Intrathecal clonidine potentiates suppression of tactile hypersensitivity by spinal cord stimulation in a model of neuropathy

Regulation of murine arthritis by systemic, spinal, and intra-articular adrenoceptors

BACKGROUND

The regulation of the immune system by the sympathetic nervous system is allowing the design of novel treatments for inflammatory disorders such as arthritis. In this study, we have analyzed the effects of α- and β-adrenoceptor agonists injected subcutaneously, intrathecally, or intra-articularly in zymosan-induced arthritis.

METHODS

Murine arthritis was induced by intra-articular (knee joint) injection of zymosan. α1 (phenylephrine), α2 (clonidine), β1 (dobutamine), or β2 (salbutamol)-adrenoceptor agonists were injected subcutaneously (sc), intrathecally (it), or intra-articularly (ia) to activate peripheral, spinal, or intra-articular adrenoceptors and to study their effects on articular edema formation and neutrophil migration into the synovial cavity.

RESULTS

Treatments with phenylephrine did not affect the edema formation, but it increased neutrophil migration when injected subcutaneously (155.3%) or intra-articularly (187.7%). Treatments with clonidine inhibited neutrophil migration (59.9% sc, 68.7% it, 42.8% ia) regardless of the route of administration, but it inhibited edema formation only when injected intrathecally (66.7%) or intra-articularly (36%) but not subcutaneously. Treatments with dobutamine inhibited both edema (42.0% sc, 69.5% it, 61.6% ia) and neutrophil migration (28.4% sc, 70.3% it, 82.4% ia) in a concentration dependent manner. Likewise, all the treatments with salbutamol also inhibited edema formation (89.9% sc, 62.4% it, 69.8% ia) and neutrophil migration (76.6% sc, 39.1% it, 71.7% ia).

CONCLUSION

Whereas the β-adrenoceptor agonists induced anti-inflammatory effects regardless of their route of administration, α1- and α2-adrenoceptor agonists induced either pro- and anti-inflammatory effects, respectively.

Spinal cord stimulation in chronic pain: evidence and theory for mechanisms of action

Well-established in the field of bioelectronic medicine, Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) offers an implantable, non-pharmacologic treatment for patients with intractable chronic pain conditions. Chronic pain is a widely heterogenous syndrome with regard to both pathophysiology and the resultant phenotype. Despite advances in our understanding of SCS-mediated antinociception, there still exists limited evidence clarifying the pathways recruited when patterned electric pulses are applied to the epidural space. The rapid clinical implementation of novel SCS methods including burst, high frequency and dorsal root ganglion SCS has provided the clinician with multiple options to treat refractory chronic pain. While compelling evidence for safety and efficacy exists in support of these novel paradigms, our understanding of their mechanisms of action (MOA) dramatically lags behind clinical data. In this review, we reconstruct the available basic science and clinical literature that offers support for mechanisms of both paresthesia spinal cord stimulation (P-SCS) and paresthesia-free spinal cord stimulation (PF-SCS). While P-SCS has been heavily examined since its inception, PF-SCS paradigms have recently been clinically approved with the support of limited preclinical research. Thus, wide knowledge gaps exist between their clinical efficacy and MOA. To close this gap, many rich investigative avenues for both P-SCS and PF-SCS are underway, which will further open the door for paradigm optimization, adjunctive therapies and new indications for SCS. As our understanding of these mechanisms evolves, clinicians will be empowered with the possibility of improving patient care using SCS to selectively target specific pathophysiological processes in chronic pain.

Spinal Cord Stimulation: Clinical Efficacy and Potential Mechanisms

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a minimally invasive therapy used for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. SCS is a safe and effective alternative to medications such as opioids, and multiple randomized controlled studies have demonstrated efficacy for difficult-to-treat neuropathic conditions such as failed back surgery syndrome. Conventional SCS is believed mediate pain relief via activation of dorsal column Aβ fibers, resulting in variable effects on sensory and pain thresholds, and measurable alterations in higher order cortical processing. Although potentiation of inhibition, as suggested by Wall and Melzack's gate control theory, continues to be the leading explanatory model, other segmental and supraspinal mechanisms have been described. Novel, non-standard, stimulation waveforms such as high-frequency and burst have been shown in some studies to be clinically superior to conventional SCS, however their mechanisms of action remain to be determined. Additional studies are needed, both mechanistic and clinical, to better understand optimal stimulation strategies for different neuropathic conditions, improve patient selection and optimize efficacy.

Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Pain: Mode of Action

STUDY DESIGN

Literature review.

OBJECTIVE

A review of the literature that presents a perspective on mechanisms of actions behind spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapy for chronic pain.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

SCS is an effective therapeutic alternative for the treatment of intractable chronic pain. Its application has been mostly based on the gate control theory of pain. Computational models have been fundamental on the understanding of clinical observations and the design of therapies that provide optimal neuromodulation. Research has provided insight into the involvement of specific neurotransmitters that support segmental and supraspinal mechanisms of action.

