Valproate for treatment of chronic central pain after spinal cord injury. A double-blind cross-over study

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.

A Systematic Review of the Interventions for Management of Pain in Patients After Spinal Cord Injury

Chronic pain is a very common problem in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) as it affects 80% of these patients, which negatively affects their quality of life. Despite many advantages that exist in the management of any type of pain (neuropathic, nociceptive, mixed) in these patients, there is no cure, and the analgesic effect of some treatments is inadequate. This study aims to conduct an evidence-based systematic review regarding the various interventions used for the management of pain after SCI. The PubMed, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and Cochrane Library databases were searched from 1969 to 2023. The risk of bias was assessed using the PEDro scoring system. A total of 57 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review. Among the different interventions at present, 18 studies examined the role of oral medications, 11 studies examined the role of minimally invasive methods (injection and infusion), 16 studies investigated physiotherapy and alternative treatments, and 12 studies examined the role of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), and cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) in the management of pain in patients after SCI. Gabapentin and pregabalin are very effective in managing chronic neuropathic pain after SCI, and pregabalin also seems to reduce anxiety and sleep disturbances in the patients. It is noteworthy that lamotrigine, valproate, and carbamazepine do not have an analgesic effect, but mirogabalin is a novel and promising drug. Antidepressants (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors) did not reduce the pain of the patients, although some studies showed an efficacy of amitriptyline especially in depressed patients and tramadol should be considered short-term with caution. Also, tDCS and rTMS reduced pain. Moreover, botulinum toxin type A, lidocaine, ketamine, and intrathecal baclofen significantly reduced pain intensity, although the sample of the studies was small. Physiotherapy and alternative treatments seem to relieve pain, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation had the greatest reduction of pain intensity. In conclusion, several pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical methods exist, which can reduce pain in patients after SCI. The type of intervention can be considered by the physician depending on the patients' preference, age, medical history, type of pain, and associated symptoms. However, more studies with greater samples and with better methodological quality should be conducted.

The Time Sequence of Gene Expression Changes after Spinal Cord Injury

Gene expression changes following spinal cord injury (SCI) are time-dependent, and an accurate understanding of these changes can be crucial in determining time-based treatment options in a clinical setting. We performed RNA sequencing of the contused spinal cord of rats at five different time points from the very acute to chronic stages (1 hour, 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months) following SCI. We identified differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and Gene Ontology (GO) terms at each time point, and 14,257 genes were commonly expressed at all time points. The biological process of the inflammatory response was increased at 1 hour and 1 day, and the cellular component of the integral component of the synaptic membrane was increased at 1 day. DEGs associated with cell activation and the innate immune response were highly enriched at 1 week and 1 month, respectively. A total of 2841 DEGs were differentially expressed at any of the five time points, and 18 genes (17 upregulated and 1 downregulated) showed common expression differences at all time points. We found that interleukin signaling, neutrophil degranulation, eukaryotic translation, collagen degradation, LGI–ADAM interactions, GABA receptor, and L1CAM-ankyrin interactions were prominent after SCI depending on the time post injury. We also performed gene–drug network analysis and found several potential antagonists and agonists which can be used to treat SCI. We expect to discover effective treatments in the clinical field through further studies revealing the efficacy and safety of potential drugs.

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.

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.

Evaluation of sodium valproate low dose efficacy in radicular pain management and it's relation with pharmacokinetics parameters

BACKGROUND

Radiculopathy due to lumbar or cervical disc disease is the most common chronic neuropathic pain in adults. The aim of present study was evaluation of low dose of sodium valproate (VPA) on radicular pain and determining VPA pharmacokinetics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this double blind randomized placebo control clinical study, 80 patients with established lumbar or cervical radicular pain, have been randomly allocated into two study groups: 40 have received sodium valproate 200 mg/day and Celecoxib 100 mg/day and acetaminophen 500 mg PRN as rescue medication, and second group has received placebo, Celecoxib and acetaminophen. Quantitative assessment of pain was done by visual analogue scale (VAS) prior to perform the intervention and after ten days (treatment duration). Blood sample has been taken for determining mean through concentration after five half-lives. Evaluation of plasma concentration of VPA and that of efficacy on pain score relationship by comparing VAS before and after the therapy was done.

RESULTS

Group A and B have demonstrated significant alleviation in mean VAS score; -21.97 ± 25.41, -14.39 ± 23.03 respectively (P < 0.001). The mean plasma concentration of VPA in group A was: 26.9 ± 13.5 mg/L. Moreover, no significant correlation was seen between pain score with age, gender, and weight (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Low dose of sodium valproate especially together with NSAIDs demonstrated good efficacy in lumbar and cervical radicular pain management.

Valproate reverses stress-induced somatic hyperalgesia and visceral hypersensitivity by up-regulating spinal 5-HT2C receptor expression in female rats

Sodium valproate (VPA) has analgesic effects in clinical and experimental studies, but the mechanisms are still unclear. The present study examined the effects of VPA on stress-induced somatic hyperalgesia and visceral hypersensitivity and the role of 5-HT_2C receptors in the spinal cord. Repeated 3 day forced swim (FS) significantly reduced the thermal withdrawal latency and mechanical withdrawal threshold, and increased the magnitude of the visceromotor response to colorectal distention compared to the baseline values in rats. The somatic hyperalgesia and visceral hypersensitivity were accompanied by significant down-regulation of 5-HT_2C receptor expression in the L4-L5 and L6-S1 dorsal spinal cord. Intraperitoneal administration of VPA (300 mg/kg) before each FS and 1 day post FS prevented the development of somatic hyperalgesia and visceral hypersensitivity induced by FS stress, as well as down-regulation of 5-HT_2C receptors in the spinal cord. The reversal of somatic hyperalgesia and visceral hypersensitivity by VPA in FS rats was blocked by intrathecal administration of the selective 5-HT_2C receptor antagonist RS-102221 (30 μg/10 μL) 30 min after each VPA injection. The results suggest that VPA attenuates FS-induced somatic hyperalgesia and visceral hypersensitivity by restoring down-regulated function of 5-HT_2C receptors in the spinal cord.

