Central Post-Stroke Pain: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background

Central post-stroke pain (CPSP) is a common condition. Several pharmacotherapies have been applied in practice. However, the comparative effectiveness among these pharmacotherapies is unknown.

Aim

The aim of this study is to study the comparative effectiveness among differential pharmacotherapies for CPSP through a network meta-analysis.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science from inception to 30 March 2022, without any language restriction. Two reviewers independently screened the retrieved articles, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias (RoB). The outcome of interest of the study was the change in the scores of pain intensity scales. We estimated standard mean differences (SMDs) between treatments and calculated corresponding 95% CIs.

Results

Thirteen randomized controlled trials (529 participants) were included after a screen of 1774 articles. Compared with placebo, pamidronate (SMD -2.43, 95% CI -3.54 to -1.31; P − score = 0.93), prednisone (SMD -2.38, 95% CI -3.09 to -1.67; P − score = 0.92), levetiracetam (SMD -2.11, 95% CI -2.97 to -1.26; P − score = 0.87), lamotrigine (SMD -1.39, 95% CI -2.21 to -0.58; P − score = 0.73), etanercept (SMD -0.92, 95% CI -1.8 to -0.03; P − score = 0.59), and pregabalin (SMD -0.46, 95% CI -0.71 to -0.22; P − score = 0.41) had significantly better treatment effect. Pamidronate, prednisone, and levetiracetam ranked as the first three most effective treatments. In subgroup analyses, prednisone, levetiracetam, lamotrigine, and pregabalin were more effective than placebo as oral pharmacotherapies, while etanercept was more effective than placebo as injectable pharmacotherapy.

Conclusions

Our study confirmed that pamidronate, prednisone, and guideline-recommended anticonvulsants were effective for reducing pain intensity for CPSP. Pamidronate and prednisone showed better effect than other pharmacotherapies, which warrants further investigation.

Central Neuropathic Pain Syndromes: Current and Emerging Pharmacological Strategies

Central neuropathic pain is caused by a disease or lesion of the brain or spinal cord. It is difficult to predict which patients will develop central pain syndromes after a central nervous system injury, but depending on the etiology, lifetime prevalence may be greater than 50%. The resulting pain is often highly distressing and difficult to treat, with no specific treatment guidelines currently available. This narrative review discusses mechanisms contributing to central neuropathic pain, and focuses on pharmacological approaches for managing common central neuropathic pain conditions such as central post-stroke pain, spinal cord injury-related pain, and multiple sclerosis-related neuropathic pain. Tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and gabapentinoids have some evidence for efficacy in central neuropathic pain. Medications from other pharmacologic classes may also provide pain relief, but current evidence is limited. Certain non-pharmacologic approaches, neuromodulation in particular, may be helpful in refractory cases. Emerging data suggest that modulating the primary afferent input may open new horizons for the treatment of central neuropathic pain. For most patients, effective treatment will likely require a multimodal therapy approach.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of 11 Drugs as Therapies for Adults With Neuropathic Pain After Spinal Cord Injury: A Bayesian Network Analysis Based on 20 Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

To provide an updated analysis of the efficacy and safety of drugs for the management of neuropathic pain (NP) after spinal cord injury (SCI) based on Bayesian network analysis.

Methods

A Bayesian network meta-analysis of literature searches within PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases from their inception to February 21 2021 was conducted without language restrictions. Paired and network meta-analyses of random effects were used to estimate the total standardized mean deviations (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs).

Results

A total of 1,133 citations were identified and 20 RCTs (including 1,198 patients) involving 11 drugs and placebos for post-SCI NP selected. The 5 outcomes from all 11 drugs and placebos had no inconsistencies after Bayesian network analysis. BTX-A gave the most effective pain relief for the 4 weeks, following a primary outcome. No significant differences were found among drugs with regard to adverse events of the primary outcome. Gabapentin, BTX-A, and pregabalin were found to be the most helpful in relieving secondary outcomes of mental or sleep-related symptoms with differences in SMDs, ranging from −0.63 to −0.86. Tramadol triggered more serious adverse events than any of the other drugs with differences in ORs ranging from 0.09 to 0.11.

Conclusion

BTX-A, gabapentin, pregabalin, amitriptyline, ketamine, lamotrigine, and duloxetine were all effective for NP management following SCI. Lamotrigine and gabapentin caused fewer side effects and had better efficacy in relieving mental or sleep-related symptoms caused by SCI-related NP. Tramadol, levetiracetam, carbamazepine, and cannabinoids could not be recommended due to inferior safety or efficacy.

Systematic Review Registration

[https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2020-7-0061/], identifier [INPLASY202070061].

Pain in Multiple Sclerosis: Understanding Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management Through Clinical Vignettes

Neuropathic pain and other pain syndromes occur in the vast majority of patients with multiple sclerosis at some time during their disease course. Pain can become chronic and paroxysmal. In this review, we will utilize clinical vignettes to describe various pain syndromes associated with multiple sclerosis and their pathophysiology. These syndromes vary from central neuropathic pain or Lhermitte's phenomenon associated with central nervous system lesions to trigeminal neuralgia and optic neuritis pain associated with nerve lesions. Muscular pain can also arise due to spasticity. In addition, we will discuss strategies utilized to help patients manage these symptoms.

The CanPain SCI clinical practice guidelines for rehabilitation management of neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury: 2021 update

STUDY DESIGN

Clinical practice guidelines.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to update the 2016 version of the Canadian clinical practice guidelines for the management of neuropathic pain in people with spinal cord injury (SCI).

SETTING

The guidelines are relevant for inpatient, outpatient and community SCI rehabilitation settings in Canada.

METHODS

The guidelines were updated in accordance with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. A Steering Committee and Working Group reviewed the relevant evidence on neuropathic pain management (encompassing screening and diagnosis, treatment and models of care) after SCI. The quality of evidence was scored using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A consensus process was followed to achieve agreement on recommendations and clinical considerations.

RESULTS

The working group identified and reviewed 46 additional relevant articles published since the last version of the guidelines. The panel agreed on 3 new screening and diagnosis recommendations and 8 new treatment recommendations. Two key changes to these treatment recommendations included the introduction of general treatment principles and a new treatment recommendation classification system. No new recommendations to model of care were made.

