Lidocaine 5% medicated plaster: a review of its use in postherpetic neuralgia

Lidocaine patch as noninvasive alternative treatment option in children with anterior cutaneous nerve entrapment syndrome: A retrospective case series

BACKGROUND

Chronic abdominal pain in children is occasionally caused by anterior cutaneous nerve entrapment syndrome (ACNES). Diagnosing and treating this typical peripheral abdominal wall neuropathy is challenging. Management usually starts with minimally invasive tender point injections. Nevertheless, these injections can be burdensome and might even be refused by children or their parents. However, a surgical neurectomy is far more invasive. Treatment with a Lidocaine 5% medicated patch is successfully used in a variety of peripheral neuropathies.

AIMS

This single center retrospective case series aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of lidocaine patches in children with ACNES.

METHODS

Children aged under 18 diagnosed with ACNES who were treated with a 10 day lidocaine patch treatment between December 2021 and December 2022 were studied. Patient record files were used to collect treatment outcomes including pain reduction based on NRS and complications.

RESULTS

Twelve of sixteen children (mean age 13 years; F:M ratio 3:1) diagnosed with ACNES started the lidocaine patch treatment. Two patients achieved a pain free status and remained pain free during a 4 and 7 months follow-up. A third child reported a lasting pain reduction, but discontinued treatment due to a temporary local skin rash. Five additional patients reported pain reduction only during application of the patch. The remaining four children experienced no pain relief. No adverse effects were reported.

CONCLUSION

Lidocaine patches provides pain relief in a substantial portion of children with ACNES.

Lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster for postherpetic neuralgia: real-world data from the German Pain e-Registry

Aim: To provide real-world evidence for the effectiveness and tolerability of lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster (LMP) compared with oral systemic first-line medications (OSM) in postherpetic neuralgia treatment. Patients & methods: Retrospective cohort study in patients refractory to at least one recommended OSM (single drug or a combination of drugs) using anonymized routine medical care data from the German Pain e-Registry. A matched pair approach using propensity score matching was employed. Results: A total of 1711 data sets of postherpetic neuralgia patients were identified per treatment group. The majority (>60%) had experienced pain for more than a year and reported a high burden of pain and reduced quality of life. Six months of LMP treatment provided significantly greater pain reductions, improvements in pain-related impairments and quality of life than OSM treatment (p < 0.001 for all parameters). Drug-related adverse events and treatment discontinuation due to drug-related adverse events also occurred less frequently under LMP treatment (p < 0.001). Conclusion: These real-world data confirm the effectiveness and good tolerability of LMP under routine medical care. The treatment was significantly more effective when compared with first-line oral systemic medications.

Expert consensus of Chinese Association for the Study of Pain on the non-opioid analgesics for chronic musculoskeletal pain

Chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) is a common occurrence in clinical practice and there are a variety of options for the treatment of it. However, the pharmacological therapy is still considered to be a primary treatment. The recent years have witnessed the emergence of opioid crisis, yet there are no relevant guidelines on how to treat CMP with non-opioid analgesics properly. The Chinese Medical Association for the Study of Pain convened a panel meeting to develop clinical practice consensus for the treatment of CMP with non-opioid analgesics. The purpose of this consensus is to present the application of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, muscle relaxants, ion channel drugs and topical drugs in CMP.

Capsaicin 8% Dermal Patch: A Review in Peripheral Neuropathic Pain

The adhesive capsaicin dermal patch (Qutenza^®) delivers a high concentration (8% w/w) of synthetic capsaicin, a highly selective agonist of transient receptor potential vanilloid-1 (TRPV-1), directly to the site of pain. The capsaicin 8% dermal patch is indicated in the EU for the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) in adults, either alone or in combination with other medicinal products for pain. In patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy, a single 30-min application of the capsaicin 8% dermal patch provided 12 weeks of pain relief and improved sleep quality compared with placebo. Repeat treatment with the capsaicin 8% dermal patch plus standard of care over 52 weeks provided sustained pain relief, with no negative neurological effects compared with standard of care alone. The capsaicin 8% dermal patch was non-inferior to oral pregabalin in relieving pain in patients with non-diabetic PNP, with a faster onset of action and greater treatment satisfaction. A single 60-min application of the capsaicin 8% dermal patch provided rapid and sustained pain relief in patients with postherpetic neuralgia. Results in patients with HIV-associated neuropathy were equivocal, with a significant improvement in pain intensity observed in one trial, but not in the other. The capsaicin 8% dermal patch was generally well tolerated; transient application-site reactions were the most common adverse events. In conclusion, the capsaicin 8% dermal patch is a useful addition to the treatment options currently available for patients with PNP.