METHODS

A literature review was performed with emphasis on mechanisms of action for SCS including the effects of electrical fields on spinal cord structures based on computational models and preclinical and clinical explorations.

RESULTS

This review provides background on the development of SCS, which has been driven around a paresthesia-based paradigm as a result of the gate control theory. A review of computational models emphasizes their importance on our current understanding of the mechanism of action and clinical optimization of therapy. Electrophysiology and molecular biology have provided a closer, yet narrow, view of the effect of SCS on neurotransmitters and their receptors, which have led to the formulation of segmental and supraspinal mechanisms. Literature supporting the involvement of glial cells in chronic pain and their characteristic response to electrical fields should motivate further investigation of mechanisms involving neuroglia. Finally, a review of recent results paresthesia-free strategies should encourage research on mechanisms of action.

CONCLUSION

The mechanisms of SCS have been extensively studied and several consistent phenomena have emerged. The activation of A-beta fibers to induce paresthesia also involve neurotransmitter release via segmental and supraspinal pathways. Despite advancements, much remains to be understood, particularly as new stimulation strategies are developed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N /A.

Conventional and Novel Spinal Stimulation Algorithms: Hypothetical Mechanisms of Action and Comments on Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) emerged as a direct clinical spin-off from the Gate Control Theory from 1965. Over the last decade, several new modes of SCS have appeared. This review discusses these novel techniques and their hypothetical mechanisms of action.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A recent literature search on SCS coupled with the most recent data from poster presentations and congress lectures have been used to illustrate new hypothetical ways of modulating pain.

RESULTS

Several physiological and neurochemical mechanisms for conventional paresthetic SCS have been described in detail. However, much less is known about the novel SCS modes of action. One new algorithm utilizes very high frequencies (up to 10 kHz) intended for direct stimulation of dorsal horns at the T9-T10 level to treat both low back pain and leg pain. Another technique uses bursts of impulses with a high internal frequency delivered to the dorsal spinal cord with a frequency of 40 Hz. Both of these therapies intend to be subparesthetic and effective both for neuropathic and nociceptive pain components. During the last few years, more moderate changes in SCS parameters have been tried in order to increase the amount of electric charge passed from the lead to the neural tissue. This strategy, called "high density SCS," utilizes frequencies up to 1200 Hz or long pulse widths.

CONCLUSIONS

The present SCS therapies have developed beyond the Gate Control Concept. New hypotheses about mechanisms of action are presented and some improved results are discussed.

Noradrenergic inhibition of spinal hyperexcitation elicited by cutaneous cold stimuli in rats with oxaliplatin-induced allodynia: electrophysiological and behavioral assessments

We investigated the spinal action of noradrenaline on cold-elicited hyperexcitation detected in dorsal horn neurons of rats with allodynia induced by an oxaliplatin (6 mg/kg, i.p.) injection. In vivo extracellular recordings from the spinal dorsal horn showed that wide dynamic range neurons responded to cutaneous acetone (10 μl) stimulation in normal rats, and cold-elicited firings in oxaliplatin-administered rats were increased with a longer duration, correlated with behavioral responses. These responses were significantly attenuated by spinal administration (50 μM) of noradrenaline or its agonists, clonidine (α2), phenylephrine (α1) and isoprenaline (β), in descending order of efficacy. Thus, the inhibitory effect of noradrenaline on spinal oxaliplatin-induced cold hyperexcitation is mediated mainly by activation of α2- and/or α1-adrenoceptors.

Lack of Analgesic Synergy of the Cholecystokinin Receptor Antagonist Proglumide and Spinal Cord Stimulation for the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain in Rats

OBJECTIVE

Neuropathic pain is difficult to manage and treat. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has become an established procedure for treating chronic neuropathic pain that is refractory to pharmacological therapy. In order to achieve better analgesia, a number of studies have evaluated the effectiveness of combining drug therapy with SCS. Cholecystokinin antagonists, such as proglumide, enhance the analgesic efficacy of endogenous opioids in animal models of pain. We previously reported that both systemic and spinal administration of proglumide enhances analgesia produced by both low- and high-frequency transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS). Since SCS produces analgesia through endogenous opioids, we hypothesized that the analgesic effect of SCS would be enhanced through co-administration with proglumide in animals with neuropathic pain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 40) with spared nerve injury were given proglumide (20 mg/kg, i.p.) or saline prior to treatment with SCS (sham, 4 Hz, and 60 Hz). Mechanical withdrawal thresholds of the paw were measured before and after induction of nerve injury, and after SCS. Physical activity levels were measured after SCS.

RESULTS

Both proglumide and SCS when given independently significantly increased withdrawal thresholds two weeks after nerve injury. However, there was no additional effect of combining proglumide and SCS on mechanical withdrawal thresholds or activity levels in animals with nerve injury.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Proglumide may be a candidate for achieving analgesia for patients with refractory neuropathic pain conditions, but does not enhance analgesia produced by SCS.

