Facial Pain: A Comprehensive Review and Proposal for a Pragmatic Diagnostic Approach

Advancements in Understanding and Classifying Chronic Orofacial Pain: Key Insights from Biopsychosocial Models and International Classifications (ICHD-3, ICD-11, ICOP)

In exploring chronic orofacial pain (COFP), this review highlights its global impact on life quality and critiques current diagnostic systems, including the ICD-11, ICOP, and ICHD-3, for their limitations in addressing COFP's complexity. Firstly, this study outlines the global burden of chronic pain and the importance of distinguishing between different pain types for effective treatment. It then delves into the specific challenges of diagnosing COFP, emphasizing the need for a more nuanced approach that incorporates the biopsychosocial model. This review critically examines existing classification systems, highlighting their limitations in fully capturing COFP's multifaceted nature. It advocates for the integration of these systems with the DSM-5's Somatic Symptom Disorder code, proposing a unified, multidisciplinary diagnostic approach. This recommendation aims to improve chronic pain coding standardization and acknowledge the complex interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors in COFP. In conclusion, here, we highlight the need for a comprehensive, universally applicable classification system for COFP. Such a system would enable accurate diagnosis, streamline treatment strategies, and enhance communication among healthcare professionals. This advancement holds potential for significant contributions to research and patient care in this challenging field, offering a broader perspective for scientists across disciplines.

Neurotechnology for Pain

Neurotechnologies for treating pain rely on electrical stimulation of the central or peripheral nervous system to disrupt or block pain signaling and have been commercialized to treat a variety of pain conditions. While their adoption is accelerating, neurotechnologies are still frequently viewed as a last resort, after many other treatment options have been explored. We review the pain conditions commonly treated with electrical stimulation, as well as the specific neurotechnologies used for treating those conditions. We identify barriers to adoption, including a limited understanding of mechanisms of action, inconsistent efficacy across patients, and challenges related to selectivity of stimulation and off-target side effects. We describe design improvements that have recently been implemented, as well as some cutting-edge technologies that may address the limitations of existing neurotechnologies. Addressing these challenges will accelerate adoption and change neurotechnologies from last-line to first-line treatments for people living with chronic pain.

Orofacial Pain Management: An Overview of the Potential Benefits of Palmitoylethanolamide and Other Natural Agents

Pain is the most common symptom that dentists are confronted with, whether acute (pulpitis, acute periodontitis, post-surgery, etc.) or chronic diseases, such as periodontitis, muscle pain, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders, burning mouth syndrome (BMS), oral lichen planus (OLP) and others. The success of therapy depends on the reduction in and management of pain through specific drugs, hence the need to analyze new pain medications with specific activity, which are suitable for long-term use, with a low risk of side effects and interactions with other drugs, and capable of leading to a reduction in orofacial pain. Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) is a bioactive lipid mediator, which is synthesized in all tissues of the body as a protective pro-homeostatic response to tissue damage and has aroused considerable interest in the dental field due to its anti-inflammatory, analgesic, antimicrobial, antipyretic, antiepileptic, immunomodulatory and neuroprotective activities. It has been observed that PEA could play a role in the management of the pain of orofacial origin, including BMS, OLP, periodontal disease, tongue a la carte and temporomandibular disorders (TMDs), as well as in the treatment of postoperative pain. However, actual clinical data on the use of PEA in the clinical management of patients with orofacial pain are still lacking. Therefore, the main objective of the present study is to provide an overview of orofacial pain in its many manifestations and an updated analysis of the molecular pain-relieving and anti-inflammatory properties of PEA to understand its beneficial effects in the management of patients with orofacial pain, both neuropathic and nociceptive in nature. The aim is also to direct research toward the testing and use of other natural agents that have already been shown to have anti-inflammatory, antioxidant and pain-relieving actions and could offer important support in the treatment of orofacial pain.

Effect of neuropathic pain on sphenopalatine ganglion block responses in persistent idiopathic facial pain

OBJECTIVES

Management of persistent idiopathic facial pain (PIFP) can be challenging. Sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) has been the target for the interventional treatment of many facial pain syndromes. However, possible factors that may affect SPG block success are unknown. It was aimed to investigate the effect of neuropathic pain on SPG block outcomes in PIFP, which includes a heterogeneous patient group.

METHODS

All of the patients underwent fluoroscopy-guided SPG block with an injection of 40 mg of 2% lidocaine and 8 mg of dexamethasone. The patients were assigned to 2 groups according to existence of neuropathic pain determined with the DN4 questionnaire score: 19 patients with neuropathic pain (Group 1) and 15 patients without neuropathic pain (Group 2). Preprocedural and postprocedural Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 47.65 ± 6.50 years. The average pain duration was 52.95 ± 34.81 weeks. A significantly greater decrease was detected in the VAS scores at 1 week (p = 0.036) and 1 month (p < 0.001) in Group 1 when compared to Group 2. Moreover, the proportion of patients with >50% improvement in the VAS scores at 1 week (p = 0.012) and 1 month (P = 0.017) was significantly lower in Group 1 than in Group 2.