Approach to the Patient with Chronic Groin Pain

Chronic postoperative inguinal pain has become a primary outcome parameter after elective inguinal hernia repair with significant consequences affecting patient productivity, employment, and quality of life. A systematic and thorough preoperative evaluation is important to identify the etiologies and types of pain. Owing to the complex nature of chronic pain, a multimodal and multidisciplinary treatment approach is recommended. Patients with chronic pain refractory to conservative measures may be considered for surgical intervention. Triple neurectomy remains the most definitive and accepted remedial operation performed and provides effective relief in the majority of patients.

Capsaicin patch for persistent postoperative pain after thoracoscopic surgery, report of two cases

Effective postoperative pain control after thoracic surgery is a significant clinical issue because it reduces pulmonary complications and accelerates the pace of recovery. Persistent postoperative pain syndrome is a recognized and frequent complication after thoracoscopic surgery. The capsaicin 8% patch contains a high concentration of synthetic capsaicin approved for treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain in adults. Little clinical data exist on the use of capsaicin patch in thoracic persistent postoperative pain syndrome. This report included two patients who were evaluated after receiving capsaicin for thoracic surgery. Satisfactory pain relief was achieved in both cases without side effects.

Looking back to move forward: a twenty-year audit of herpes zoster in Asia-Pacific

Background

Herpes zoster (HZ) is a prevalent viral disease that inflicts substantial morbidity and associated healthcare and socioeconomic burdens. Current treatments are not fully effective, especially among the most vulnerable patients. Although widely recommended, vaccination against HZ is not routine; barriers in Asia-Pacific include long-standing neglect of adult immunisation and sparse local data. To address knowledge gaps, raise awareness, and disseminate best practice, we reviewed recent data and guidelines on HZ from the Asia-Pacific region.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Scopus, and World Health Organization databases for articles about HZ published from 1994 to 2014 by authors from Australia, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. We selected articles about epidemiology, burden, complications, comorbidities, management, prevention, and recommendations/guidelines. Internet searches retrieved additional HZ immunisation guidelines.

Results

From 4007 retrieved articles, we screened-out 1501 duplicates and excluded 1264 extraneous articles, leaving 1242 unique articles. We found guidelines on adult immunisation from Australia, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand.

HZ epidemiology in Asia-Pacific is similar to elsewhere; incidence rises with age and peaks at around 70 years – lifetime risk is approximately one-third. Average incidence of 3–10/1000 person-years is rising at around 5% per year. The principal risk factors are immunosenescence and immunosuppression. HZ almost always causes pain, and post-herpetic neuralgia is its most common complication. Half or more of hospitalised HZ patients have post-herpetic neuralgia, secondary infections, or inflammatory sequelae that are occasionally fatal. These disease burdens severely diminish patients’ quality of life and incur heavy healthcare utilisation.

Conclusions

Several countries have abundant data on HZ, but others, especially in South-East Asia, very few. However, Asia-Pacific countries generally lack data on HZ vaccine safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness. Physicians treating HZ and its complications in Asia-Pacific face familiar challenges but, with a vast aged population, Asia bears a unique and growing burden of disease. Given the strong rationale for prevention, most adult immunisation guidelines include HZ vaccine, yet it remains underused. We urge all stakeholders to give higher priority to adult immunisation in general and HZ in particular.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12879-017-2198-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The 5% Lidocaine-Medicated Plaster: Its Inclusion in International Treatment Guidelines for Treating Localized Neuropathic Pain, and Clinical Evidence Supporting its Use