Lumbar spinal anesthesia with cervical nociceptive blockade. Critical review of a series of 1,330 procedures

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The manufacture of minimally traumatic needles and synthesis of pharmacological adjuncts with safe and effective action on inhibitory and neuromodulatory synapses distributed along the nociceptive pathways were crucial for a new expansion phase of spinal anesthesia. The objectives of this paper are present our clinical experience with 1330 lumbar spinal anesthesia performed with purposeful nociceptive blockade of the thoracic and cervical spinal nerves corresponding to dermatomes C4 or C3; warn about the method pathophysiological risks, and emphasize preventive standards for the safe application of the technique.

CONTENT

Review of the historical background and anatomical spinal anesthesia with cervical levels of analgesia. Description of the technique used in our institution; population anesthetized; and surgery performed with the described method. Critical exposition of the physiological, pathophysiological, and clinical effects occurred and registered during anesthesia-surgery and postoperative period.

CONCLUSION

Spinal anesthesia with nociceptive blockade to dermatome C4, or C3, is an effective option for surgery on somatic structures distal to the metamer of the third cervical spinal nerve, lasting no more than four or five hours. The method safety depends on the unrestricted respect for the essential rules of proper anesthesia.

Spinal cord stimulation modulates supraspinal centers of the descending antinociceptive system in rats with unilateral spinal nerve injury

BACKGROUND

The descending antinociceptive system (DAS) is thought to play crucial roles in the antinociceptive effect of spinal cord stimulation (SCS), especially through its serotonergic pathway. The nucleus raphe magnus (NRM) in the rostral ventromedial medulla is a major source of serotonin [5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)] to the DAS, but the role of the dorsal raphe nucleus (DRN) in the ventral periaqueductal gray matter is still unclear. Moreover, the influence of the noradrenergic pathway is largely unknown. In this study, we evaluated the involvement of these serotonergic and noradrenergic pathways in SCS-induced antinociception by behavioral analysis of spinal nerve-ligated (SNL) rats. We also investigated immunohistochemical changes in the DRN and locus coeruleus (LC), regarded as the adrenergic center of the DAS, and expression changes of synthetic enzymes of 5-HT [tryptophan hydroxylase (TPH)] and norepinephrine [dopamine β-hydroxylase (DβH)] in the spinal dorsal horn.

RESULTS

Intrathecally administered methysergide, a 5-HT1- and 5-HT2-receptor antagonist, and idazoxan, an α2-adrenergic receptor antagonist, equally abolished the antinociceptive effect of SCS. The numbers of TPH-positive serotonergic and phosphorylated cyclic AMP response element binding protein (pCREB)-positive neurons and percentage of pCREB-positive serotonergic neurons in the DRN significantly increased after 3-h SCS. Further, the ipsilateral-to-contralateral immunoreactivity ratio of DβH increased in the LC of SNL rats and reached the level seen in naïve rats, even though the number of pCREB-positive neurons in the LC was unchanged by SNL and SCS. Moreover, 3-h SCS did not increase the expression levels of TPH and DβH in the spinal dorsal horn.

CONCLUSIONS

The serotonergic and noradrenergic pathways of the DAS are involved in the antinociceptive effect of SCS, but activation of the DRN might primarily be responsible for this effect, and the LC may have a smaller contribution. SCS does not potentiate the synthetic enzymes of 5HT and norepinephrine in the neuropathic spinal cord.

A continuous spinal cord stimulation model attenuates pain-related behavior in vivo following induction of a peripheral nerve injury

OBJECTIVES

Models that simulate clinical conditions are needed to gain an understanding of the mechanism involved during spinal cord stimulation (SCS) treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. An animal model has been developed for continuous SCS in which animals that have been injured to develop neuropathic pain behavior were allowed to carry on with regular daily activities while being stimulated for 72 hours.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sprague-Dawley rats were randomized into each of six different groups (N = 10-13). Three groups included animals in which the spared nerve injury (SNI) was induced. Animals in two of these groups were implanted with a four-contact electrode in the epidural space. Animals in one of these groups received stimulation for 72 hours continuously. Three corresponding sham groups (no SNI) were included. Mechanical and cold-thermal allodynia were evaluated using von Frey filaments and acetone drops, respectively. Mean withdrawal thresholds were compared. Statistical significance was established using one-way ANOVAs followed by Holm-Sidak post hoc analysis.

RESULTS

Continuous SCS attenuates mechanical allodynia in animals with neuropathic pain behavior. Mechanical withdrawal threshold increases significantly in SNI animals after 24 and 72 hours stimulation vs. SNI no stimulation (p = 0.007 and p < 0.001, respectively). SCS for 24 and 72 hours provides significant increase in mechanical withdrawal thresholds relative to values before stimulation (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Stimulation did not provide recovery to baseline values. SCS did not seem to attenuate cold-thermal allodynia.

