Efficacy and safety of pulsed radiofrequency and steroid injection for intercostobrachial neuralgia in postmastectomy pain syndrome - A clinical trial

Chronic Pain Following Breast Reconstruction: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer survival rates have increased significantly, underscoring the importance of enhancing long-term health-related quality of life. Breast reconstruction following mastectomy has emerged as a common approach that contributes to improved health-related quality of life. Nonetheless, chronic pain following breast reconstruction is a prevalent issue that has a negative impact on overall well-being.

METHODS

To examine recent findings on chronic pain after breast reconstruction and progress in pain management, we performed a review of the literature through independent searches using the MEDLINE database within NIH National Library of Medicine PubMed.

RESULTS

The review suggested that autologous reconstruction causes chronic postsurgical pain, especially at specific donor sites, whereas implant-based reconstruction does not seem to increase the risk of chronic pain. Moreover, certain operational and patient factors are also associated with chronic pain. Appropriate pain management can reduce chronic pain and prevent the transition from acute to chronic pain.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review evaluated the characteristics of long-term chronic pain after breast reconstruction. The findings provide patients with important treatment information and will assist with their decision on their preferred treatment.

Post-mastectomy Pain Syndrome: A Review Article and Emerging Treatment Modalities

Post-mastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS) is a syndrome broadly applied to the development of chronic pain after surgical breast intervention (i.e., lumpectomy and mastectomy). The incidence of PMPS is likely underreported, and this has contributed to a paucity of high-level evidence related to the treatment of the aforementioned condition. A drive to reduce the burden of opioid use has led to pain management physicians trialing a variety of strategies to help patients manage PMPS. This review discusses the latest evidence behind treatment options for PMPS, exploring medications as well as interventional techniques (e.g., nerve blocks, radiofrequency ablation, neuromodulation, and intrathecal drug delivery systems). Recent advances in neuromodulation technology are of particular interest here due to the well-localized nature of PMPS-related pain and the specificity with which modern neuromodulation techniques can generate an effect. Finally, the review proposes a framework with which to approach the care of patients with PMPS, with a specific emphasis on the early consideration of neuromodulation techniques along with functional and physical therapy to reduce patient medication burden and improve overall quality of life.

Percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in post-mastectomy neuropathic pain: A case report

Post-mastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS) is a type of chronic postsurgical pain that can be severe, debilitating and frequently encountered in clinical practice. Multiple studies have focused on prevention, identifying risk factors and treating this condition. Nonetheless, PMPS remains a complex condition to treat effectively. In this case report, we describe the use of percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in a breast cancer patient who experienced PMPS refractory to conventional treatments.

Post-Mastectomy Pain Syndrome: An Up-to-Date Review of Treatment Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Post-mastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS) is a known debilitating surgical complication. While research on prevention, risk factors, and treatments have been conducted, there remains no cohesive treatment paradigm. The aim of our study is to synthesize the existing evidence on PMPS treatment, which may facilitate the implementation of standardized, effective management strategies.

METHODS

Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, a comprehensive search was developed and translated for MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The databases were searched using a combination of free terms, phrase searching, and database-specific controlled vocabulary related to PMPS. All unique records were by two independent reviewers. Publications on chronic (>3 months duration) pain after breast cancer-related surgery were included. Limited case series, case reports, and editorials were not included.

RESULTS

A total of 3402 articles from the years 1946-2019 resulted from the literature search after deduplication. Twenty-seven articles met final inclusion criteria for analysis, which revealed 10 major treatment modalities: fat grafting, neuroma surgery, lymphedema surgery, nerve blocks and neurolysis, laser, antidepressants, neuromodulators, physical therapy, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, and capsaicin.

CONCLUSIONS

In this review, we present a comprehensive assessment of the treatments available for PMPS that may help guide breast surgeons and reconstructive surgeons to employ the most effective treatment strategies for these patients. This review supports the importance of multimodal, multidisciplinary care in improving the management of PMPS.

Chinese Association for the Study of Pain: Expert consensus on chronic postsurgical pain

Chronic postsurgical pain is a common surgical complication that severely reduces a patient’s quality of life. Many perioperative interventions and management strategies have been developed for reducing and managing chronic postsurgical pain. Under the leadership of the Chinese Association for the Study of Pain, an editorial committee was formed for chronic postsurgical pain diagnosis and treatment by experts in relevant fields. The editorial committee composed the main content and framework of this consensus and established a working group. The working group conducted literature review (1989-2020) using key words such as “surgery”, “post-surgical”, “post-operative”, “pain”, “chronic”, and “persistent” in different databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Only publications in the English language were included. The types of literature included systematic reviews, randomized controlled studies, cohort studies and case reports. This consensus was written based on clinical practice combined with literature evidence. The first draft of the consensus was rigorously reviewed and edited by all the editorial committee experts before being finalized. The level of evidence was assessed by methodological experts based on the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence. The strength of recommendation was evaluated by all editorial committee experts, and the opinions of most experts were adopted as the final decision. The recommendation level “strong” generally refers to recommendations based on high-level evidence and consistency between clinical behavior and expected results. The recommendation level “weak” generally refers to the uncertainty between clinical behavior and expected results based on low-level evidence.

Efficacy and safety of pulsed radiofrequency as a method of dorsal root ganglia stimulation for treatment of non-neuropathic pain: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

We systematically reviewed the evidence on the efficacy and safety of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) targeted pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) versus any comparator for treatment of non-neuropathic pain.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, clinicaltrials.gov and WHO clinical trial register until January 8, 2019. All study designs were eligible. Two authors independently conducted literature screening. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes were any other pain-related outcome and any other safety outcome that was reported. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool and Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). We conducted narrative evidence synthesis and assessed the conclusiveness of included studies regarding efficacy and safety.

RESULTS

We included 17 studies with 599 participants, which analyzed various pain syndromes. Two studies were randomized controlled trials; both included participants with low back pain (LBP). Non-randomized studies included patients with the following indications: LBP, postsurgical pain, pain associated with herpes zoster, cervicogenic headache, complex regional pain syndrome type 1, intractable vertebral metastatic pain, chronic scrotal and inguinal pain, occipital radiating pain in rheumatoid arthritis and chronic migraine. In these studies, the PRF was usually initiated after other treatments have failed. Eleven studies had positive conclusive statements (11/17) about efficacy; the remaining had positive inconclusive statements. Only three studies provided conclusiveness of evidence statements regarding safety - two indicated that the evidence was positive conclusive, and one positive inconclusive. The risk of bias was predominantly unclear in randomized and serious in non-randomized studies.

CONCLUSION

Poor quality and few participants characterize evidence about benefits and harms of DRG PRF in patients with non-neuropathic pain. Results from available studies should only be considered preliminary. Not all studies have reported data regarding the safety of the intervention, but those that did, indicate that the intervention is relatively safe. As the procedure is non-destructive and early results are promising, further comparative studies about PRF in non-neuropathic pain syndromes would be welcomed.