When peripheral neuropathic pain affects a specific, clearly demarcated area of the body, it may be described as localized neuropathic pain (LNP). Examples include postherpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy, as well as post-surgical and post-traumatic pain. These conditions may respond to topical treatment, i.e., pharmaceutical agents acting locally on the peripheral nervous system, and the topical route offers advantages over systemic administration. Notably, only a small fraction of the dose reaches the systemic circulation, thereby reducing the risk of systemic adverse effects, drug–drug interactions and overdose. From the patient’s perspective, the analgesic agent is easily applied to the most painful area(s). The 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster has been used for several years to treat LNP and is registered in approximately 50 countries. Many clinical guidelines recommend this treatment modality as a first-line option for treating LNP, particularly in frail and/or elderly patients and those receiving multiple medications, because the benefit-to-risk ratios are far better than those of systemic analgesics. However, some guidelines make only a weak recommendation for its use. This paper considers the positioning of the 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster in international treatment guidelines and how they may be influenced by the specific criteria used in developing them, such as the methodology employed by randomized, placebo-controlled trials. It then examines the body of evidence supporting use of the plaster in some prevalent LNP conditions. Common themes that emerge from clinical studies are: (1) the excellent tolerability and safety of the plaster, which can increase patients’ adherence to treatment, (2) continued efficacy over long-term treatment, and (3) significant reduction in the size of the painful area. On this basis, it is felt that the 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster should be more strongly recommended for treating LNP, either as one component of a multimodal approach or as monotherapy.

Capsaicin 8 % Patch: A Review in Peripheral Neuropathic Pain

The capsaicin 8 % patch (QUTENZA®) is an adhesive patch containing a high concentration (8 % w/w) of synthetic capsaicin, a selective agonist of transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 channel. It is approved for treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain in adults either alone or in combination with other medicinal products for pain in the EU; it is only approved to treat postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) in the USA. In patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN), a single 30-min application of the capsaicin 8 % patch significantly improved pain relief and sleep quality compared with placebo in a 12-week double-blind trial. In a 52-week, randomized trial, up to seven consecutive 30-min treatments with the capsaicin 8 % patch (≤7 treatments each at least 8 weeks apart) plus standard of care therapy was associated with sustained pain relief and no negative neurological safety consequences compared with standard of care. In two randomized trials, a single 60-min application of the capsaicin 8 % patch reduced pain scores significantly more than a low-concentration (0.04 %) capsaicin control patch in patients with PHN. Capsaicin 8 % patch treatment was noninferior to pregabalin (optimized dosage) in a randomized trial in patients with nondiabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. Results in two trials in patients with HIV-AN were equivocal, with a significant improvement in pain intensity observed in one trial, but not in the other. The capsaicin 8 % patch was associated with expected, transient, capsaicin-related application-site adverse events such as erythema and pain.

The topical 5% lidocaine medicated plaster in localized neuropathic pain: a reappraisal of the clinical evidence

Topical 5% lidocaine medicated plasters represent a well-established first-line option for the treatment of peripheral localized neuropathic pain (LNP). This review provides an updated overview of the clinical evidence (randomized, controlled, and open-label clinical studies, real-life daily clinical practice, and case series). The 5% lidocaine medicated plaster effectively provides pain relief in postherpetic neuralgia, and data from a large open-label controlled study indicate that the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster is as effective as systemic pregabalin in postherpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic polyneuropathy but with an improved tolerability profile. Additionally, improved analgesia and fewer side effects were experienced by patients treated synchronously with the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster, further demonstrating the value of multimodal analgesia in LNP. The 5% lidocaine medicated plaster provides continued benefit after long-term (≤7 years) use and is also effective in various other LNP conditions. Minor application-site reactions are the most common adverse events associated with the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster; there is minimal risk of systemic adverse events and drug–drug interactions. Although further well-controlled studies are warranted, the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster is efficacious and safe in LNP and may have particular clinical benefit in elderly and/or medically compromised patients because of the low incidence of adverse events.

A pharmacological treatment algorithm for localized neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain is caused by a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system and is difficult to manage, often proving refractory to existing treatments. In more than half of cases, it is localized and affects a specific, clearly circumscribed area of the body (localized neuropathic pain, or LNP). A recently developed screening tool enables patients with probable neuropathic pain/LNP to be identified quickly and easily. In view of the conflicting current treatment recommendations, an advisory board of pain specialists met in June 2015 to develop a complementary treatment guidance algorithm, for use in the primary care setting and by non-pain specialists. The starting point of the algorithm is a diagnosis of LNP and there was consensus that first-line treatment should be a topical analgesic agent, because the benefit/risk ratios are far better than for systemic agents. Topical application offers site-specific delivery, a lower total systemic dose and avoidance of first-pass metabolism, reducing the risk of adverse events and drug/drug interactions. The 5% lidocaine medicated plaster has most evidence supporting its use in LNP, producing effective analgesia and reducing the associated area of allodynia, but other topical agents include capsaicin, clonidine and botulinum toxin type A. Treatment should be commenced with the topical agent of choice, and the patient re-assessed after an appropriate period. Where the response is good the topical agent is continued, with a re-evaluation after 3-6 months. A systemic agent (e.g. gabapentin, pregabalin, duloxetine, venlafaxine) is added if there is only a partial response, or substituted if there is no response, and the patient re-assessed after a month. If there is poor or no response to the systemic agent the patient should be switched to an alternative one and, if this also proves ineffective, referred to a pain specialist.