CONCLUSION

A continuous SCS model has been developed. Animals with neuropathic pain behavior that were continuously stimulated showed significant increase in withdrawal thresholds proportional to stimulation time.

[Lumbar spinal anesthesia with cervical nociceptive blockade. Critical review of a series of 1,330 procedures]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The manufacture of minimally traumatic needles and synthesis of pharmacological adjuncts with safe and effective action on inhibitory and neuromodulatory synapses distributed along the nociceptive pathways were crucial for a new expansion phase of spinal anesthesia. The objectives of this paper are present our clinical experience with 1,330 lumbar spinal anesthesia performed with purposeful nociceptive blockade of the thoracic and cervical spinal nerves corresponding to dermatomes C4 or C3; warn about the method pathophysiological risks, and emphasize preventive standards for the safe application of the technique.

CONTENT

Review of the historical background and anatomical spinal anesthesia with cervical levels of analgesia. Description of the technique used in our institution; population anesthetized; and surgery performed with the described method. Critical exposition of the physiological, pathophysiological, and clinical effects occurred and registered during anesthesia-surgery and postoperative period.

CONCLUSION

Spinal anesthesia with nociceptive blockade to dermatome C4, or C3, is an effective option for surgery on somatic structures distal to the metamer of the third cervical spinal nerve, lasting no more than four or five hours. The method safety depends on the unrestricted respect for the essential rules of proper anesthesia.

Spinal cord stimulation for complex regional pain syndrome type 1 with dystonia: a case report and discussion of the literature

Background: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome type 1 (CRPS-1) is a debilitating chronic pain disorder, the physiopathology of which can lead to dystonia associated with changes in the autonomic, central and peripheral nervous system. An interdisciplinary approach (pharmacological, interventional and psychological therapies in conjunction with a rehabilitation pathway) is central to progress towards pain reduction and restoration of function.Aim: This case report aims to stimulate reflection and development of mechanism-based therapeutic strategies concerning CRPS associated with dystonia.Case description: A 31 year old female CRPS-1 patient presented with dystonia of the right foot following ligamentoplasty for chronic ankle instability. She did not have a satisfactory response to the usual therapies. Multiple anesthetic blocks (popliteal, epidural and intrathecal) were not associated with significant anesthesia and analgesia. Mobilization of the foot by a physiotherapist was not possible. A multidisciplinary approach with psychological support, physiotherapy and spinal cord stimulation (SCS) brought pain relief, rehabilitation and improvement in the quality of life.Conclusion: The present case report demonstrates the occurrence of multilevel (peripheral and central) pathological modifications in the nervous system of a CRPS-1 patient with dystonia. This conclusion is based on the patient’s pain being resistant to anesthetic blocks at different levels and the favourable, at least initially, response to SCS. The importance of the bio-psycho-social model is also suggested, permitting behavioural change.

Neural mechanisms of spinal cord stimulation

Neuromodulation, specifically spinal cord stimulation (SCS), relieves pain and improves organ function. This chapter discusses the limited information presently available about the underlying mechanisms that explain the beneficial effects of treating patients with SCS. Where applicable, information is presented about translational research that illustrates the importance of collaboration between clinicians, basic scientists, and engineers. This chapter presents the infant stage of studies that attempt to explain the mechanisms which come into play for treating neuropathic pain, ischemic pain in peripheral vascular disease, and diseases of the visceral organs, specifically the gastrointestinal tract and the heart. The basic science studies will demonstrate how SCS acts on various pain syndromes and diseases via multiple pathways in the central nervous system as well as in somatic structures and visceral organs.

Intrathecal clonidine and baclofen enhance the pain-relieving effect of spinal cord stimulation: a comparative placebo-controlled, randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-established treatment for neuropathic pain; nevertheless, 40% of patients fail to obtain satisfactory pain relief and in many patients, the effect tends to diminish with time. Based on animal experiments, intrathecal baclofen was previously introduced clinically to enhance suboptimal SCS effects. Later animal experiments demonstrated similar data for clonidine. The aim of this study was to elucidate whether intrathecal clonidine or baclofen enhances the effect of SCS in neuropathic pain patients in whom the pain relieving-effect of SCS is inadequate.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted with 10 patients experiencing neuropathic pain with insufficient pain relief with SCS alone. Clonidine, baclofen, and saline (control) were intrathecally administered by bolus injections in combination with SCS.

RESULTS

Seven of 10 patients reported significant pain reduction when SCS was combined with active drugs. The mean visual analog scale ratings were reduced by more than 50% with either drug combined with SCS. Four patients previously treated with SCS alone later underwent implantation of a pump for long-term administration of clonidine or baclofen. In the 2 patients with clonidine pumps with a mean follow-up of 15 months, the combined therapy produced pain reduction of 55% and 45%, respectively. The corresponding effect with baclofen was 32% and 82%, respectively, at 7 months follow-up.

