Postdural puncture headache in complex regional pain syndrome: a retrospective observational study

[Post-dural puncture headache and blood-patch: theoretical and practical approach]

OBJECTIVE

To review the current research and formulate a rational approach to the physiopathology, cause and treatment of post-dural puncture headache (PDPH).

DATA SOURCES

Articles published to December 2011 were obtained through a search of Medline for the MeSh terms "epidural blood-patch" and "post-dural puncture headache".

STUDY SELECTION

Six hundred and eighty-two pertinent studies were included and 200 were analysed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Resulting of a dural tap after spinal anaesthesia or diagnostic lumbar puncture or as a complication of epidural anaesthesia, PDPH occurs when an excessive leak of cerebrospinal fluid leads to intracranial hypotension associated to a resultant cerebral vasodilatation. Reduction in cerebrospinal fluid volume in upright position may cause traction of the intracranial structure and stretching of vessels. Typically postural, headache may be associated to nausea, photophobia, tinnitus or arm pain and changes in hearing acuity. In severe cases, there may be cranial nerve dysfunction and nerve palsies secondary to traction on those nerves. The Epidural Blood-Patch (EBP) is considered as the "gold standard" in the treatment of PDHP because it induces a prolonged elevation of subarachnoid and epidural pressures, whereas such elevation is transient with saline or dextran. EBP should be performed within 24-48hours of onset of headache; the optimum volume of epidural blood appears to be 15-20mL. Severe complications following EBP are exceptional. The use of echography may be safety puncture. The optimum timing of epidural blood-patch, the resort of repeating procedure if the symptomatology does not disappear, the alternative to the conventional medical treatment need to be determined by future clinical trial.

Postdural puncture headache in migraineurs and nonheadache subjects: a prospective study

OBJECTIVES

To prospectively assess 1) the incidence and duration of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) in migraineurs and healthy subjects; 2) the associated risk factors; and 3) the risk of getting a migraine attack shortly before or after lumbar puncture (LP).

METHODS

As part of an extensive biochemical migraine research program, we assessed the occurrence, duration, and characteristics of PDPH in 160 migraineurs and 53 age- and sex-matched healthy controls. In addition, we evaluated potential risk factors for PDPH as well as the risk of developing a migraine attack before or after LP.

RESULTS

In total, 64 of 199 subjects (32.2%) developed PDPH. Young age, low body mass index, severe headache immediately after LP, and sitting sampling position, but not being a migraineur, increased the risk of PDPH (all p < 0.05). Duration of PDPH was prolonged by history of depression, sitting sampling position, high perceived stress during the LP procedure, and multiple LP efforts (all p < 0.05). Migraine attacks were less likely to occur before or shortly after LP.

CONCLUSIONS

Migraineurs are not at increased risk of developing PDPH. PDPH duration is similar in migraineurs and age- and sex-matched controls. LP does not trigger migraine attacks, and the stress of an upcoming LP might even have a protective effect against onset of migraine attacks.

Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference 2012: recommendations for the management of pain by intrathecal (intraspinal) drug delivery: report of an interdisciplinary expert panel

INTRODUCTION

The use of intrathecal (IT) infusion of analgesic medications to treat patients with chronic refractory pain has increased since its inception in the 1980s, and the need for clinical research in IT therapy is ongoing. The Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC) panel of experts convened in 2000, 2003, and 2007 to make recommendations on the rational use of IT analgesics based on preclinical and clinical literature and clinical experiences.

METHODS

The PACC panel convened again in 2011 to update the standard of care for IT therapies to reflect current knowledge gleaned from literature and clinical experience. A thorough literature search was performed, and information from this search was provided to panel members. Analysis of published literature was coupled with the clinical experience of panel members to form recommendations regarding the use of IT analgesics to treat chronic pain.

RESULTS

After a review of literature published from 2007 to 2011 and discussions of clinical experience, the panel created updated algorithms for the rational use of IT medications for the treatment of neuropathic pain and nociceptive pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The advent of new algorithmic tracks for neuropathic and nociceptive pain is an important step in improving patient care. The panel encourages continued research and development, including the development of new drugs, devices, and safety recommendations to improve the care of patients with chronic pain.

Efficacy and safety of a single intrathecal methylprednisolone bolus in chronic complex regional pain syndrome

Activated immune cells in the spinal cord may play an important role in the development and maintenance of neuropathic pain, such as occurs in response to peripheral inflammation or tissue injury. Immune activation may therefore serve as a therapeutic target for immune modulating drugs like corticosteroids. This double-blind randomized placebo-controlled parallel-group trial aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of a single intrathecal administration of 60 mg methylprednisolone (ITM) in chronic patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). The primary outcome measure was change in pain (pain intensity numeric rating scale; range 0-10) after 6 weeks. With 21 subjects per group the study had a 90% power to detect a clinically relevant difference (> or = 2 points). After 21 patients (10 on ITM) were included, the trial was stopped prematurely after the interim analysis had shown that ITM had no effect on pain (difference in mean pain intensity numeric rating scale at 6 weeks 0.3, 95% confidence interval -0.7 to 1.3) or any other outcome measure. We did not find any difference in treatment-emergent adverse events between the ITM and placebo group. We conclude that a single bolus administration of ITM is not efficacious in chronic CRPS patients, which may indicate that spinal immune activation does not play an important role in this phase of the syndrome.