Topical treatment in pain medicine: from ancient remedies to modern usage

Over several millennia, substances have been applied to the skin for treatment of pain. Some ingredients are in current use; others have been discontinued. Mechanisms of action include interactions with nociceptive neural networks and inflammatory processes. Substances must penetrate the stratum corneum barrier and vehicles that enhance penetration have been developed. Topical drugs with links to the past include menthol, capsaicin, some opioids, local anesthetic agents and NSAIDs. Mandragora is also described as an example of a herbal remedy that has been discontinued due to its toxicity. The future for topical drugs is promising, with the advent of new drugs tailored for specific pain mechanisms and the development of both penetration enhancers and sterile preparation methods.

Topical analgesics for neuropathic pain in the elderly: current and future prospects

Neuropathic pain (NeP) is a significant medical and socioeconomic burden with limited therapeutic options. Elderly patients exhibit a higher incidence of several NeP conditions and pose a particular challenge due to age-related pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic issues, comorbid conditions, and polypharmacy, as well as frailty and cognitive decline. Topical analgesics are of interest because of their comparable efficacy to oral agents, good tolerability and safety, and potential to be add-on therapies to oral treatments. In recent years, two topical formulations for NeP have been approved (5% lidocaine medicated plaster, 8% capsaicin patch) but are not available in all countries. There are controlled trials and a growing body of open-label reports on their use in clinical care. Some studies provide a post hoc analysis of data in relation to older age (≥65 years), which is useful. The body of evidence relating to topical investigational agents is growing and involves controlled trials as well as individual cases. The largest single body of information is for topical ketamine, administered either alone or combined with other agents (particularly amitriptyline), and some large randomized controlled trials report efficacy. Other large trials involve topical clonidine and further ketamine combinations. Compounding analgesics involves challenges, including uncertain composition (two to five ingredients are used) and concentrations (range 0.5-5%), as well as the heterogeneity of data that support choices. Nevertheless, case reports and acceptable response rates in larger cohorts are intriguing, and this area merits further investigation in controlled settings as well as continued documentation of clinical experiences.

5% lidocaine medicated plasters vs. sympathetic nerve blocks as a part of multimodal treatment strategy for the management of postherpetic neuralgia: a retrospective, consecutive, case-series study

INTRODUCTION

5% lidocaine medicated plasters (5% LMP) have been appointed as a first-line treatment for post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN), while formerly used sympathetic nerve blocks (SNBs) were recently denied their clinical efficacy. The aim of this study was to compare the results of PHN management with the use of SNBs and 5% LMP as a first-line treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study was designed as a retrospective, consecutive, case-series study. Data of 60 consecutive PHN patients with allodynia treated with the use of SNBs and 60 subsequent patients managed with 5% LMP were analyzed. Pain severity after 8 weeks was assessed to recognize the results of the implemented therapy, with numeric rating scale (NRS) score <3 or =3 considered a success. Additionally, the number of pain-free patients (NRS=0) after 8 weeks were identified in both groups and compared.

RESULTS

The rate of failures in SNBs and 5% LMP group was similar (18.9% vs. 27.1% of poor treatment results, respectively), with the average change in NRS of 5.88 ± 2.41 in nerve blocks and 5.01 ± 1.67 in lidocaine group (p=0.02). Significant difference was also noted in the rates of pain-free patients: 20 patients (34.4%) treated with SNBs and 8 (13.5%) using 5% LMP were pain-free after 8 weeks of treatment.

CONCLUSION

It may be concluded that SNBs may still be considered useful in PHN management, as it appears that in some cases this mode of treatment may offer some advantages over 5% LMP.