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.

Some Prospective Alternatives for Treating Pain: The Endocannabinoid System and Its Putative Receptors GPR18 and GPR55

Background: Marijuana extracts (cannabinoids) have been used for several millennia for pain treatment. Regarding the site of action, cannabinoids are highly promiscuous molecules, but only two cannabinoid receptors (CB₁ and CB₂) have been deeply studied and classified. Thus, therapeutic actions, side effects and pharmacological targets for cannabinoids have been explained based on the pharmacology of cannabinoid CB₁/CB₂ receptors. However, the accumulation of confusing and sometimes contradictory results suggests the existence of other cannabinoid receptors. Different orphan proteins (e.g., GPR18, GPR55, GPR119, etc.) have been proposed as putative cannabinoid receptors. According to their expression, GPR18 and GPR55 could be involved in sensory transmission and pain integration.

Methods: This article reviews select relevant information about the potential role of GPR18 and GPR55 in the pathophysiology of pain.

Results: This work summarized novel data supporting that, besides cannabinoid CB₁ and CB₂ receptors, GPR18 and GPR55 may be useful for pain treatment.

Conclusion: There is evidence to support an antinociceptive role for GPR18 and GPR55.

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.

Combined Transcriptomics, Proteomics and Bioinformatics Identify Drug Targets in Spinal Cord Injury

Spinal cord injury (SCI) causes irreversible tissue damage and severe loss of neurological function. Currently, there are no approved treatments and very few therapeutic targets are under investigation. Here, we combined 4 high-throughput transcriptomics and proteomics datasets, 7 days and 8 weeks following clinically-relevant rat SCI to identify proteins with persistent differential expression post-injury. Out of thousands of differentially regulated entities our combined analysis identified 40 significantly upregulated versus 48 significantly downregulated molecules, which were persistently altered at the mRNA and protein level, 7 days and 8 weeks post-SCI. Bioinformatics analysis was then utilized to identify currently available drugs with activity against the filtered molecules and to isolate proteins with known or unknown function in SCI. Our findings revealed multiple overlooked therapeutic candidates with important bioactivity and established druggability but with unknown expression and function in SCI including the upregulated purine nucleoside phosphorylase (PNP), cathepsins A, H, Z (CTSA, CTSH, CTSZ) and proteasome protease PSMB10, as well as the downregulated ATP citrate lyase (ACLY), malic enzyme (ME1) and sodium-potassium ATPase (ATP1A3), amongst others. This work reveals previously unappreciated therapeutic candidates for SCI and available drugs, thus providing a valuable resource for further studies and potential repurposing of existing therapeutics for SCI.

Ravages of Diabetes on Gastrointestinal Sensory-Motor Function: Implications for Pathophysiology and Treatment

Symptoms related to functional and sensory abnormalities are frequently encountered in patients with diabetes mellitus. Most symptoms are associated with impaired gastric and intestinal function. In this review, we discuss basic concepts of sensory-motor dysfunction and how they relate to clinical findings and gastrointestinal abnormalities that are commonly seen in diabetes. In addition, we review techniques that are available for investigating the autonomic nervous system, neuroimaging and neurophysiology of sensory-motor function. Such technological advances, while not readily available in the clinical setting, may facilitate stratification and individualization of therapy in diabetic patients in the future. Unraveling the structural, mechanical, and sensory remodeling in diabetes disease is based on a multidisciplinary approach that can bridge the knowledge from a variety of scientific disciplines. The final goal is to increase the understanding of the damage to GI structures and to sensory processing of symptoms, in order to assist clinicians with developing an optimal mechanics based treatment.

Brain changes in diabetes mellitus patients with gastrointestinal symptoms

Diabetes mellitus is a common disease and its prevalence is increasing worldwide. In various studies up to 30%-70% of patients present dysfunction and complications related to the gut. To date several clinical studies have demonstrated that autonomic nervous system neuropathy and generalized neuropathy of the central nervous system (CNS) may play a major role. This systematic review provides an overview of the neurodegenerative changes that occur as a consequence of diabetes with a focus on the CNS changes and gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction. Animal models where diabetes was induced experimentally support that the disease induces changes in CNS. Recent investigations with electroencephalography and functional brain imaging in patients with diabetes confirm these structural and functional brain changes. Encephalographic studies demonstrated that altered insular processing of sensory stimuli seems to be a key player in symptom generation. In fact one study indicated that the more GI symptoms the patients experienced, the deeper the insular electrical source was located. The electroencephalography was often used in combination with quantitative sensory testing mainly showing hyposensitivity to stimulation of GI organs. Imaging studies on patients with diabetes and GI symptoms mainly showed microstructural changes, especially in brain areas involved in visceral sensory processing. As the electrophysiological and imaging changes were associated with GI and autonomic symptoms they may represent a future therapeutic target for treating diabetics either pharmacologically or with neuromodulation.

