Endoscopic Neuromodulation of Suprascapular Nerve in Chronic Shoulder Pain: A Case Report

Migraine and Neuromodulation: A Literature Review

Migraine is not only known to be one of the most common causes of a headache around the globe but is also the leading neurologic cause of disability worldwide. Migraine has significant social and economic effects. It not only hampers patients' quality of life but also hampers work, public conduct, and family life. Migraine is one of the leading causes of morbidity in the world, so effective management is critical. Currently, medical management is the mainstay remedial approach for migraine, but with time, non-pharmacological approaches, especially neuromodulation, are gaining popularity with a shred of solid backing evidence. Neuromodulation is the process in which specific devices are used to excite the central nervous system or peripheral nervous system with electric or magnetic, or any other form of energy to regulate the abnormal behavior of neural pathways that have occurred due to the disease process. Neuromodulation devices as approved by Food and Drug Administration include non-invasive Vagus nerve stimulators, single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulators, and transcutaneous supraorbital neurostimulators. The purpose of this study is to summarize the information about the advances relating to neuromodulation concerning managing and preventing migraine. This Narrative review article is prepared after analyzing various research papers and publications on PubMed and Google Scholar. This article holds brief information on understanding neuromodulation, its mechanism, its implication in managing migraine, and its different modalities with their mechanism of action and contraindications. These neuromodulation techniques can certainly be used to deal with acute migraine attacks and inhibit their progression to chronic illness. Research is required on the application of neuromodulation in the early diagnosis of migraine, which is what we still lack as a whole medical fraternity.

Ultrasound-Guided Clavipectoral Block for Postoperative Analgesia of Clavicular Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Trial

Background

Clavicular fractures are commonly encountered in daily practice, and most cases are operated under general surgery. Until now, there has been a debate about the best approach to manage pain in such cases.

Objectives

We aimed to evaluate whether ultrasound-guided clavipectoral block [clavipectoral fascial plane block (CPB)] would be safe and effective in cases with clavicular fractures.

Methods

This prospective randomized study included a total of 40 patients with clavicular fractures; they were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 included 20 cases who underwent CPB, and group 2 included 20 cases who underwent placebo block. Pain score, duration of analgesia, total analgesic consumption, and procedure-related complications were noted and recorded.

Results

Despite the comparable demographic data between the 2 groups, pain scores were significantly lower in group 1 than in group 2, starting from postanesthesia care unit (PACU) admission until 12 hours after the operation. Group 1 showed a significant reduction in 24-hour opioid consumption and significant prolongation of the duration of analgesia compared to the placebo. Patient satisfaction was significantly better in group 1 than in group 2. No block-related adverse events were recorded.

Conclusions

CPB is a safe and effective regional technique that should be used for pain management after clavicular fixation surgery.

Conolidine: A Novel Plant Extract for Chronic Pain

: Pain, the most common symptom reported among patients in the primary care setting, is complex to manage. Opioids are among the most potent analgesics agents for managing pain. Since the mid-1990s, the number of opioid prescriptions for the management of chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) has increased by more than 400%, and this increased availability has significantly contributed to opioid diversion, overdose, tolerance, dependence, and addiction. Despite the questionable effectiveness of opioids in managing CNCP and their high rates of side effects, the absence of available alternative medications and their clinical limitations and slower onset of action has led to an overreliance on opioids. Conolidine is an indole alkaloid derived from the bark of the tropical flowering shrub Tabernaemontana divaricate used in traditional Chinese, Ayurvedic, and Thai medicine. Conolidine could represent the beginning of a new era of chronic pain management. It is now being investigated for its effects on the atypical chemokine receptor (ACK3). In a rat model, it was found that a competitor molecule binding to ACKR3 resulted in inhibition of ACKR3’s inhibitory activity, causing an overall increase in opiate receptor activity. Although the identification of conolidine as a potential novel analgesic agent provides an additional avenue to address the opioid crisis and manage CNCP, further studies are necessary to understand its mechanism of action and utility and efficacy in managing CNCP.

Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Foraminotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Spinal endoscopic techniques have recently been applied to complex degenerative conditions or failed back surgery syndrome. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess transforaminal endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (TELF) outcomes and adverse event rates. We also analyzed the effectiveness of the technique for chronic pain after arthrodesis or previous spinal surgery.