CONCLUSIONS

The CanPainSCI recommendations for the management of neuropathic pain after SCI should be used to inform practice.

Pregabalin and Gabapentin in Patients with Spinal Cord Injury-Related Neuropathic Pain: A Network Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

This study was performed to explore the efficacy and safety of pregabalin and gabapentin in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI)-induced neuropathic pain to determine which treatment is most suitable for such patients.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from database inception to August 31, 2020. The quality of the included studies was assessed. We selected the average pain intensity after treatment and the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment because of adverse effects as the outcome indicators for efficacy and safety, respectively. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata, v16.0, and RevMan, v5.3, software.

RESULTS

We included eight randomized controlled trials that examined four interventions (pregabalin, gabapentin, carbamazepine, and amitriptyline). Based on the average pain intensity after treatment, the efficacy order from highest to lowest was pregabalin, gabapentin, amitriptyline, carbamazepine, and placebo. Based on the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment because of adverse effects, the order from highest to lowest was pregabalin, amitriptyline, carbamazepine, gabapentin, and placebo. In addition, five studies reported the overall incidence of treatment-related adverse effects for two interventions (pregabalin and gabapentin). According to the pooled analysis of these studies, the order for the overall incidence of treatment-related adverse effects from highest to lowest was pregabalin, gabapentin, and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that for patients with SCI-related neuropathic pain, pregabalin was the most effective for relieving pain, whereas gabapentin performed better in aspects associated with drug therapy-related safety.

Expert review and recommendations for the management of acute, chronic, and neuropathic pain in Qatar

BACKGROUND

Pain management is an evolving area of expertise in Qatar. Gaps in knowledge, inadequate training for physicians and nurses, and the absence of policies/guidelines are the main barriers to effective pain management in Qatar. In addition, the use of certain pain medication, especially opioids, is highly regulated, limiting their availability in outpatient pain management. These factors are responsible for the undertreatment of pain in Qatar. This study aimed to standardize evidence-based local recommendations for pharmacological treatment of pain in Qatar.

METHODS

An expert panel of physicians from different disciplines, with experience in diagnosis and treatment of the three pain types (i.e., acute, chronic, and neuropathic), was convened for two face-to-face meetings in Doha, Qatar, on November 29, 2019, and on February 22, 2020, with subsequent virtual meetings. A literature search was performed on Medline and Google Scholar databases from inception till December 2019, and all relevant articles were selected. Based on these articles and repeated feedback from the authors, the final pain treatment protocols were developed.

RESULTS

Recommendations for the treatment of acute pain, based on pain severity, followed three approaches: acetaminophen/paracetamol or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for mild pain and moderate pain and referral to a pain specialist for severe pain. Acetaminophen/paracetamol or NSAIDs is recommended for chronic pain, and the use of opioids was strongly discouraged because of its long-term side effects. For neuropathic pain, tricyclic antidepressants or gabapentin or pregabalin or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors were recommended first-line agents. Non-responders must be referred to neurologists or a pain specialist.

CONCLUSION

The expert panel provides recommendations for the management of acute, chronic, and neuropathic pain based on international guidelines adapted to local practice and treatment availability in Qatar. More importantly, the panel has recommended taking extreme caution in the use of opioids for long-term management of chronic pain and to refer the patient to a pain specialist clinician as required.

On the therapeutic targets and pharmacological treatments for pain relief following spinal cord injury: A mechanistic review

Spinal cord injury (SCI) is globally considered as one of the most debilitating disorders, which interferes with daily activities and life of the affected patients. Despite many developments in related recognizing and treating procedures, post-SCI neuropathic pain (NP) is still a clinical challenge for clinicians with no distinct treatments. Accordingly, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and national database (SID and Irandoc). The relevant articles regarding signaling pathways, therapeutic targets and pharmacotherapy of post-SCI pain were also reviewed. Data were collected with no time limitation until November 2020. The present study provides the findings on molecular mechanisms and therapeutic targets, as well as developing the critical signaling pathways to introduce novel neuroprotective treatments of post-SCI pain. From the pathophysiological mechanistic point of view, post-SCI inflammation activates the innate immune system, in which the immune cells elicit secondary injuries. So, targeting the critical signaling pathways for pain management in the SCI population has significant importance in providing new treatments. Indeed, several receptors, ion channels, excitatory neurotransmitters, enzymes, and key signaling pathways could be used as therapeutic targets, with a pivotal role of n-methyl-D-aspartate, gamma-aminobutyric acid, and inflammatory mediators. The current review focuses on conventional therapies, as well as crucial signaling pathways and promising therapeutic targets for post-SCI pain to provide new insights into the clinical treatment of post-SCI pain. The need to develop innovative delivery systems to treat SCI is also considered.

The Efficacy, Adverse Events & Withdrawal Rates of the Pharmacological Management of Chronic Spinal Cord Injury Pain: A Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To establish the efficacy of medications, incidence of adverse events (AE) and withdrawal rates (WR) of the pharmacological management of chronic spinal cord injury (SCI) pain.

METHODOLOGY

PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, CENTRAL and PsycINFO were searched (November 2017) and updated (January 2020). Two independent review authors screened and identified papers for inclusion.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies met inclusion for efficacy analysis and 17 for AEs and WR analysis; no additional paper were included from the up dated 2020 search. Treatments were divided into 6 categories: anticonvulsants (n = 6), antidepressants (n = 3), analgesics (n = 8), anti-spasticity (n = 2), cannabinoids (n = 1) and other (n = 2). Trials of anticonvulsants, antidepressants, and cannabinoids included long-term follow-up trials (2 weeks- 4 months), and analgesics, anti-spasticity, among others were short term trials (0-2 days). Effectiveness for NP was found for Pregabalin (3/3 studies) and Lidocaine (2/3 studies). Studies using Ketamine also reported effectiveness (2/2) but the quality of these papers was rated as poor. Most frequently reported AEs included dizziness, dry mouth, nausea and constipation. Pregabalin had a higher risk of somnolence (RR 3.15, 95% CI 2.00-4.98) and dizziness (RR 2.9, 95% CI 1.58-5.30). Ketamine had a higher risk of reduced vision (RR 9.00, 95% CI 0.05-146.11), dizziness (RR 8.33, 95% CI 1.73-40.10) and somnolence (RR 7.00, 95% CI 1.73-40.1). WRs ranged from: 18.4% (antidepressants), 0-30% (anticonvulsants), 0-10% (anti-spasticity), 0-48% (analgesics), 28.6% (cannabinoids) and 0-22.2% (other).