Spinal cord injury-induced pain: mechanisms and treatments

Pain is a common consequence of a spinal cord injury (SCI) and has a major impact on quality of life through its impact on physical function, mood and participation in work, recreational and social activities. Several types of pain typically present following SCI with central neuropathic pain being a frequent and difficult to manage occurrence. Despite advances in our understanding of the mechanisms contributing to this type of pain and an increasing number of trials examining treatment efficacy, our ability to relieve neuropathic SCI pain is still very limited. Optimal management relies upon an integrated approach that uses a combination of pharmacological and nonpharmacological options.

Management of Neuropathic Pain Associated with Spinal Cord Injury

Spinal cord injury (SCI) is an injury to the spinal cord that leads to varying degrees of motor and/or sensory deficits and paralysis. Chronic pain of both neuropathic and nociceptive type is common and contributes to reduced quality of life. The aim of the review is to provide current clinical understanding as well as discuss and evaluate efficacy of pharmacological interventions demonstrated in the clinical studies. The review was based on literature search in PubMed and Medline with words "neuropathic pain" and "spinal cord injury". The review included clinical studies and not experimental data nor case reports. A limited number of randomized and placebo-controlled studies concerning treatment options of neuropathic pain after SCI were identified. Amitriptyline, a tricyclic antidepressant and the antiepileptic drugs, gabapentin and pregabalin, are most studied with demonstrated efficacy, and considered to be the primary choice. Opioids have demonstrated conflicting results in the clinical studies. In addition, administration route used in the studies as well as reported side effects restrict everyday use of opioids as well as ketamine and lidocaine. Topical applications of capsaicin or lidocaine as well as intradermal injections of Botulinum toxin are new treatment modalities that are so far not studied on SCI population and need further studies. Non-pharmacological approaches may have additional effect on neuropathic pain. Management of pain should always be preceded by thorough clinical assessment of the type of pain. Patients need a follow-up to evaluate individual effect of applied measures. However, the applied management does not necessarily achieve satisfactory pain reduction. Further clinical studies are needed to evaluate the effect of both established and novel management options.

Central Neuropathic Pain in Spinal Cord Injury

Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating medical condition affecting 1.2 million people in the United States. Central neuropathic pain is one of the most common medical complications of SCI. Current treatment options include opioids, antiepileptic agents such as gabapentin, antispastic agents such as baclofen or tizanidine, and tricyclic acid. Other options include complementary, nonpharmacological treatment such as exercise or acupuncture, interventional treatments, and psychological approaches. Although these treatment options exist, central neuropathic pain in patients with SCI is still extremely difficult to treat because of its complexity. To develop and provide more effective treatment options to these patients, proper assessment of and classification tools for central neuropathic pain, as well as a better understanding of the pathophysiology, are needed. A combination of approaches, from standard general pain assessments to medically specific questions unique to SCI pathophysiology, is essential for this population. A multidisciplinary approach to patient care, in addition with a better understanding of pathophysiology and diagnosis, will lead to improved management and treatment of patients with SCI displaying central neuropathic pain. Here we summarize the most recent classification tools, pathophysiology, and current treatment options for patients with SCI with central neuropathic pain.

Alcoholic neuropathy: possible mechanisms and future treatment possibilities

Chronic alcohol consumption produces painful peripheral neuropathy for which there is no reliable successful therapy, mainly due to lack of understanding of its pathobiology. Alcoholic neuropathy involves coasting caused by damage to nerves that results from long term excessive drinking of alcohol and is characterized by spontaneous burning pain, hyperalgesia and allodynia. The mechanism behind alcoholic neuropathy is not well understood, but several explanations have been proposed. These include activation of spinal cord microglia after chronic alcohol consumption, oxidative stress leading to free radical damage to nerves, activation of mGlu5 receptors in the spinal cord and activation of the sympathoadrenal and hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. Nutritional deficiency (especially thiamine deficiency) and/or the direct toxic effect of alcohol or both have also been implicated in alcohol-induced neuropathic pain. Treatment is directed towards halting further damage to the peripheral nerves and restoring their normal functioning. This can be achieved by alcohol abstinence and a nutritionally balanced diet supplemented by all B vitamins. However, in the setting of ongoing alcohol use, vitamin supplementation alone has not been convincingly shown to be sufficient for improvement in most patients. The present review is focused around the multiple pathways involved in the development of peripheral neuropathy associated with chronic alcohol intake and the different therapeutic agents which may find a place in the therapeutic armamentarium for both prevention and management of alcoholic neuropathy.

Valproic acid and sodium valproate for neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in adults