CONCLUSION

A trial with clonidine and baclofen combined with SCS may be warranted in patients who do not obtain satisfactory pain relief with SCS alone or experienced a decreasing therapeutic effect.

The rostroventromedial medulla is engaged in the effects of spinal cord stimulation in a rodent model of neuropathic pain

The neurobiological mechanisms underlying the suppression of neuropathic pain by spinal cord stimulation (SCS) are still incompletely known. The present study aims at exploring whether the descending pain control system in the rostroventromedial medulla (RVM) exerts a role in the attenuation of neuropathic pain by SCS. Experiments were performed in the rat spared nerve injury (SNI) pain model. The effects of SCS on neuronal activity of pronociceptive ON-like, antinociceptive OFF-like, and neutral cells, including 5-HT-like cells, in the RVM were analyzed in SCS responding and SCS non-responding SNI animals as well as in naïve controls. Decreased spontaneous activities in OFF-like cells and increased spontaneous activities in ON-like cells were observed in SNI animals, whereas the spontaneous activities of 5-HT-like and neutral cells were unchanged. SCS produced a prominent increase in the discharge of OFF- and 5-HT-like cells in SCS responding, but not in non-responding SNI animals or controls. Discharge rates of ON-like and neutral cell were not affected by SCS. In awake SNI animals, microinjection of a GABAA receptor agonist, muscimol, into the RVM significantly attenuated the antihypersensitivity effect induced by SCS while a non-selective opioid receptor antagonist, naltrexone, was ineffective. It is concluded that SCS may shift the reciprocal inhibitory and facilitatory pain modulation balance controlled by the RVM in favor of inhibition. This increase in the descending antinociceptive effect operates in concert with segmental spinal mechanisms in producing pain relief.

Spinal cord stimulation: neurophysiological and neurochemical mechanisms of action

Chronic neuropathic pain can significantly reduce quality of life and place an economic burden on individuals and society. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an alternative approach to the treatment of neuropathic pain when standard pharmacological agents have failed. However, an improved understanding of the mechanisms by which SCS inhibits pain is needed to enhance its clinical utility. This review summarizes important findings from recent studies of SCS in animal models of neuropathic pain, highlights current understanding of the spinal neurophysiological and neurochemical mechanisms by which SCS produces an analgesic effect, and discusses the potential clinical applicability of these findings and future directions for research.

Experimental spinal cord stimulation and neuropathic pain: mechanism of action, technical aspects, and effectiveness

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a valuable treatment for chronic intractable neuropathic pain. Although SCS has gone through a technological revolution over the last four decades, the neurophysiologic and biochemical mechanisms of action have only been partly elucidated. Animal experimental work has provided some evidence for spinal as well as supraspinal mechanisms of neuropathic pain relief of SCS. A SCS computer model of the electrical properties of the human spinal cord revealed many basic neurophysiologic principles that were clinically validated later on. The main question in clinical SCS is how to further improve the effectiveness of SCS as there is still a significant failure rate of 30%. In this context, experimental studies are needed to elucidate which target pain neuron(s) are involved, as well as with what exact electrical stimulation this target neuron can be influenced to produce an optimal supapression of neuropathic pain. This article reviews the basic clinical and experimental technical aspects in relation to the effectiveness of SCS in view of recent understanding of the dorsal horn pain circuit involved. These data may then result in experiments needed for an improved understanding of the mechanisms underlying SCS and consequently lead to improvement and increased effectiveness of SCS in neuropathic pain as a clinical therapy.

Randomized control trial of topical clonidine for treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy

A length-dependent neuropathy with pain in the feet is a common complication of diabetes (painful diabetic neuropathy). It was hypothesized that pain may arise from sensitized-hyperactive cutaneous nociceptors, and that this abnormal signaling may be reduced by topical administration of the α(2)-adrenergic agonist, clonidine, to the painful area. This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter trial. Nociceptor function was measured by determining the painfulness of 0.1% topical capsaicin applied to the pretibial area of each subject for 30minutes during screening. Subjects were then randomized to receive 0.1% topical clonidine gel (n=89) or placebo gel (n=90) applied 3 times a day to their feet for 12weeks. The difference in foot pain at week 12 in relation to baseline, rated on a 0-10 numerical pain rating scale (NPRS), was compared between groups. Baseline NPRS was imputed for missing data for subjects who terminated the study early. The subjects treated with clonidine showed a trend toward decreased foot pain compared to the placebo-treated group (the primary endpoint; P=0.07). In subjects who felt any level of pain to capsaicin, clonidine was superior to placebo (P<0.05). In subjects with a capsaicin pain rating ⩾2 (0-10, NPRS), the mean decrease in foot pain was 2.6 for active compared to 1.4 for placebo (P=0.01). Topical clonidine gel significantly reduces the level of foot pain in painful diabetic neuropathy subjects with functional (and possibly sensitized) nociceptors in the affected skin as revealed by testing with topical capsaicin. Screening for cutaneous nociceptor function may help distinguish candidates for topical therapy for neuropathic pain.