CONCLUSION

Pregabalin was found to be effective for NP versus placebo. Cannabinoids was ineffective for NP. AEs are a common cause for withdrawal. The nature of AEs was poorly reported and should be improved in future RCT's.

[Central Post-Stroke Pain at the Tingandogo University Teaching Hospital of Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso): Frequency, Clinical Profile, Quality of Life of Patients and Associated Factors]

Objective

Few studies have been done on central post-stroke pain (CPSP) in Sub-Saharan Africa, while taking it into account would improve the quality of life of stroke survivors. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of CPSP, to describe its clinical profile, to assess the quality of life of patients and to identify the factors associated with its occurrence, from a prospective hospital series in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.

Methodology

It was a prospective, descriptive and analytical longitudinal follow-up study, conducted from January 2015 to March 2020, at the Tingandogo University Hospital, in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. The study involved all patients over the age of 16, consecutively hospitalized for stroke confirmed by CT and / or brain MRI, then reviewed every three months in outpatient Neurology, during at least 9 months after their stroke. The sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the patients, the nature of the stroke, the existence of CPSP and, if applicable, its clinical characteristics, its treatment and its impact on the quality of life of the patients were recorded; a bivariate then multivariate analysis with logistic regression step by step, made it possible to search for the factors associated with the occurrence of CPSP. The significance threshold used was p < 0.05.

Results

A total of 236 patients were collected, out of which 28 patients presented a CPSP (11.9%), after a mean duration of post-stroke follow-up of 12.9 months. Cerebral infarction, intracerebral hemorrhage and cerebral venous thrombosis accounted for 69.5%, 29.7% and 0.8% respectively. The mean age of patients with CPSP was 54.6 years, with a male predominance (53.6%). The mean time to onset for CPSP was 3.8 months after stroke. Pains such as burning (75%) and allodynia (67.8%) were the most common. The average CPSP intensity was 7.6 / 10 on the visual analog scale. Hypoaesthesia (96.4%) and paraesthesia (71.4%) were the signs or symptoms most commonly associated with CPSP. CPSP had a moderate to severe negative impact on usual work, general activity and mood of patients in 60.7%, 50% and 46.4% of patients, respectively. Amitriptyline (75%) and / or level II analgesics (60.7%,) were the most used molecules, and effective in 57% of cases. Only age ≤ 50 years was independently associated with the occurrence of CPSP (OR 2.86; p = 0.03).

Conclusion

CPSP affects more than 1 in 10 stroke patients and moderately to severely affects the quality of life for most of these patients. Screening and adequate management of CPSP as part of multidisciplinary post-stroke follow-up will contribute to improve the quality of life of stroke patients and will facilitate their social and professional reintegration.

Pharmacological treatment of central neuropathic pain: consensus of the Brazilian Academy of Neurology

ABSTRACT Background: Central neuropathic pain (CNP) is often refractory to available therapeutic strategies and there are few evidence-based treatment options. Many patients with neuropathic pain are not diagnosed or treated properly. Thus, consensus-based recommendations, adapted to the available drugs in the country, are necessary to guide clinical decisions. Objective: To develop recommendations for the treatment of CNP in Brazil. Methods: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and specialists opinions considering efficacy, adverse events profile, cost, and drug availability in public health. Results: Forty-four studies on CNP treatment were found, 20 were included in the qualitative analysis, and 15 in the quantitative analysis. Medications were classified as first-, second-, and third-line treatment based on systematic review, meta-analysis, and expert opinion. As first-line treatment, gabapentin, duloxetine, and tricyclic antidepressants were included. As second-line, venlafaxine, pregabalin for CND secondary to spinal cord injury, lamotrigine for CNP after stroke, and, in association with first-line drugs, weak opioids, in particular tramadol. For refractory patients, strong opioids (methadone and oxycodone), cannabidiol/delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, were classified as third-line of treatment, in combination with first or second-line drugs and, for central nervous system (CNS) in multiple sclerosis, dronabinol. Conclusions: Studies that address the treatment of CNS are scarce and heterogeneous, and a significant part of the recommendations is based on experts opinions. The CNP approach must be individualized, taking into account the availability of medication, the profile of adverse effects, including addiction risk, and patients' comorbidities.

Treatment of hiccups in stroke rehabilitation with gabapentin: A case series and focused clinical review

BACKGROUND

Persistent and intractable hiccups have a major impact on quality of life and can be a barrier to stroke rehabilitation. The first-line treatment for intractable hiccups, chlorpromazine, can have sedating effects, which may negatively affect rehabilitation participation. Gabapentin has been reported in several cases to be effective in hiccup treatment in both the general and post-stroke populations.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the use of gabapentin for treatment of persistent or intractable hiccups in post-stroke patients.

METHODS

Four cases were identified by clinicians for a retrospective review. A literature review was concurrently conducted.

RESULTS

This case series presents four patients with improvement or resolution of intractable hiccups on gabapentin in a stroke rehabilitation setting. Therapeutic dose ranged from 100 mg TID to 400 mg BID. Treatment duration ranged from 2 days to 5.5 weeks. Adjuncts were used in three of the cases. A potential side effect was worsened confusion in one case.

CONCLUSION

Evidence on the use of gabapentin for persistent or intractable hiccups is limited. This case series expands on the current literature by examining and comparing the current literature to our cases and exploring issues related to dosing, titration, side effects, and adjuncts to gabapentin.

Nonpharmacological therapies for central poststroke pain: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Central poststroke pain (CPSP) is a neuropathic pain syndrome that can occur after a cerebrovascular accident. It has negative effects on mood, sleep, rehabilitation, and quality of life in stroke patients. This systematic review assessed the efficacy and safety of nonpharmacological therapies for treating CPSP.