BACKGROUND

Valproic acid and its sodium salt (sodium valproate) are antiepileptic drugs that are sometimes used to treat chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia, although they are not licensed for this use.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of valproic acid and sodium valproate in the management of chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of valproic acid and sodium valproate in acute, and chronic pain by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL to June 2011, together with reference lists of retrieved papers and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs that were double blind and of eight-weeks duration or longer, reporting on analgesic effects and adverse events with valproic acid and sodium valproate in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted results and scored for quality. We extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three studies, two in diabetic neuropathy (42 participants treated with valproate, 42 with placebo), and one in post-herpetic neuralgia (23 treated with divalproex sodium, 22 with placebo). Study duration was eight or 12 weeks. No studies were found in fibromyalgia.Only one study reported one of our primary outcomes (≥ 50% pain relief), while all three reported group means for pain reduction from baseline to endpoint. In all three studies; efficacy results were given only for participants who completed the study. One study in diabetic neuropathy and the study in post-herpetic neuralgia reported significant differences between active and placebo groups, but there were insufficient data for reliable pooled analysis.More adverse events were reported with active treatment than placebo, and included nausea, drowsiness and abnormal liver function tests. One participant taking sodium valproate withdrew due to serious derangement of liver enzymes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These three studies no more than hint that sodium valproate may reduce pain in diabetic neuropathy, and divalproex sodium in post-herpetic neuralgia, but the use of 'completer' analysis may overestimate efficacy, and there were too few data for pooled analysis of efficacy or harm, or to have confidence in the results of the individual studies. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of valproic acid or sodium valproate as a first-line treatment for neuropathic pain. There is more robust evidence of greater efficacy for a small number of other drugs.

Ion channel blockers and spinal cord injury

The activation of a delayed secondary cascade of unsatisfactory cellular and molecular responses after a primary mechanical insult to the spinal cord causes the progressive degeneration of this structure. Disturbance of ionic homeostasis is part of the secondary injury process and plays an integral role in the early stage of spinal cord injury (SCI). The secondary pathology of SCI is complex and involves disturbance of the homeostasis of K(+) , Na(+) , and Ca(2+) . The effect of ion channel blockers on chronic SCI has also been proved. In this Mini-Review, we provide a comprehensive summary of the effects of ion channel blockers on the natural responses after SCI. Combination therapy is based on the roles of ions and disturbance of their homeostasis in SCI. The effects of ion channel blockers suggest that they have potential in the treatment of SCI, although the complexity of their effects shows that further knowledge is needed before they can be applied clinically.

A systematic review of pharmacologic treatments of pain after spinal cord injury

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of published research on the pharmacologic treatment of pain after spinal cord injury (SCI).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were searched for articles published 1980 to June 2009 addressing the treatment of pain post SCI. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were assessed for methodologic quality using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) assessment scale, whereas non-RCTs were assessed by using the Downs and Black (D&B) evaluation tool. A level of evidence was assigned to each intervention by using a modified Sackett scale.

STUDY SELECTION

The review included RCTs and non-RCTs, which included prospective controlled trials, cohort, case series, case-control, pre-post studies, and post studies. Case studies were included only when there were no other studies found.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data extracted included the PEDro or D&B score, the type of study, a brief summary of intervention outcomes, the type of pain, the type of pain scale, and the study findings.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Articles selected for this particular review evaluated different interventions in the pharmacologic management of pain after SCI. Twenty-eight studies met inclusion criteria; there were 21 randomized controlled trials; of these, 19 had level 1 evidence. Treatments were divided into 5 categories: anticonvulsants, antidepressants, analgesics, cannabinoids, and antispasticity medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies did not specify participants' types of pain, making it difficult to identify the type of pain being targeted by the treatment. Anticonvulsant and analgesic drugs had the highest levels of evidence and were the drugs most often studied. Gabapentin and pregabalin had strong evidence (5 level 1 RCTs) for effectiveness in treating post-SCI neuropathic pain as did intravenous analgesics (lidocaine, ketamine, and morphine), but the latter only had short-term benefits. Tricyclic antidepressants only showed benefit for neuropathic pain in depressed persons. Intrathecal baclofen reduced musculoskeletal pain associated with spasticity; however, there was conflicting evidence for the reduction in neuropathic pain. Studies assessing the effectiveness of opioids were limited and revealed only small benefits. Cannabinoids showed conflicting evidence in improving spasticity-related pain. Clonidine and morphine when given together had a significant synergistic neuropathic pain-relieving effect.

WITHDRAWN. Anticonvulsant drugs for acute and chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Anticonvulsant drugs have been used in the management of pain since the 1960s. The clinical impression is that they are useful for chronic neuropathic pain, especially when the pain is lancinating or burning. Readers are referred to reviews of carbamazepine and gabapentin in T he Cochrane Library which replace the information on those drugs in this review. Other drugs remain unchanged at present in this review

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the analgesic effectiveness and adverse effects of anticonvulsant drugs for pain management in clinical practice . Migraine and headache studies are excluded in this revision.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised trials of anticonvulsants in acute, chronic or cancer pain were identified by MEDLINE (1966-1999), EMBASE (1994-1999), SIGLE (1980 to 1999) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL/CCTR) (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 1999). In addition, 41 medical journals were hand searched. Additional reports were identified from the reference list of the retrieved papers, and by contacting investigators. Date of most recent search: September 1999.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-three trials of six anticonvulsants were considered eligible (1074 patients).The only placebo-controlled study in acute pain found no analgesic effect of sodium valproate.Three placebo-controlled studies of carbamazepine in trigeminal neuralgia had a combined NNT (95% confidence interval (CI)) for effectiveness of 2.5 (CI 2.0 to 3.4). A single placebo-controlled trial of gabapentin in post-herpetic neuralgia had an NNT of 3.2 (CI 2.4 to 5.0). For diabetic neuropathy NNTs for effectiveness were as follows: (one RCT for each drug) carbamazepine 2.3 (CI 1.6 to 3.8), gabapentin 3.8 (CI 2.4 to 8.7) and phenytoin 2.1 (CI 1.5 to 3.6).Numbers-needed-to-harm (NNHs) were calculated where possible by combining studies for each drug entity irrespective of the condition treated. The results were, for minor harm, carbamazepine 3.7 (CI 2.4 to 7.8), gabapentin 2.5 (CI 2.0 to 3.2), phenytoin 3.2 (CI 2.1 to 6.3). NNHs for major harm were not statistically significant for any drug compared with placebo.Phenytoin had no effect in irritable bowel syndrome, and carbamazepine little effect in post-stroke pain. Clonazepam was effective in one study of temporomandibular joint dysfunction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although anticonvulsants are used widely in chronic pain surprisingly few trials show analgesic effectiveness. Only one study identified considered cancer pain. There is no evidence that anticonvulsants are effective for acute pain. In chronic pain syndromes other than trigeminal neuralgia, anticonvulsants should be withheld until other interventions have been tried. While gabapentin is increasingly being used for neuropathic pain the evidence would suggest that it is not superior to carbamazepine.