Baclofen-enhanced spinal cord stimulation and intrathecal baclofen alone for neuropathic pain: Long-term outcome of a pilot study

In a previously published pilot study, we addressed the possibility to increase the effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) applied for neuropathic pain by using adjunct pharmacological therapy. This combined treatment approach was a direct spin-off from animal experiments aiming at the exploration of transmitter and receptor mechanisms involved in the pain relieving effect of SCS. Out of 48 patients with neuropathic pain of peripheral origin responding poorly to SCS, seven received pumps for intrathecal baclofen (GABA-B receptor agonist) delivery together with SCS, and four had pumps alone. In order to assess the long-term effect a follow-up has been performed, with an average, total treatment time of 67 months. At the follow-up the remaining nine patients still enjoy about the same pain relief as initially, but with a mean, further dose increase of about 30%. This study demonstrates that a deficient SCS effect in neuropathic pain may be considerably improved by intrathecal baclofen administration, and that this enhanced effect persists for a long-time. On-going and future animal studies may provide new and even more efficient pharmaceutical candidates for such combined therapy.

Pharmacologically enhanced spinal cord stimulation for pain: an evolving strategy

SUMMARY Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) as treatment for chronic neuropathic pain has developed into an important therapeutic strategy. However, several studies indicate that as many as 30–50% of patients do not respond sufficiently to technically well-functioning SCS. Experimental studies have revealed some of the possible neuronal systems and transmitters involved in SCS. Based on such data, a new strategy has been suggested: “pharmacologically enhanced spinal cord stimulation” using receptor active drugs to improve the therapeutic effect. The present article reviews the animal data on which clinical trials have been based and summarizes the clinical experience up to the present. Relevant data exist for intrathecal baclofen as an adjuvant to SCS, but trials with clonidine and adenosine have also been performed. Available basic studies indicate that other substances might also prove useful in future trials. The present data thus only announce the beginning of ‘drug-enhanced spinal stimulation’.

The interaction between antidepressant drugs and the pain-relieving effect of spinal cord stimulation in a rat model of neuropathy

BACKGROUND

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has proven to be a valuable treatment in neuropathic pain. On the basis of our previous studies on the mode of action of SCS, intrathecal administration of subeffective doses of certain drugs has been shown to enhance the pain-relieving effect in patients with SCS. Antidepressants have a well-established beneficial effect in neuropathic pain. We performed the present study to examine potential synergistic or antagonistic effects on SCS of antidepressants: amitriptyline (tricyclic antidepressant), fluoxetine (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor), and milnacipran (selective serotonin/noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor).

METHODS

In rats, the effect of SCS on mechanical hypersensitivity after peripheral nerve injury was assessed in awake, freely moving animals. Antidepressants were administered intrathecally.

RESULTS

When combining SCS with subeffective doses of amitriptyline or milnacipran, the suppressive effect of SCS on the mechanical hypersensitivity was enhanced in comparison with that obtained with SCS alone. There was no detectable effect of fluoxetine. No signs of an antagonistic effect of the drugs on the SCS effect were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest a possible clinical application with a combination of SCS and a tricyclic antidepressant or selective serotonin/noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor drug in cases in which SCS per se has proven inefficient.

Spinal 5-HT receptors that contribute to the pain-relieving effects of spinal cord stimulation in a rat model of neuropathy

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is extensively employed in the management of neuropathic pain, but the underlying mechanisms are only partially understood. Recently, we demonstrated that the pain-relieving effect of SCS appears to involve the spinal serotonin system, and the present study aimed at identifying the types of the spinal serotonin receptors involved. Experiments were performed on rats with neuropathy produced by partial ligation of the sciatic nerve. Tactile sensitivity was assessed using von Frey filaments, and cold and heat sensitivity with cold spray and radiant heat, respectively. Selective 5-HT receptor antagonists, methiothepin (5-HT(1,6,7)), ketanserin tartrate (5-HT(2A)), TICM (5-HT(3)), SDZ-205,557 (5-HT(4)), as well as receptor agonists, α-m-5-HT (5-HT(2)), m-CPBG (5-HT(3)) in per se ineffective doses, or vehicle, were administrated intrathecally 5 minutes prior to the application of SCS. Ketanserin and SDZ-205,557 significantly attenuated the suppressive effect of SCS on tactile hypersensitivity, while methiothepin and TICM were ineffective. The suppressive effect on cold hypersensitivity of SCS was counteracted by ketanserin only. None of the 5-HT receptor antagonists attenuated the suppressive effect on heat hyperalgesia of SCS. Subeffective doses of α-m-5-HT and m-CPBG enhanced the suppressive effect of SCS on tactile hypersensitivity. The enhancing effect of m-CPBG was abolished by a γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA)(A) or GABA(B) antagonist intrathecally. These results suggest that the activation of 5-HT(2A), 5-HT(3), and 5-HT(4) receptors plays an important role in SCS-induced relief of neuropathic pain. The activation of 5-HT(3) receptors appears to operate via spinal GABAergic interneurons.