Topical lidocaine for neuropathic pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Lidocaine is a local anaesthetic that is sometimes used on the skin to treat neuropathic pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the analgesic efficacy of topical lidocaine for chronic neuropathic pain in adults, and to assess the associated adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from inception to 1 July 2014, together with the reference lists of retrieved papers and other reviews. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal to identify additional published or unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind studies of at least two weeks' duration comparing any formulation of topical lidocaine with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain. Participants were adults aged 18 and over. We included only full journal publication articles.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality. We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. First tier evidence derived from data meeting current best standards and subject to minimal risk of bias (outcome equivalent to substantial pain intensity reduction, intention-to-treat analysis without imputation for dropouts; at least 200 participants in the comparison, 8 to 12 weeks' duration, parallel design); second tier evidence from data that failed to meet one or more of these criteria and that we considered at some risk of bias but with adequate numbers in the comparison; and third tier evidence from data involving small numbers of participants that we considered very likely to be biased or used outcomes of limited clinical utility, or both.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 studies (508 participants) in comparisons with placebo or an active control. Six studies enrolled participants with moderate or severe postherpetic neuralgia, and the remaining studies enrolled different, or mixed, neuropathic pain conditions, including trigeminal neuralgia and postsurgical or post-traumatic neuralgia. Four different formulations were used: 5% medicated patch, 5% cream, 5% gel, and 8% spray. Most studies used a cross-over design, and two used a parallel-group design. Two studies used enriched enrolment with randomised withdrawal. Seven studies used multiple doses, with one to four-week treatment periods, and five used single applications. We judged all of the studies at high risk of bias because of small size or incomplete outcome assessment, or both.There was no first or second tier evidence, and no pooling of data was possible for efficacy outcomes. Only one multiple-dose study reported our primary outcome of participants with ≥ 50% or ≥ 30% pain intensity reduction. Three single-dose studies reported participants who were pain-free at a particular time point, or had a 2-point (of 10) reduction in pain intensity. The two enriched enrolment, randomised withdrawal studies reported time to loss of efficacy. In all but one study, third tier (very low quality) evidence indicated that lidocaine was better than placebo for some measure of pain relief. Pooling multiple-dose studies across conditions demonstrated no clear evidence of an effect of lidocaine on the incidence of adverse events or withdrawals, but there were few events and the withdrawal phase of enriched enrolment designs is not suitable to assess the true impact of adverse events (very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found no evidence from good quality randomised controlled studies to support the use of topical lidocaine to treat neuropathic pain, although individual studies indicated that it was effective for relief of pain. Clinical experience also supports efficacy in some patients. Several large ongoing studies, of adequate duration, with clinically useful outcomes should provide more robust conclusions about both efficacy and harm.

Pain control following inguinal herniorrhaphy: current perspectives

Inguinal hernia repair is one of the most common surgeries performed worldwide. With the success of modern hernia repair techniques, recurrence rates have significantly declined, with a lower incidence than the development of chronic postherniorrhaphy inguinal pain (CPIP). The avoidance of CPIP is arguably the most important clinical outcome and has the greatest impact on patient satisfaction, health care utilization, societal cost, and quality of life. The etiology of CPIP is multifactorial, with overlapping neuropathic and nociceptive components contributing to this complex syndrome. Treatment is often challenging, and no definitive treatment algorithm exists. Multidisciplinary management of this complex problem improves outcomes, as treatment must be individualized. Current medical, pharmacologic, interventional, and surgical management strategies are reviewed.

Management of the hospitalized patient experiencing acute on chronic pain: a case study

The ability to balance the patient's level of comfort while minimizing adverse outcomes related to overdosing remains the key to providing excellent post operative care for the patient with chronic pain. This article presents the case of a hospitalized patient with severe pain and the challenges her care presented to the nursing staff.

Lidocaine Patch (5%) in Treatment of Persistent Inguinal Postherniorrhaphy Pain

Background:

Evidence-based pharmacological treatment options for patients with persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain are lacking.

Methods:

Twenty-one male patients, with severe, unilateral, persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain, participated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial, receiving lidocaine patch (5%) and placebo patch treatments in periods of 14 days separated by a 14-day wash-out period. Pain intensities (at rest, during movement, and pressure evoked [Numerical Rating Scale]) were assessed before treatment and on the last 3 days of each treatment period. Patients were a priori divided into two subgroups based on quantitative sensory testing (+/− thermal “hyposensitivity”). Skin biopsies for intraepidermal nerve fiber density assessment were taken at baseline, and quantitative sensory testing was performed before and after each treatment period. The primary outcome was change in pain intensity assessed as the difference in summed pain intensity differences between lidocaine and placebo patch treatments.