Pharmacological management of neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury

Spinal cord injury (SCI) has a number of severe and disabling consequences, including chronic pain, and around 40% of patients develop persistent neuropathic pain. Pain following SCI has a detrimental impact on the patient's quality of life and is a major specific healthcare problem in its own right. Thus far, there is no cure for the pain and oral pharmaceutical intervention is often inadequate, commonly resulting in a reduction of only 20-30% in pain intensity. Neuropathic pain sensations are characterized by spontaneous persistent pain and a range of abnormally evoked responses, e.g. allodynia (pain evoked by normally non-noxious stimuli) and hyperalgesia (an increased response to noxious stimuli). Neuropathic pain following SCI may be present at or below the level of injury. Oral pharmacological agents used in the treatment of neuropathic pain act either by depressing neuronal activity, by blocking sodium channels or inhibiting calcium channels, by increasing inhibition via GABA agonists, by serotonergic and noradrenergic reuptake inhibition, or by decreasing activation via glutamate receptor inhibition, especially by blocking the NMDA receptor. At present, only ten randomized, double-blind, controlled trials have been performed on oral drug treatment of pain after SCI, the results of most of which were negative. The studies included antidepressants (amitriptyline and trazodone), antiepileptics (gabapentin, pregabalin, lamotrigine and valproate) and mexiletine. Gabapentin, pregabalin and amitriptyline showed a significant reduction in neuropathic pain following SCI. Cannabinoids have been found to relieve other types of central pain, and serotonin noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors as well as opioids relieve peripheral neuropathic pain and may be used to treat patients with SCI pain.

Clinical use of pregabalin in the management of central neuropathic pain

Central neuropathic pain (central pain) is treated with antidepressants, various anticonvulsants, opioids, and cannabinoids, but in many cases treatment is insufficient and associated with a range of side-effects. This review addresses a new treatment for neuropathic pain, the anticonvulsant pregabalin. We review the pharmacology, mode of action, pharmacokinetics, and safety of pregabalin as well as two randomized efficacy studies in central pain and a brief overview of efficacy in peripheral neuropathic pain. Pregabalin appears to have efficacy in treating central pain comparable to that in peripheral neuropathic pain as well as efficacy of other recommended drugs for central pain. Pregabalin also improves disturbed sleep and anxiety. Pregabalin is well tolerated; the most common side-effects are somnolence, dizziness, ataxia, and weight gain. Pregabalin is suitable for patients on multiple drugs although there may be additive CNS-related side-effects. Thus, pregabalin has a primary role in central pain patients.

Pain following spinal cord injury

Pain is one of the most common, severe, and treatment-resistant complications that follows SCI. Recent years have seen a surge of research on methods for assessing and treating spinal cord injury pain. In this article, pain after SCI is reviewed in terms of nature, scope, assessment techniques, and treatment strategies.

EFNS guidelines on pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain treatment remains unsatisfactory despite a substantial increase in the number of trials. This EFNS Task Force aimed at evaluating the existing evidence about the pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. Studies were identified using first the Cochrane Database then Medline. Trials were classified according to the aetiological condition. All class I and II controlled trials (according to EFNS classification of evidence) were assessed, but lower-class studies were considered in conditions that had no top level studies. Only treatments feasible in an outpatient setting were evaluated. Effects on pain symptoms/signs, quality of life and comorbidities were particularly searched for. Most of the randomized controlled trials included patients with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) and painful polyneuropathies (PPN) mainly caused by diabetes. These trials provide level A evidence for the efficacy of tricyclic antidepressants, gabapentin, pregabalin and opioids, with a large number of class I trials, followed by topical lidocaine (in PHN) and the newer antidepressants venlafaxine and duloxetine (in PPN). A small number of controlled trials were performed in central pain, trigeminal neuralgia, other peripheral neuropathic pain states and multiple-aetiology neuropathic pains. The main peripheral pain conditions respond similarly well to tricyclic antidepressants, gabapentin, and pregabalin, but some conditions, such as HIV-associated polyneuropathy, are more refractory. There are too few studies on central pain, combination therapy, and head-to-head comparison. For future trials, we recommend to assess quality of life and pain symptoms or signs with standardized tools.

Treatments for chronic pain in persons with spinal cord injury: A survey study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

To determine the degree and duration of pain relief provided by specific pain treatments used by individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) who have chronic pain.

DESIGN

Postal survey.

SETTING

Community.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were 117 individuals who had traumatic SCI, were 18 years of age or older, and reported a chronic pain problem.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Questions assessing current or past use of 26 different pain treatments, the amount of relief each treatment provided, and the length of time that any pain relief usually lasts.