METHODS

The Cochrane, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for studies from inception to August 2020. Two authors worked independently and in duplicate to identify suitable studies.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were identified. Pain related to CPSP was ameliorated by precentral gyrus stimulation (P = .01), caloric vestibular stimulation (P = 0.004), transcranial direct current stimulation (P < .05), and bee venom acupuncture point injection (P = .009). Acupuncture (P = .72) and electroacupuncture therapies (P > .05) were as effective for thalamic pain as oral carbamazepine treatment. Motor cortex stimulation, but not deep brain stimulation (DBS), was effective for treating refractory CPSP, and appeared to be more effective than thalamic stimulation for controlling bulbar pain secondary to Wallenberg syndrome. However, DBS in the ventral striatum or anterior limb of the internal capsule improved depression (P = .020) and anxiety in patients with refractory CPSP. Some serious adverse events were reported in response to invasive electrical brain stimulation, but most of these effects recovered with treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonpharmacological therapies appear to be effective in CPSP, but the evidence is relatively weak. Invasive electrical brain stimulation can be accompanied by serious adverse events, but most patients recover from these effects.

Poststroke shoulder pain in subacute patients and its correlation with upper limb recovery after robotic or conventional treatment: A secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Poststroke shoulder pain is a common complication. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of poststroke shoulder pain, with attention to the neuropathic component, and the relationship between poststroke shoulder pain and upper limb improvement in motor function, strength, disability, and quality of life after upper limb rehabilitation.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare upper limb conventional or robotic rehabilitation on 224 patients enrolled in eight rehabilitation centers. We assessed poststroke shoulder pain (using the Numerical Rating Scale and the Douleur Neuropathique 4), and upper limb motor function, strength, disability, and quality of life at baseline (T0), after 30 rehabilitation sessions (T1), and three months after the end of rehabilitation (T2).

RESULTS

A moderate/severe poststroke shoulder pain was reported by 28.9% of patients, while 19.6% of them showed a neuropathic component. At T0, the intensity of pain was higher in women and in patients with neglect syndrome, positively correlated with the time since stroke and disability and negatively correlated with motor function, strength, and the physical aspects of the quality of life.Moderate/severe pain and neuropathic component significantly reduced after both treatments and this reduction was maintained at T2. Finally, the intensity of pain at baseline was negatively correlated with the improvement of upper limb motor function.

CONCLUSIONS

Poststroke shoulder pain negatively impact on motor performance, strength, disability, and physical aspects of the quality of life as well as on upper limb motor recovery; however, it can be reduced after a robotic or a conventional rehabilitation. Therefore, we suggest considering poststroke shoulder pain when planning the rehabilitation intervention.

Pregabalin-induced sexual disinhibition

INTRODUCTION

Sexual side effects have rarely been reported secondary to treatment with Pregabalin, a structural analogue of the inhibitory neurotransmitter gamma amino butyric acid (GABA).

METHOD

We present the case of AB, a 27-year-old single man with a diagnosis of recurrent depressive disorder who was prescribed pregabalin to alleviate the significant anxiety symptoms he was experiencing.

RESULTS

A significant amelioration in anxiety symptoms was attained; however, he developed the adverse effects of acute sexual disinhibition and increased libido. These adverse effects were temporally related to treatment with pregabalin and reduced with dose reduction of this agent.

CONCLUSIONS

To date, limited published data are available relating such a reaction to pregabalin. A greater clinical recognition of this association between pregabalin and sexual disinhibition, would allow clinicians to intervene at an earlier stage of this adverse effect and potentially as in this case, management may only require dose reduction rather than treatment discontinuation.

Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations: Rehabilitation, Recovery, and Community Participation following Stroke. Part One: Rehabilitation and Recovery Following Stroke; 6th Edition Update 2019

The sixth update of the Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations: Rehabilitation, Recovery, and Reintegration following Stroke. Part one: Rehabilitation and Recovery Following Stroke is a comprehensive set of evidence-based guidelines addressing issues surrounding impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions following stroke. Rehabilitation is a critical component of recovery, essential for helping patients to regain lost skills, relearn tasks, and regain independence. Following a stroke, many people typically require rehabilitation for persisting deficits related to hemiparesis, upper-limb dysfunction, pain, impaired balance, swallowing, and vision, neglect, and limitations with mobility, activities of daily living, and communication. This module addresses interventions related to these issues as well as the structure in which they are provided, since rehabilitation can be provided on an inpatient, outpatient, or community basis. These guidelines also recognize that rehabilitation needs of people with stroke may change over time and therefore intermittent reassessment is important. Recommendations are appropriate for use by all healthcare providers and system planners who organize and provide care to patients following stroke across a broad range of settings. Unlike the previous set of recommendations, in which pediatric stroke was included, this set of recommendations includes primarily adult rehabilitation, recognizing many of these therapies may be applicable in children. Recommendations related to community reintegration, which were previously included within this rehabilitation module, can now be found in the companion module, Rehabilitation, Recovery, and Community Participation following Stroke. Part Two: Transitions and Community Participation Following Stroke.

Pregabalin and gabapentin in neuropathic pain management after spinal cord injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury (SCI) has a significant negative impact on the patients’ quality of life. The objective of this systematic review is to examine the safety and efficacy of pregabalin (PGB) and gabapentin (GBP) in the treatment of neuropathic pain due to SCI. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, and the Web of Science were searched up to December 2018. The reference lists of key and review studies were reviewed for additional citations. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tools for assessing the risk of bias. A meta-analysis was performed for primary and secondary outcomes. Eight studies were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analysis of PGB vs. placebo showed that PGB was effective for neuropathic pain (standardized mean difference [SMD] = −0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.78, −0.01), anxiety (MD = −0.68; 95% CI: −0.77, −0.59), depression (mean difference [MD] = −0.99; 95% CI: −1.08, −0.89), and sleep interference (MD = −1.08; 95% CI: −1.13, −1.02). Also, GBP was more effective than a placebo for reducing pain. No significant difference was observed between the efficacy of the two drugs (MD = −0.37; 95% CI: −1.67, 0.93). There was no significant difference between the two drugs for discontinuation due to adverse events (risk ratio = 3.00; 95% CI: 0.81, 11.15). PGB and GBP were effective vs. placebos in decreasing neuropathic pain after SCI. Also, there was no significant difference between the two drugs for decreasing pain and adverse events.