What does the mechanism of spinal cord stimulation tell us about complex regional pain syndrome?

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can have dramatic effects on painful, vascular, and motor symptoms of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), but its precise mechanism of action is unclear. Better understanding of the physiologic effects of SCS may improve understanding not only of this treatment modality but also of CRPS pathophysiology. Effects of SCS on pain perception are likely to occur through activation of inhibitory GABA-ergic and cholinergic spinal interneurons. Increased release of both neurotransmitters has been demonstrated following SCS in animal models of neuropathic pain, with accompanying reductions in pain behaviors. Effects of SCS on vascular symptoms of CRPS are thought to occur through two main mechanisms: antidromic activation of spinal afferent neurons and inhibition of sympathetic efferents. Cutaneous vasodilation following SCS in animal models has been shown to involve antidromic release of calcitonin gene-related peptide and possibly nitric oxide, from small-diameter sensory neurons expressing the transient receptor potential V1 (TRPV1) receptor. The involvement of sympathetic efferents in the effects of SCS has not been studied in animal models of neuropathic pain, but has been demonstrated in models of angina pectoris. In conclusion, SCS is of clinical benefit in CRPS, and although its mechanism of action merits further elucidation, what little we do know is informative and can partially explain some of the pathophysiology of CRPS.

Behavioral models of pain states evoked by physical injury to the peripheral nerve

Physical injury or compression of the root, dorsal root ganglion, or peripheral sensory axon leads to well-defined changes in biology and function. Behaviorally, humans report ongoing painful dysesthesias and aberrations in function, such that an otherwise innocuous stimulus will yield a pain report. These behavioral reports are believed to reflect the underlying changes in nerve function after injury, wherein increased spontaneous activity arises from the neuroma and dorsal root ganglion and spinal changes increase the response of spinal projection neurons. These pain states are distinct from those associated with tissue injury and pose particular problems in management. To provide for developing an understanding of the underlying mechanisms of these pain states and to promote development of therapeutic agents, preclinical models involving section, compression, and constriction of the peripheral nerve or compression of the dorsal root ganglion have been developed. These models give rise to behaviors, which parallel those observed in the human after nerve injury. The present review considers these models and their application.

Cholinergic mechanisms involved in the pain relieving effect of spinal cord stimulation in a model of neuropathy

The mechanisms underlying the pain relieving effect of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) on neuropathic pain remain unclear. We have previously demonstrated that suppression of tactile hypersensitivity produced by SCS may be potentiated by i.t. clonidine in a rat model of mononeuropathy. Since the analgesic effect of this drug is mediated mainly via cholinergic mechanisms, a study exploring the possible involvement of the spinal cholinergic system in SCS was undertaken. The effect of SCS was assessed with von Frey filaments in rats displaying tactile hypersensitivity after partial ligation of the sciatic nerve and both SCS-responding and non-responding as well as normal rats were subjected to microdialysis in the dorsal horn. Acetylcholine (ACh) was analyzed with HPLC before, during and after SCS. SCS produced significantly increased release of ACh in the dorsal horn in rats responding to SCS whereas the release was unaffected in the non-responding animals. Furthermore, the basal release of ACh was significantly lower in nerve lesioned than in normal rats. In another group of rats it was found that the response to SCS was completely eliminated by i.t. atropine and a muscarinic M(4) receptor antagonist while a partial attenuation was produced by M(1) and M(2) antagonists. Blocking of nicotinic receptors did not influence the SCS effect. In conclusion, the attenuating effect of SCS on pain related behavior is associated with the activation of the cholinergic system in the dorsal horn and mediated via muscarinic receptors, particularly M(4,) while nicotinic receptors appear not to be involved.

Muscarinic receptor activation potentiates the effect of spinal cord stimulation on pain-related behavior in rats with mononeuropathy

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has proven to be a valuable treatment in neuropathic pain. Our previous animal experiments performed on rat models of SCS and ensuing clinical trials have demonstrated that intrathecal (i.t.) administration of subeffective doses of certain drugs may enhance the pain relieving effect of SCS in cases with unsatisfactory SCS outcome. Recently, an augmented release of spinal acetylcholine acting on muscarinic receptors has been shown to be one of the mechanisms involved in SCS. The present study was performed to examine whether cold hypersensitivity and heat hyperalgesia in rats with partial sciatic nerve injuries can be attenuated by SCS in the same way as tactile hypersensitivity and to explore a possibly synergistic effect of SCS and a muscarinic receptor agonist, oxotremorine. Rats with signs of neuropathy were subjected to SCS applied in awake, freely moving condition. Oxotremorine was administered intrathecally. Tactile, cold and heat sensitivities were assessed by using von Frey filaments, cold spray and focused radiant heat, respectively. Oxotremorine i.t. dose-dependently suppressed the tactile hypersensitivity. SCS markedly increased withdrawal thresholds (WTs), withdrawal latencies and cold scores. When combining SCS with a subeffective dose of oxotremorine i.t., the suppressive effect of SCS on the pain-related symptoms was dramatically enhanced in rats failing to obtain a satisfactory effect with SCS alone. In conclusion, the combination of SCS and a drug with selective muscarinic receptor agonistic properties could be an optional therapy, when SCS per se has proven inefficient.