RESULTS

The medications tried most often were nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (tried by 71%) and acetaminophen (tried by 70%); these medications were still being used by more than one half of the patients who had tried them. Opioids produced the greatest degree of pain relief on average (mean, 6.27 +/- 3.05 [SD] on a 0-10 scale, with 0 = no relief and 10 = complete relief) but were unlikely to be continued by those who tried them. Although 38% of respondents with pain had tried gabapentin, only 17% were still using it, and average pain relief was only moderate (mean, 3.32 +/- 3.03 on the 0-10 relief scale). Seventy-three percent of the respondents had tried at least 1 of 7 alternative pain treatments, and the most frequently tried were massage, marijuana, and acupuncture. The most relief was provided by massage (mean, 6.05 +/- 2.47] on the 0-10 relief scale) and marijuana (mean, 6.62 +/- 2.54 on the 0-10 relief scale). The relief from the various treatments, including most medications, tended to last only minutes or hours; however, pain relief from alternative treatments such as massage, acupuncture, and hypnosis was reported to last for days in 25% to 33% of those who tried these treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients are not finding adequate pain relief from commonly prescribed medications. Alternative therapies should be considered as additional treatment options in this population.

Anticonvulsant drugs for acute and chronic pain

BACKGROUND

Anticonvulsant drugs have been used in the management of pain since the 1960s. The clinical impression is that they are useful for chronic neuropathic pain, especially when the pain is lancinating or burning. Readers are referred to reviews of carbamazepine and gabapentin in the Cochrane Library which replace the information on those drugs in this review. Other drugs remain unchanged at present in this review

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the analgesic effectiveness and adverse effects of anticonvulsant drugs for pain management in clinical practice . Migraine and headache studies are excluded in this revision.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised trials of anticonvulsants in acute, chronic or cancer pain were identified by MEDLINE (1966-1999), EMBASE (1994-1999), SIGLE (1980-1999) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL/CCTR) (Cochrane Library Issue 3, 1999). In addition, 41 medical journals were hand searched. Additional reports were identified from the reference list of the retrieved papers, and by contacting investigators. Date of most recent search: September 1999.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-three trials of six anticonvulsants were considered eligible (1,074 patients). The only placebo-controlled study in acute pain found no analgesic effect of sodium valproate. Three placebo-controlled studies of carbamazepine in trigeminal neuralgia had a combined NNT (95% confidence interval (CI)) for effectiveness of 2.5 (CI 2.0-3.4). A single placebo-controlled trial of gabapentin in post-herpetic neuralgia had an NNT of 3.2 (CI 2.4-5.0). For diabetic neuropathy NNTs for effectiveness were as follows: (one RCT for each drug) carbamazepine 2.3 (CI 1.6-3.8), gabapentin 3.8 (CI 2.4-8.7) and phenytoin 2.1 (CI 1.5-3.6).Numbers-needed-to-harm (NNHs) were calculated where possible by combining studies for each drug entity irrespective of the condition treated. The results were, for minor harm, carbamazepine 3.7 (CI 2.4-7.8), gabapentin 2.5 (CI 2.0-3.2), phenytoin 3.2 (CI 2.1-6.3). NNHs for major harm were not statistically significant for any drug compared with placebo. Phenytoin had no effect in irritable bowel syndrome, and carbamazepine little effect in post-stroke pain. Clonazepam was effective in one study of temporomandibular joint dysfunction.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although anticonvulsants are used widely in chronic pain surprisingly few trials show analgesic effectiveness. Only one studied considered cancer pain. There is no evidence that anticonvulsants are effective for acute pain. In chronic pain syndromes other than trigeminal neuralgia, anticonvulsants should be withheld until other interventions have been tried. While gabapentin is increasingly being used for neuropathic pain the evidence would suggest that it is not superior to carbamazepine.

Practical considerations in the assessment and treatment of pain in adults with physical disabilities

Adults aging with physical disabilities experience a variety of pain disorders that affect their functionality and QOL. It is important that clinicians caring for this population be knowledgeable about this common symptom and be able to perform a thorough history and physical examination. In addition, it is imperative to have a good working knowledge of the strengths and limitations of the treatments available.

Spinal cord injury pain--mechanisms and treatment

In spinal cord injury (SCI), pain is a major cause of disability. A review of experimental and human studies, which provide insight into the mechanisms and treatment of SCI neuropathic pain are presented. Each of a series of pathophysiologic changes after SCI may be relevant for the development of SCI neuropathic pain. These changes are discussed in relation to neuropathic pain at and below the level of SCI. SCI neuropathic pain is difficult to treat. Experimental and human randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trials on pharmacologic treatment of SCI pain are summarized.

Pharmacologic Management Part 2: Lesser-Studied Neuropathic Pain Diseases

This second part of a review of the pharmacologic management of neuropathic pain diseases describes the current treatment options for three lesser-studied neuropathic syndromes: Central poststroke pain, spinal cord injury, and complex regional pain syndrome II. Diagnosis can be difficult in patients with these syndromes, because the pain experienced is much greater and of a different type than would normally be expected following a stroke or injury to the spinal cord or a peripheral nerve. Even when an accurate and timely diagnosis is made, treatment options are limited and frequently suboptimal. However, the results of published trials do support the use of anticonvulsants and/or tricyclic antidepressants as first-line pharmacotherapy in these three neuropathic pain syndromes. To maximize treatment outcomes, future research must: Continue to more fully elucidate the relationship between the signs and symptoms of pain and the underlying pathophysiology; Delineate the natural history of central poststroke pain, spinal cord injury, and complex regional pain syndrome; Identify patient-related factors that may indicate an increased risk of developing neuropathic pain following stroke or nerve injury; Investigate emerging treatments that target underlying pain mechanisms.