Chiari malformation and syringomyelia

Chiari malformation was first described over a century ago, and consists of posterior fossa anomalies that generally share the feature of cerebellar tonsillar descent through the foramen magnum. Our understanding of this disorder was initially based on autopsy studies, and has been greatly enhanced by the advent of MRI. The surgical management of Chiari anomalies has also evolved in a parallel fashion. Although the exact surgical technique varies among individual surgeons, the goals of surgery remain constant and consist of relieving brainstem compression and cranial nerve distortion, restoring the normal flow of CSF across the foramen magnum, and reducing the size of any associated syrinx cavity. Syrinx cavities are most commonly associated with Chiari anomalies, yet primary spinal syringomyelia (PSS) can be caused by traumatic, infectious, degenerative, and other etiologies that cause at least a partial CSF flow obstruction in the spinal subarachnoid space. As with syringomyelia associated with Chiari anomalies, the main goal of PSS surgery is to reestablish CSF flow across the area of obstruction. In addition to MRI, myelography with CT can be very helpful in the evaluation and management of these patients by identifying focal regions of CSF obstruction that may be amenable to surgical intervention. Future directions for the treatment of Chiari anomalies and syringomyelia include the application of advanced imaging techniques, more widespread use of genetic evaluation, large-scale outcome studies, and the further refinement of surgical technique.

Management of pain in individuals with spinal cord injury: Guideline of the German-Speaking Medical Society for Spinal Cord Injury

Introduction: Pain is a prominent complication in spinal cord injury (SCI). It can either occur as a direct or as an indirect consequence of SCI and it often heavily influences the quality of life of affected individuals. In SCI, nociceptive and neuropathic pain can equally emerge at the same time above or below the level of injury. Thus, classification and grading of pain is frequently difficult. Effective treatment of SCI-related pain in general and of neuropathic pain in particular is challenging. Current treatment options are sparse and their evidence is considered to be limited. Considering these aspects, a clinical practice guideline was developed as basis for an optimized, comprehensive and standardized pain management in SCI-related pain.

Methods: The German-Speaking Medical Society for Spinal Cord Injury (Deutschsprachige Medizinische Gesellschaft für Paraplegiologie – DMGP) developed a clinical practice guideline that received consensus from seven further German-speaking medical societies and one patient organization. The evidence base from clinical trials and meta-analyses was summarized and subjected to a structured consensus-process in accordance with the regulations of the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) and the methodological requirements of the “German instrument for methodological guideline appraisal”.

Results: This consensus-based guideline (S2k classification according to the AWMF guidance manual and rules) resulted in seven on-topic statements and 17 specific recommendations relevant to the classification, assessment and therapy of pain directly or indirectly caused by SCI. Recommended therapeutic approaches comprise pharmacological (e.g. nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or anticonvulsants) and non-pharmacological (e.g. physical activity or psychotherapeutic techniques) strategies for both nociceptive and neuropathic pain.

Discussion: Assessment of SCI-related pain is standardized and respective methods in terms of examination, classification and grading of pain are already in use and validated in German language. In contrast, valid, evidence-based and efficient therapeutic options are limited and ask for further clinical studies, ideally randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses.

Pregabalin and lamotrigine in central poststroke pain: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Comparative study of Class I drugs in central poststroke pain (CPSP) is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of pregabalin and lamotrigine in patients with CPSP.

SETTING

Tertiary care teaching referral hospital.

METHODS

We included consecutive patients with CPSP having ≥50 mm score on Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and randomized them to receive either oral pregabalin or oral lamotrigine. Their clinical findings, serum chemistry, and cranial magnetic resonance imaging findings were noted. The severity of CPSP was assessed by VAS while the allodynia was assessed on a 0-10 scale. The hospital anxiety and depression (HAD) score was also recorded. The primary outcome was> 50% reduction in the VAS score while the secondary outcome was> 50% reduction in the severity of allodynia and improvement in HAD score at 3 months. Adverse reactions were noted in both the groups.

RESULTS

There were 30 patients with CPSP with a median age of 54.5 years (Male:Female = 36:4). While both pregabalin (P < 0.0001) and lamotrigine (P < 0.0001) resulted in significant improvement in the VAS score (63.3% vs. 53.3%), allodynia (66.7% vs. 75%), and HAD score (80% vs. 81.8%) compared to the baseline, the was no significant intergroup difference. Lamotrigine had to be withdrawn in three patients due to skin rash.

CONCLUSIONS

Both pregabalin and lamotrigine are equally effective in CPSP, but significant side effects leading to drug withdrawal occured with lamotrigine administration.

A Comprehensive Algorithm for Management of Neuropathic Pain

BACKGROUND

The objective of this review was to merge current treatment guidelines and best practice recommendations for management of neuropathic pain into a comprehensive algorithm for primary physicians. The algorithm covers assessment, multidisciplinary conservative care, nonopioid pharmacological management, interventional therapies, neurostimulation, low-dose opioid treatment, and targeted drug delivery therapy.

METHODS

Available literature was identified through a search of the US National Library of Medicine's Medline database, PubMed.gov. References from identified published articles also were reviewed for relevant citations.

RESULTS

The algorithm provides a comprehensive treatment pathway from assessment to the provision of first- through sixth-line therapies for primary care physicians. Clear indicators for progression of therapy from firstline to sixth-line are provided. Multidisciplinary conservative care and nonopioid medications (tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, gabapentanoids, topicals, and transdermal substances) are recommended as firstline therapy; combination therapy (firstline medications) and tramadol and tapentadol are recommended as secondline; serotonin-specific reuptake inhibitors/anticonvulsants/NMDA antagonists and interventional therapies as third-line; neurostimulation as a fourth-line treatment; low-dose opioids (no greater than 90 morphine equivalent units) are fifth-line; and finally, targeted drug delivery is the last-line therapy for patients with refractory pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The presented treatment algorithm provides clear-cut tools for the assessment and treatment of neuropathic pain based on international guidelines, published data, and best practice recommendations. It defines the benefits and limitations of the current treatments at our disposal. Additionally, it provides an easy-to-follow visual guide of the recommended steps in the algorithm for primary care and family practitioners to utilize.