Drug-enhanced spinal stimulation for pain: a new strategy

Neuropathic pain is notoriously difficult to manage and only a few classes of drugs may provide adequate benefits. Thus, in many cases spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is considered; however, in this group of patients, between 30-50% of the cases offered a percutaneous SCS trial may fail to obtain a satisfactory effect. Additionally, a certain number of patients with a good initial effect, report that after a period the benefits are reduced necessitating additional peroral drug therapy. Based on animal studies of transmitters and receptors involved in the effects of SCS in neuropathic pain, the GABA-B receptor seems to play a pivotal role for the effect and, moreover, the agonist baclofen injected intrathecally in rats potentiated the SCS effect in animals not responsive to SCS per se. Based on these and further studies, 48 patients with neuropathic pain and inadequate response to SCS were given intrathecal (i.t.) baclofen (ITB) in bolus doses as an adjuvant. In this group 7 patients enjoyed such a good effect that they were implanted with both SCS and drug delivery systems for ITB. Four additional cases received baclofen pumps alone. Some other patients were given intrathecal (i.t.) adenosine in combination with SCS and initially preferred this to baclofen. The chronic use of this drug in a pump however proved to be technically problematic and all the adenosine cases were eventually terminated. At follow-ups, in average 32 and 67 months after start of SCS + baclofen therapy, more than 50% still enjoy a very good effect. The daily dose of baclofen needed to maintain the effects was approximately doubled during the observation period. There were few and mild side-effects. However, in a group of three patients with peroral baclofen therapy and SCS, complaints of side-effects were common and this therapy was terminated. Informal reports from collegues support the negative experience with additional peroral baclofen. In conclusion, in patients with neuropathic pain demonstrating inadequate response to SCS (small VAS reduction; short duration) a trial of intrathecal baclofen in combination with SCS may be warranted.

Effect of spinal cord stimulation in an animal model of neuropathic pain relates to degree of tactile “allodynia”

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an established treatment for chronic neuropathic pain. However, in recent studies conflicting results regarding the effect of SCS were noted in a selected group of patients suffering from complex regional pain syndrome and mechanical allodynia. In the present study we investigated the pain relieving effect of SCS in a rat experimental model of neuropathic pain as related to the severity of mechanical allodynia. Adult male rats (n=45) were submitted to a unilateral sciatic nerve ligation. The level of allodynia was tested using the withdrawal response to tactile stimuli with the von Frey test. A portion of these rats developed marked tactile hypersensitivity in the nerve-lesioned paw (von Frey test), similar to "tactile allodynia" observed after nerve injury in humans. Prior to SCS treatment the rats were subdivided into three groups based on the level of allodynia: mild, moderate and severe. All allodynic rats were treated with SCS (n=27) for 30 min (f=50 Hz; pulse width 0.2 ms and stimulation at 2/3 of motor threshold) at 16 days post-injury. Our data demonstrate a differential effect of SCS related to the severity of the mechanical allodynia. SCS leads to a faster and better pain relief in mildly allodynic rats as compared with the more severely allodynic rats. Thus, we suggest that the selection and subdivision of patient groups similar to those defined in our experimental setting (mild, moderate and severe allodynic) may provide better pre-treatment prediction of possible therapeutic benefits of SCS.

Mode of action of spinal cord stimulation in neuropathic pain

Spinal cord stimulation emerged as a spin-off from the classical gate-control theory, which, however, does not suffice to explain its clinical effects. Whether or not nociceptive forms of pain may be attenuated remains a controversial issue. Previous experimental studies aiming at elucidating the underlying mechanisms were performed on intact, anesthetized animals and were therefore of limited clinical relevance. Not until recent years have some data on the mode of action accumulated providing evidence that gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) ergic as well as adenosine-related mechanisms are involved in the pain amelioration. It appears that the effects are exerted mostly via segmental spinal levels, but recent evidence suggests that a supraspinal loop may also be of importance; this issue remains to be resolved. It should be emphasized that most experimental data pertaining to the mode of action are derived from so-called animal models of neuropathic pain. However, caution must be exercised in the translation of such data from bench to bedside, because some behavioral signs interpreted as "pain" in such models may be misleading. We still need animal studies to generate basic data but these findings should also be confirmed in humans.