DISCUSSION

SPG block appears as a safe, effective, and rapid method to treat PIFP, especially in cases with neuropathic pain. Neuropathic pain may be a predictor for pain relief in interventional procedures targeting SPG in the treatment of PIFP.

Giant cell arteritis complicated by tongue necrosis and bilateral cerebellar ischaemic stroke

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) typically presents with headache, scalp tenderness or visual disturbance. Other symptoms include orofacial pain, constitutional symptoms and ischaemic stroke. An 81-year-old woman with a background of type-2 diabetes and hypertension presented with headache, oral pain and right visual loss. Examination showed hypertension, nodular temporal arteries, reduced visual acuity and suspected oral candida. Inflammatory markers were raised and she was diagnosed with GCA and commenced on corticosteroids. During treatment she developed tongue ulceration, then acute vertigo and incoordination with nystagmus and ataxia. Neuroimaging confirmed bilateral, cerebellar ischaemic strokes and temporal artery biopsy was consistent with GCA. With corticosteroids and secondary prevention of stroke measures she is now functionally independent. Oral pain is an uncommon symptom of GCA and delays in recognition may lead to catastrophic consequences. Clinicians should be aware of uncommon presentations and to optimise additional ischaemic stroke risk-factors.

Results of three or more Gamma Knife radiosurgery procedures for recurrent trigeminal neuralgia

OBJECTIVE

Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS) is an established surgical option for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (TN), particularly for high-risk surgical candidates and those with recurrent pain. However, outcomes after three or more GKRS treatments have rarely been reported. Herein, the authors reviewed outcomes among patients who had undergone three or more GKRS procedures for recurrent TN.

METHODS

The authors conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis of patients who had undergone at least three GKRS treatments for TN between July 1997 and April 2019 at two different institutions. Clinical characteristics, radiosurgical dosimetry and technique, pain outcomes, and complications were reviewed. Pain outcomes were scored on the Barrow Neurological Institute (BNI) scale, including time to pain relief (BNI score ≤ III) and recurrence (BNI score > III).

RESULTS

A total of 30 patients were identified, including 16 women and 14 men. Median pain duration prior to the first GKRS treatment was 10 years. Three patients (10%) had multiple sclerosis. Time to pain relief was longer after the third treatment (p = 0.0003), whereas time to pain recurrence was similar across each of the successive treatments (p = 0.842). Complete or partial pain relief was achieved in 93.1% of patients after the third treatment. The maximum pain relief achieved after the third treatment was significantly better among patients with no prior percutaneous procedures (p = 0.0111) and patients with shorter durations of pain before initiation of GKRS therapy (p = 0.0449). New or progressive facial sensory dysfunction occurred in 29% of patients after the third GKRS treatment and was reported as bothersome in 14%. One patient developed facial twitching, while another experienced persistent lacrimation. No statistically significant predictors of adverse effects following the third treatment were found. Over a median of 39 months of follow-up, 77% of patients maintained complete or partial pain relief. Three patients underwent a fourth GKRS treatment, including one who ultimately received five treatments; all of them reported sustained pain relief at the extended follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors describe the largest series to date of patients undergoing three or more GKRS treatments for refractory TN. A third treatment may produce outcomes similar to those of the first two treatments in terms of long-term pain relief, recurrence, and adverse effects.

Chronic Facial Pain: Trigeminal Neuralgia, Persistent Idiopathic Facial Pain, and Myofascial Pain Syndrome-An Evidence-Based Narrative Review and Etiological Hypothesis

Trigeminal neuralgia (TN), the most common form of severe facial pain, may be confused with an ill-defined persistent idiopathic facial pain (PIFP). Facial pain is reviewed and a detailed discussion of TN and PIFP is presented. A possible cause for PIFP is proposed. (1) Methods: Databases were searched for articles related to facial pain, TN, and PIFP. Relevant articles were selected, and all systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included. (2) Discussion: The lifetime prevalence for TN is approximately 0.3% and for PIFP approximately 0.03%. TN is 15-20 times more common in persons with multiple sclerosis. Most cases of TN are caused by neurovascular compression, but a significant number are secondary to inflammation, tumor or trauma. The cause of PIFP remains unknown. Well-established TN treatment protocols include pharmacotherapy, neurotoxin denervation, peripheral nerve ablation, focused radiation, and microvascular decompression, with high rates of relief and varying degrees of adverse outcomes. No such protocols exist for PIFP. (3) Conclusion: PIFP may be confused with TN, but treatment possibilities differ greatly. Head and neck muscle myofascial pain syndrome is suggested as a possible cause of PIFP, a consideration that could open new approaches to treatment.