Review of Treatment for Central Spinal Neuropathic Pain and Its Effect on Quality of Life: Implications for Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder

OBJECTIVES

Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) causes disabling and persistent central neuropathic pain (NP). Because the pain syndrome in NMOSD is severe and often intractable to analgesic treatment, it interferes with quality of life in patients. No interventional trials have been published looking at response to interventions for pain in NMOSD. This is a synthesis of the literature surveying the impact on quality of life of interventions in all mechanisms of central spinal NP. This review has important implications for management of pain in NMOSD.

METHODS AND DATA SOURCES

A systematic database search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL Plus with keywords including "spinal cord," "quality of life," and "neuropathic pain" in an attempt to identify original research that targeted spinal NP treatment and used quality of life as an outcome measure. Both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments were sought out.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies meeting our eligibility criteria were identified and evaluated, 13 using pharmacologic treatments and 8 using nonpharmacologic interventions. Overall, sample sizes were modest, and effects on decreasing pain and/or improving quality of life were suboptimal.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides researchers with a foundation from which to start a more thorough and thoughtful investigation into the management of NP in NMOSD and underscores the importance of including quality of life as a clinically meaningful outcome measure.

A Clinical Overview of Off-label Use of Gabapentinoid Drugs

BACKGROUND

The gabapentinoid drugs gabapentin and pregabalin were originally developed as antiseizure drugs but now are prescribed mainly for treatment of pain. For gabapentin, the only pain-related indication approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is postherpetic neuralgia. For pregabalin, FDA-approved indications related to pain are limited to postherpetic neuralgia, neuropathic pain associated with diabetic neuropathy or spinal cord injury, and fibromyalgia. Despite these limited indications, gabapentin and pregabalin are widely prescribed off-label for various other pain syndromes. Such use is growing, possibly because clinicians are searching increasingly for alternatives to opioids.

OBSERVATIONS

This report summarizes the limited published evidence to support off-label gabapentinoid uses, describes clinical cases in which off-label use is problematic, and notes how review articles and guidelines tend to overstate gabapentinoid effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians who prescribe gabapentinoids off-label for pain should be aware of the limited evidence and should acknowledge to patients that potential benefits are uncertain for most off-label uses.

The effect of pregabalin treatment on balance and gait in patients with chronic low back pain: a retrospective observational study

Background: Low back pain is the most common musculoskeletal problem, and is a major cause of loss of workforce. Chronic low back pain associated with radiculopathy often includes nociceptive and neuropathic components. While non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the first choice for the nociceptive component, pregabalin is preferred as the neuropathic component.

Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted of 48 patients (26 women, 22 men) who had chronic low back pain associated with radiculopathy. A follow-up chart was used to collect data from February 2017 to November 2017. The patients characteristics (age, gender, initial daily dose of pregabalin), neuropathic pain (DN4 scale; Douleur Neuropathique, 4 questions), and balance and gait (Tinetti Balance and Gait Test) were assessed.

Results: The DN4 scores in the fourth (p < .001) and 12th (p < .001) weeks were significantly lower in patients. The Tinetti total test scores (23.2 ± 3.9) in the first (p > .001) week were significantly lower. There was no significant difference between the Tinetti test scores (balance, gait, and total scores) at baseline and in the 12th week (p > .001).

Conclusion: Pregabalin is effective on neuropathic pain and may have adverse effects on balance at initial doses and dose increments. Tolerance develops to these effects at maintenance doses.