Results:

There was no difference in summed pain intensity differences between lidocaine and placebo patch treatments in all patients (mean difference 6.2% [95% CI = −6.6 to 18.9%]; P = 0.33) or in the two subgroups (+/− thermal “hyposensitivity”). The quantitative sensory testing (n = 21) demonstrated an increased pressure pain thresholds after lidocaine compared with placebo patch treatment. Baseline intraepidermal nerve fiber density (n = 21) was lower on the pain side compared with the nonpain side (−3.8 fibers per millimeter [95% CI = −6.1 to −1.4]; P = 0.003). One patient developed mild erythema in the groin during both treatments.

Conclusions:

Lidocaine patch treatment did not reduce combined resting and dynamic pain ratings compared with placebo in patients with severe, persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain.

[Analgesic efficacy of topical lidocaine for vaso-occlusive crisis in children with sickle cell disease]

Pain associated with vaso-occlusive crisis is the main cause of hospitalization in children with sickle cell disease. Recent studies have suggested that pain might have a neuropathic component. Lidocaine patches are commonly prescribed as a topical analgesic in adult neuropathic pain. This study reports the efficacy and safety of such treatment in 6 patients with sickle cell disease, aged 6-18 years, who had been hospitalized for vaso-occlusive crisis after failure of the standard analgesic treatment. These data have led to setting up a confirmatory phase II trial, which is currently underway.

Cognitive function in older patients with postherpetic neuralgia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Neuropathic pain has been shown to be accompanied by cognitive impairment, but the specific impact of postherpetic neuropathic pain on cognitive processes has not been explored. This study aims to evaluate the impact of pain on several domains of cognition in older patients with postherpetic neuralgia (PHN).

METHODS

This cross-sectional study (clinicaltrial.gov NCT 00989040) included 84 individuals after signature of informed consent.

PARTICIPANTS

42 patients with PHN and 42 healthy volunteers. Of the 42 PHN patients, 21 received systemic treatment (antidepressants, anticonvulsants, opiates) and 21 had topical treatment with the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster. All participants performed a panel of four cognitive tests: reaction time, semantic memory, decision-making, and visual memory (Cantab, Cambridge).

RESULTS

Forty men and 44 women with a mean age of 72 ± 8 years participated. Each PHN patient was matched by age and gender with a healthy volunteer. Vigilance, decision-making, and semantic memory were significantly impaired (P < 0.05) in patients on systemic treatment, especially with antidepressants, while no significant changes were noted between the lidocaine plaster group and their matched controls of healthy volunteers.

CONCLUSION

This study shows the deleterious effect of systemic PHN treatment on several domains of cognition. Cognitive impairment associated with pain and antidepressants may be reversed by topical pain management. Topical treatment with 5% lidocaine medicated plaster is a valuable alternative for pain alleviation and maintains cognitive integrity in this vulnerable population.

Safety and efficacy outcomes of long-term treatment up to 4 years with 5% lidocaine medicated plaster in patients with post-herpetic neuralgia

OBJECTIVE

Prospective evaluation of the long-term efficacy and safety of the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster in patients with post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients with persisting pain for ≥3 months after acute herpes zoster and a baseline pain intensity of at least 4 on an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS 0-10) were treated with 5% lidocaine medicated plasters for up to 5 years and monitored in regular intervals. Efficacy parameters are presented for the first 4 years and include patients' recall of pain relief (6-point verbal rating scale (VRS), clinical global impression of change (CGIC), patients' global impression of change PGIC), and the global evaluations of study medication. Safety parameters (clinical examination, skin evaluation, laboratory) and adverse events (AEs) were assessed at regular visits.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

KF10004/02.

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients continuing from a 1 year main study period were included in an extension phase of up to 3 years. Ten patients (9.8%) dropped out due to lack of efficacy and 9 patients (8.8%) due to treatment-related AEs; 56 patients (54.9%) left the study for non-treatment-related reasons. Twenty-seven patients (26.4%) were still under treatment after a total treatment period of 4 years. On average, a pain relief of at least 4.3 (between moderate and a lot) was achieved throughout the study. At all visits the CGIC and the PGIC were much or very much improved in about 80% of patients. At the final visit, study medication was rated at least to be good by 91% of physicians and 89% of patients. Drug-related adverse events (DRAEs) were reported in 19 of 102 patients, mainly mild to moderate localized skin reactions. There were no hints for a reduced analgesic effect or an increase of DRAEs with long-term treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that long-term treatment of ≥12 months with the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster is effective and well tolerated in PHN patients. These findings support the recommendations to use the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster as baseline therapy for localized neuropathic pain after herpes zoster infection (PHN).