Management strategies for the treatment of neuropathic pain in the elderly

Pain caused by dysfunction or damage to the peripheral or central nervous system is typified by the symptoms described by patients with painful diabetic neuropathy, post-herpetic neuralgia and central poststroke pain. All these conditions are more common in the elderly. Neuropathic pain has long been recognised as one of the more difficult types of pain to treat; however, with the current emphasis on providing a multidisciplinary assessment and approach to management, more patients will be offered relief of their symptoms and an improved quality of life. Despite the use of combination drug therapy, adequate pain relief in the elderly is difficult to achieve without adverse effects. In an attempt to minimise these it is important to include non-drug treatment options in the management plan. Lifestyle changes and environmental modification, together with encouragement to adopt an appropriate exercise programme and an emphasis on maintaining mobility and independence should always be considered. Interventional therapy ranging from simple nerve blocks to intrathecal drug delivery can be of value. Drug treatment remains the mainstay of therapy. Tricyclic antidepressants such as amitriptyline, while having significant adverse effects in the elderly, have a number needed to treat (NNT) of 3.5 for 50% pain relief in diabetic neuropathy and 2.1 for 50% pain relief in postherpetic neuralgia. The newer antiepileptic drugs, such as gabapentin, appear to have a better adverse effect profile and provide similar efficacy with the NNT for treating painful diabetic neuropathy being 3.7 and 3.2 for treating pain in postherpetic neuralgia. As our understanding of the complexities of the pain processes increases, we are becoming more able to appropriately combine treatments to achieve not only improved pain relief but also improved function.

Chronic pain secondary to disability: a review

BACKGROUND

Until recently, very little has been written regarding chronic pain as a secondary problem in persons who already have a physical disability, despite the potential for pain to increase the negative impact of what may already be a very disabling condition. The purpose of this review is to summarize what is currently known concerning the nature and scope of chronic pain as a secondary condition to disability, specifically spinal cord injury, acquired amputations, cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis, neuromuscular disease, and postpolio syndrome.

METHOD

What is known concerning the frequency, severity, impact, and treatment of pain in these specific conditions is reviewed, as are the factors that contribute to, or are associated with, adjustment to chronic pain in these disability groups. The authors conclude with several research questions that emerge from this knowledge, the answers to which will contribute to the long-term goal of the reduction of pain and suffering in persons with disabilities.

CONCLUSIONS

The existing literature clearly documents that many persons with disabilities experience chronic pain. Many questions remain unanswered regarding the scope, severity, and treatment of chronic pain in these groups.

Pain and rehabilitation after spinal cord injury: the case of sensory spasticity?

Sixty percent of patients with posttraumatic para- or tetraplegia suffer from severe, continuous burning and/or lancinating pain. Multiple sclerosis produces pain in more than 30%. This pain can be as important as the absent mobility or sexual function as a cause of lowered quality of life. Two unique types of longstanding neuropathic pain can be recognized in persons with spinal cord injury: (1). segmentally distributed pain at the lesion; and (2). pain in the body below the lesion, often with late onset. The first type could be produced by nerve root entrapment or by direct segmental deafferentation. The second type probably contains several forms of central pain, evoked either by the original spinal lesion, by an expanding syrinx in the spinal cord or by secondary changes at higher levels of the somatosensory systems. Patients with central pain almost always have stimulus-independent pain. Its intensity may vary independently, be related to the presence of visceral activity/inflammation or be constant. In addition, stimulus-dependent pain is sometimes present, usually because skin areas or viscera below the lesion are allodynic. Partial spinal lesions, especially centrally in the cervical spinal cord, may be more prone to produce pain than are complete lesions. There is limited analgesic effectiveness in controlled studies of serotonin reuptake inhibitors, of sodium channel blockers (lidocaine, tetracaine), of the GABA receptor agonist baclofen (one study) and of the NMDA-receptor antagonist ketamine (one study). There are anecdotal reports on oral carbamazepine, on gabapentin, on intrathecal opiates and also on the alpha(2)-agonist clonidine, being effective in central neuropathic pain. Neurostimulation is effective only if it evokes paraesthesia in the painful area; hence TENS may give relief of segmental pain. Neurodestructive procedures and central neurostimulation have been largely unsuccessful. As in other longstanding pain, improved coping through cognitive-behavioural rehabilitation may be helpful for the clinical outcome.

Treatments for chronic pain associated with spinal cord injuries: many are tried, few are helpful

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to investigate, in two community samples of people with spinal cord injuries, the frequency of use of different pain treatments and the perceived helpfulness of these treatments.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A postal survey was conducted in the community.

PARTICIPANTS

The participants were 471 persons aged 18 years or older who had spinal cord injuries and pain. There were 2 separate samples (n = 308 and n = 163).

OUTCOME MEASURES

The pain treatments used, the helpfulness of these treatments, and the Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire answers were assessed.