Pregabalin for neuropathic pain in adults

BACKGROUND

This review updates part of an earlier Cochrane Review titled "Pregabalin for acute and chronic pain in adults", and considers only neuropathic pain (pain from damage to nervous tissue). Antiepileptic drugs have long been used in pain management. Pregabalin is an antiepileptic drug used in management of chronic pain conditions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of pregabalin for chronic neuropathic pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase for randomised controlled trials from January 2009 to April 2018, online clinical trials registries, and reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind trials of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing pregabalin (any route of administration) with placebo or another active treatment for neuropathic pain, with participant-reported pain assessment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality and biases. Primary outcomes were: at least 30% pain intensity reduction over baseline; much or very much improved on the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scale (moderate benefit); at least 50% pain intensity reduction; or very much improved on PGIC (substantial benefit). We calculated risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial (NNTB) or harmful outcome (NNTH). We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 45 studies lasting 2 to 16 weeks, with 11,906 participants - 68% from 31 new studies. Oral pregabalin doses of 150 mg, 300 mg, and 600 mg daily were compared with placebo. Postherpetic neuralgia, painful diabetic neuropathy, and mixed neuropathic pain predominated (85% of participants). High risk of bias was due mainly to small study size (nine studies), but many studies had unclear risk of bias, mainly due to incomplete outcome data, size, and allocation concealment.Postherpetic neuralgia: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 300 mg than with placebo (50% vs 25%; RR 2.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6 to 2.6); NNTB 3.9 (3.0 to 5.6); 3 studies, 589 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (32% vs 13%; RR 2.5 (95% CI 1.9 to 3.4); NNTB 5.3 (3.9 to 8.1); 4 studies, 713 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (62% vs 24%; RR 2.5 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.2); NNTB 2.7 (2.2 to 3.7); 3 studies, 537 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (41% vs 15%; RR 2.7 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.5); NNTB 3.9 (3.1 to 5.5); 4 studies, 732 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Somnolence and dizziness were more common with pregabalin than with placebo (moderate-quality evidence): somnolence 300 mg 16% versus 5.5%, 600 mg 25% versus 5.8%; dizziness 300 mg 29% versus 8.1%, 600 mg 35% versus 8.8%.Painful diabetic neuropathy: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 300 mg than with placebo (47% vs 42%; RR 1.1 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.2); NNTB 22 (12 to 200); 8 studies, 2320 participants, moderate-quality evidence), more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (31% vs 24%; RR 1.3 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.5); NNTB 22 (12 to 200); 11 studies, 2931 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had PGIC much or very much improved (51% vs 30%; RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.0); NNTB 4.9 (3.8 to 6.9); 5 studies, 1050 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (63% vs 52%; RR 1.2 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.4); NNTB 9.6 (5.5 to 41); 2 studies, 611 participants, low-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (41% vs 28%; RR 1.4 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.7); NNTB 7.8 (5.4 to 14); 5 studies, 1015 participants, low-quality evidence). Somnolence and dizziness were more common with pregabalin than with placebo (moderate-quality evidence): somnolence 300 mg 11% versus 3.1%, 600 mg 15% versus 4.5%; dizziness 300 mg 13% versus 3.8%, 600 mg 22% versus 4.4%.Mixed or unclassified post-traumatic neuropathic pain: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (48% vs 36%; RR 1.2 (1.1 to 1.4); NNTB 8.2 (5.7 to 15); 4 studies, 1367 participants, low-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (34% vs 20%; RR 1.5 (1.2 to 1.9); NNTB 7.2 (5.4 to 11); 4 studies, 1367 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Somnolence (12% vs 3.9%) and dizziness (23% vs 6.2%) were more common with pregabalin.Central neuropathic pain: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (44% vs 28%; RR 1.6 (1.3 to 2.0); NNTB 5.9 (4.1 to 11); 3 studies, 562 participants, low-quality evidence) and at least 50% pain intensity reduction (26% vs 15%; RR 1.7 (1.2 to 2.3); NNTB 9.8 (6.0 to 28); 3 studies, 562 participants, low-quality evidence). Somnolence (32% vs 11%) and dizziness (23% vs 8.6%) were more common with pregabalin.Other neuropathic pain conditions: Studies show no evidence of benefit for 600 mg pregabalin in HIV neuropathy (2 studies, 674 participants, moderate-quality evidence) and limited evidence of benefit in neuropathic back pain or sciatica, neuropathic cancer pain, or polyneuropathy.Serious adverse events, all conditions: Serious adverse events were no more common with placebo than with pregabalin 300 mg (3.1% vs 2.6%; RR 1.2 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.7); 17 studies, 4112 participants, high-quality evidence) or pregabalin 600 mg (3.4% vs 3.4%; RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.5); 16 studies, 3995 participants, high-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence shows efficacy of pregabalin in postherpetic neuralgia, painful diabetic neuralgia, and mixed or unclassified post-traumatic neuropathic pain, and absence of efficacy in HIV neuropathy; evidence of efficacy in central neuropathic pain is inadequate. Some people will derive substantial benefit with pregabalin; more will have moderate benefit, but many will have no benefit or will discontinue treatment. There were no substantial changes since the 2009 review.

Benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain: a rapid review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess the benefits and harms of pregabalin in the management of neuropathic pain.

DESIGN

Rapid review and meta-analysis of phase III, randomised, placebo-controlled trials.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged 18 years and above with neuropathic pain defined according to the International Association for the Study of Pain criteria.

INTERVENTIONS

Pregabalin or placebo.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Our primary outcomes were pain (as measured using validated scales) and adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were sleep disturbance, quality of life, Patient Global Impression of Change, Clinician Global Impression scale, anxiety and depression scores, overall discontinuations and discontinuations because of adverse events.

RESULTS

We included 28 trials comprising 6087 participants. The neuropathic pain conditions studied were diabetic peripheral neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, herpes zoster, sciatica (radicular pain), poststroke pain and spinal cord injury-related pain. Patients who took pregabalin reported significant reductions in pain (numerical rating scale (NRS)) compared with placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.49 (95% CI -0.66 to -0.32, p<0.00001), very low quality evidence). Pregabalin significantly reduced sleep interference scores (NRS) compared with placebo (SMD -0.38 (95% CI -0.50 to -0.26, p<0.00001), moderate quality evidence. Pregabalin significantly increased the risk of adverse events compared with placebo (RR 1.33 (95% CI 1.23 to 1.44, p<0.00001, low quality evidence)). The risks of experiencing weight gain, somnolence, dizziness, peripheral oedema, fatigue, visual disturbances, ataxia, non-peripheral oedema, vertigo and euphoria were significantly increased with pregabalin. Pregabalin was significantly more likely than placebo to lead to discontinuation of the drug because of adverse events (RR 1.91 (95% CI 1.54 to 2.37, p<0.00001), low quality evidence).

CONCLUSION

Pregabalin has beneficial effects on some symptoms of neuropathic pain. However, its use significantly increases the risk of a number of adverse events and discontinuation due to adverse events. The quality of the evidence from journal publications is low.

Bilateral Serous Macular Detachment After Attempted Suicide with Pregabalin

A 24-year-old female presented with bilateral vision loss following attempted suicide with pregabalin. Her best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 20/40 in the right eye and 20/50 in the left eye. The bilateral visual disturbance was associated with serous macular detachment. Fundus examination of both eyes showed foveal serous retinal detachment, which was confirmed by optical coherence tomography. Topical nepafenac 0.1% eye drops were started as single drop every 8 hours for 4 weeks. One month later, the serous macular detachment had regressed and BCVA increased to 20/20 in both eyes. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case of bilateral serous macular detachment presumably caused by pregabalin intoxication.

Pain Management in Athletes With Impairment: A Narrative Review of Management Strategies

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature related to different treatment strategies for the general population of individuals with amputation, spinal cord injury, and cerebral palsy, as well as how this may impact pain management in a correlated athlete population.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive literature search was performed linking pain with terms related to different impairment types.

MAIN RESULTS

There is a paucity in the literature relating to treatment of pain in athletes with impairment; however, it is possible that the treatment strategies used in the general population of individuals with impairment may be translated to the athlete population. There are a wide variety of treatment options including both pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments which may be applicable in the athlete.

CONCLUSIONS

It is the role of the physician to determine which strategy of the possible treatment options will best facilitate the management of pain in the individual athlete in a sport-specific setting.

Long-Term Outcomes in the Management of Central Neuropathic Pain Syndromes: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Background:Central neuropathic pain syndromes are a result of central nervous system injury, most commonly related to stroke, traumatic spinal cord injury, or multiple sclerosis. These syndromes are distinctly less common than peripheral neuropathic pain, and less is known regarding the underlying pathophysiology, appropriate pharmacotherapy, and long-term outcomes. The objective of this study was to determine the long-term clinical effectiveness of the management of central neuropathic pain relative to peripheral neuropathic pain at tertiary pain centers.Methods:Patients diagnosed with central (n=79) and peripheral (n=710) neuropathic pain were identified for analysis from a prospective observational cohort study of patients with chronic neuropathic pain recruited from seven Canadian tertiary pain centers. Data regarding patient characteristics, analgesic use, and patient-reported outcomes were collected at baseline and 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the composite of a reduction in average pain intensity and pain interference. Secondary outcome measures included assessments of function, mood, quality of life, catastrophizing, and patient satisfaction.Results:At 12-month follow-up, 13.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.6-25.8) of patients with central neuropathic pain and complete data sets (n=52) achieved a ≥30% reduction in pain, whereas 38.5% (95% CI, 25.3-53.0) achieved a reduction of at least 1 point on the Pain Interference Scale. The proportion of patients with central neuropathic pain achieving both these measures, and thus the primary outcome, was 9.6% (95% CI, 3.2-21.0). Patients with peripheral neuropathic pain and complete data sets (n=463) were more likely to achieve this primary outcome at 12 months (25.3% of patients; 95% CI, 21.4-29.5) (p=0.012).Conclusion:Patients with central neuropathic pain syndromes managed in tertiary care centers were less likely to achieve a meaningful improvement in pain and function compared with patients with peripheral neuropathic pain at 12-month follow-up.

Dronabinol Is a Safe Long-Term Treatment Option for Neuropathic Pain Patients

Treatment of neuropathic pain (NP) symptoms associated with multiple sclerosis (MS) is frequently insufficient. Yet, cannabis is still rarely offered for treatment of pain. This clinical trial aimed at showing the positive benefit-risk ratio of dronabinol. Two hundred forty MS patients with central NP entered a 16-weeks placebo-controlled phase-III study followed by a 32-weeks open-label period. One hundred patients continued therapy for overall up to 119 weeks. Primary endpoint was change of pain intensity on the 11-point Numerical Rating Scale over a 16-weeks treatment period. Safety was assessed on the basis of adverse reactions (ARs), signs of dependency and abuse. Pain intensity during 16-weeks dronabinol and placebo treatment was reduced by 1.92 and 1.81 points without significant difference in between (p = 0.676). Although the proportion of patients with ARs was higher under dronabinol compared to placebo (50.0 vs. 25.9%), it decreased during long-term use of dronabinol (26%). No signs of drug abuse and only one possible case of dependency occurred. The trial results demonstrate that dronabinol is a safe long-term treatment option.

Pregabalin for the treatment of neuropathic pain: a narrative review for primary care providers

BACKGROUND

Neuropathic pain (NeP) is a distinct type of pain caused by damage to the nervous system itself. This often severe and chronic type of pain requires specific treatments that target the underlying pain pathophysiology.

AIM

The purpose of the current narrative review is to provide an overview of pregabalin (Lyrica ¹ ) for the treatment of NeP including its effects on pain, pain-related sleep interference, and other health-related outcomes, timing of therapeutic effect, safety and tolerability, and dosing. The information provided here will help primary care providers develop more effective NeP treatment strategies.

Neuropathic Pain and Spinal Cord Injury: Phenotypes and Pharmacological Management

Chronic neuropathic pain is a complicated condition after a spinal cord injury (SCI) that often has a lifelong and significant negative impact on life after the injury; therefore, improved pain management is considered a significant and unmet need. Neuropathic pain mechanisms are heterogeneous and the difficulty in determining their individual contribution to specific pain types may contribute to poor treatment outcomes in this population. Thus, identifying human neuropathic pain phenotypes based on pain symptoms, somatosensory changes, or cognitive and psychosocial factors that reflect specific spinal cord or brain mechanisms of neuropathic pain is an important goal. Once a pain phenotype can be reliably replicated, its relationship with biomarkers and clinical treatment outcomes can be analyzed, and thereby facilitate translational research and further the mechanistic understanding of individual differences in the pain experience and in clinical trial outcomes. The present article will discuss clinical aspects of SCI-related neuropathic pain, neuropathic pain phenotypes, pain mechanisms, potential biomarkers and pharmacological interventions, and progress regarding how defining neuropathic pain phenotypes may lead to more targeted treatments for these difficult pain conditions.

Efficacy and Safety of Pregabalin for the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain in Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis

OBJECTIVE

Pregabalin is a gamma aminobutyric acid derivative administered for neuropathic pain. It binds to α2δ subunits of voltage-dependent calcium channels, and inhibits calcium inflow of synapses and the release of excitatory neurotransmitters. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of pregabalin in patients with peripheral neuropathic pain undergoing maintenance hemodialysis.

METHODS

This study was a prospective, open-label, single-arm, multi-center trial. Patients were treated with an initial dose of pregabalin at 25 mg; this was then increased up to a maximum of 150 mg depending on the patient during a 12-week study period. Visual Analog Scale, Eight-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-8), and laboratory data were collected at baseline and the end of the study.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients with peripheral neuropathic pain were included, of whom 35 patients were analyzed. The final mean dose of pregabalin was 50.7 mg daily. Mean Visual Analog Scale scores significantly decreased from 52.4 mm at baseline to 34.1 mm at the end of the study (p < 0.0001). Scores for all eight categories of the SF-8 significantly increased compared with baseline (p < 0.05). Both physical and mental component summary scores of the SF-8 also significantly increased (p < 0.05). Ten patients were withdrawn from the study because of drowsiness, dizziness, and invalidity; however, no serious adverse drug reactions were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

If adverse effects are carefully monitored and the administered dosage prudently determined, pregabalin can be an effective treatment for peripheral neuropathic pain in patients undergoing hemodialysis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000023117.