RESULTS

Respondents reported multiple pain treatments (range of 0-14 and median of 4 in sample 1; range of 0-16 and median of 4 in sample 2). The most commonly reported treatments were oral medications and physical therapy. Medication types most commonly reported were nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, and opioids. The treatments rated as most helpful were opioid medications, physical therapy, and diazepam therapy, and those rated as least helpful were spinal cord stimulation, counseling or psychotherapy, administration of acetaminophen, and administration of amitriptyline. Alternative treatments reported as most helpful were massage therapy and use of marijuana. Acupuncture was tried by many but was rated as only moderately helpful.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey of two large samples of community-dwelling individuals with spinal cord injury-related chronic pain indicates that multiple pain treatments are tried but only a few are rated as more than somewhat helpful. Furthermore, the treatments that are most commonly reported are not always those that are rated as most helpful. The findings point to a number of potentially fruitful directions for future research.

Anticonvulsants in neuropathic pain: rationale and clinical evidence

Neuropathic pain, whether of peripheral or central origin, is characterized by a neuronal hyperexcitability in damaged areas of the nervous system. In peripheral neuropathic pain, damaged nerve endings exhibit abnormal spontaneous and increased evoked activity, partly due to an increased and novel expression of sodium channels. In central pain, although not explored in detail, the spontaneous pain and evoked allodynia are also best explained by a neuronal hyperexcitability. The peripheral hyperexcitability is due to a series of molecular changes at the level of the peripheral nociceptor, in dorsal root ganglia, in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord, and in the brain. These changes include abnormal expression of sodium channels, increased activity at glutamate receptor sites, changes in gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA-ergic) inhibition, and an alteration of calcium influx into cells. The neuronal hyperexcitability and corresponding molecular changes in neuropathic pain have many features in common with the cellular changes in certain forms of epilepsy. This has led to the use of anticonvulsant drugs for the treatment of neuropathic pain. Carbamazepine and phenytoin were the first anticonvulsants to be used in controlled clinical trials. Studies have shown these agents to relieve painful diabetic neuropathy and paroxysmal attacks in trigeminal neuralgia. Subsequent studies have shown the anticonvulsant gabapentin to be effective in painful diabetic neuropathy, mixed neuropathies, and postherpetic neuralgia. Lamotrigine, a new anticonvulsant, is effective in trigeminal neuralgia, painful peripheral neuropathy, and post-stroke pain. Other anticonvulsants, both new and old, are currently undergoing controlled clinical testing. The most common adverse effects of anticonvulsants are sedation and cerebellar symptoms (nystagmus, tremor and incoordination). Less common side-effects include haematological changes and cardiac arrhythmia with phenytoin and carbamazepine. The introduction of a mechanism-based classification of neuropathic pain, together with new anticonvulsants with a more specific pharmacological action, may lead to more rational treatment for the individual patient with neuropathic pain.

Pain and spasticity after spinal cord injury: mechanisms and treatment

STUDY DESIGN

A comprehensive survey of literature on the proposed mechanisms and treatment of pain and spasticity after spinal cord injury (SCI) was completed.

OBJECTIVES

To define the current understanding of these entities and to review various treatment options.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The neurophysiologic basis of spasticity after SCI is well established. The mechanism of neuropathic pain after SCI remains conjectural, although considerable new data, much of it from animal models, now add to our understanding of this condition.

METHODS

A comprehensive search and review of the published literature was undertaken.

RESULTS

Treatment options for spasticity are effective and include oral medication (baclofen, tizanidine), intrathecal baclofen, and rarely, surgical rhizotomy or myelotomy. Selected patients with post-SCI pain can respond to surgical myelotomy (DREZ lesions) or intrathecal agents (e.g., morphine + clonidine), but the majority continue to suffer.

CONCLUSIONS

Medical and surgical treatments for spasticity are established and highly successful. Management of post-SCI pain remains a clinical challenge, as there is no uniformly successful medical or surgical treatment.

Anticonvulsant drugs for acute and chronic pain

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the analgesic effectiveness of anticonvulsant drugs compared to either placebo or other drugs in order to provide evidence-based recommendations for pain management in clinical practice and to identify a clinical research agenda. Adverse effects are also considered.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised trials of anticonvulsants in acute, chronic or cancer pain were identified by Medline (Silver Platter 3.0, 3.1 and 3.11) from 1966 to February 1994. In addition, 40 medical journals were hand searched (published between 1950 and 1990). Additional reports were identified from the reference list of the retrieved papers, and contacting investigators. Date of the most recent searches: 1994.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty trials of four anticonvulsants were considered eligible (746 patients). The only placebo-controlled study in acute pain found no analgesic effect of sodium valproate. Three placebo-controlled studies of carbamazepine in trigeminal neuralgia had a combined NNT for effectiveness of 2.6, for adverse effects 3.4, and for severe effects (withdrawal from study) 24. Three placebo-controlled studies of diabetic neuropathy had a combined NNT for effectiveness of 3, for adverse effects 2.5, and for severe effects 20. Three placebo-controlled studies of migraine prophylaxis had a combined NNT for effectiveness of 2.4, for adverse effects 2.4 and for severe effects 39. Phenytoin had no effect in irritable bowel syndrome, and carbamazepine little effect in post-stroke pain. Clonazepam was effective in one study of temporomandibular joint dysfunction. No study compared one anticonvulsant with another. Anticonvulsants fared poorly against other treatments.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Although anticonvulsants are used widely in chronic pain surprisingly few trials show analgesic effectiveness. No trial compared different anticonvulsants. There is no evidence that anticonvulsants are effective for acute pain. In chronic pain syndromes other than trigeminal neuralgia anticonvulsants should be withheld until other interventions have been tried.