METHODS

Multiple databases were searched for studies published in the English language, involving patients > 18 years old who underwent endoscopic foraminotomy. Outcomes included the rate of patients who showed "excellent" and "good" postoperative improvement, decreased leg pain, and improved Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Adverse events considered in the analysis included nerve root damage and intraoperative dural tear, the proportion of patients requiring revision surgery or recurrences, and infections.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies, encompassing 600 patients, were identified. Approximately 85% of patients improved significantly after TELF, without significant differences among different groups (85% vs. 78%, respectively). Mean leg pain decreased an average of 5.2 points, and ODI scores improved by 41.2%. Patients with previous spine surgery or failed back surgery syndrome had higher postoperative leg dysesthesia rates after TELF (14% vs. 1%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

TELF is a useful and safe method to achieve decompression in foraminal stenosis. This technique is indicated in the elderly or patients with comorbidities. Preoperative planning is paramount in determining the foraminal size and endoscope trajectory. A diamond burr is recommended because it has an advantage over the regular endoscopic shaver in bleeding control and complication avoidance.

Treatment of suprascapular nerve entrapment syndrome

Suprascapular nerve entrapment syndrome (SNES) is an often-overlooked etiology of shoulder pain and weakness. Treatment varies depending on the location and etiology of entrapment, which can be described as compressive or traction lesions. In some cases, treating the primary cause of impingement (ie. rotator cuff tear, ganglion cyst, etc.) is sufficient to relieve pressure on the nerve. In other cases where impingement is caused by dynamic microtrauma (as seen in overhead athletes and laborers), treatment is often more conservative. Conservative first-line therapy includes rehabilitation programs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and lifestyle modification. Physical therapy is targeted at strengthening the rotator cuff muscles, trapezius, levator scapulae, rhomboids, serratus anterior, and deltoid muscle(s). If non-operative treatment fails to relieve suprascapular neuropathy, minimally invasive treatment options exist, such as suprascapular nerve injection, neurostimulation, cryoneurolysis, and pulsed radiofrequency. Multiple treatment modalities are often used synergistically due to variations in shoulder anatomy, physiology, pain response, and pathology as a sole therapeutic option does not seem successful for all cases. Often patients can be treated with non-invasive measures alone; however, injuries refractory to conservative treatment may require either arthroscopic or open surgery, particularly if the patient has an identifiable and reversible cause of nerve compression. Indications for invasive treatment include, but are not limited to, refractory to non-operative treatment, have a space-occupying lesion, or show severe signs and symptoms of muscle atrophy. Open decompression has fallen out of favor due to the advantages inherent in the less invasive arthroscopic approach.

Supraclavicular vs. Infraclavicular Brachial Plexus Nerve Blocks: Clinical, Pharmacological, and Anatomical Considerations

: Peripheral nerve blocks (PNB) have become standard of care for enhanced recovery pathways after surgery. For brachial plexus delivery of anesthesia, both supraclavicular (SC) and infraclavicular (IC) approaches have been shown to require less supplemental anesthesia, are performed more rapidly, have quicker onset time, and have lower rates of complications than other approaches (axillary, interscalene, etc.). Ultrasound-guidance is commonly utilized to improve outcomes, limit the need for deep sedation or general anesthesia, and reduce procedural complications. Given the SC and IC approaches are the most common approaches for brachial plexus blocks, the differences between the two have been critically evaluated in the present manuscript. Various studies have demonstrated slight favorability towards the IC approach from the standpoint of complications and safety. Two prospective RCTs found a higher incidence of complications in the SC approach – particularly Horner syndrome. The IC method appears to support a greater block distribution as well. Overall, both SC and IC brachial plexus nerve block approaches are the most effective and safe approaches, particularly under ultrasound-guidance. Given the success of the supraclavicular and infraclavicular blocks, these techniques are an important skill set for the anesthesiologist for intraoperative anesthesia and postoperative analgesia.

Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Dexamethasone as Adjuvants to Ultra-Sound Guided Interscalene Block in Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: A Double-Blinded Randomized Placebo-Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Interscalene block is one of the popular methods for decreasing pain and analgesic consumption after shoulder arthroscopic surgeries.

OBJECTIVES

The objective is to compare the analgesic duration of effects of dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone as adjuvants to 0.5% ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided interscalene blocks for arthroscopic shoulder surgery in an ambulatory setting.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial, 117 adult patients candidate for ambulatory arthroscopic shoulder surgery under general anesthesia were divided into three groups to perform an ultra-sound guided interscalene block before the surgery. The ropivacaine (control) group received ropivacaine 0.5% 20 mL, group Dexamethasone received ropivacaine 0.5% 20 mL plus 4mg dexamethasone, and group dexmedetomidine received ropivacaine 0.5% 20 mL plus 75 mcg of dexmedetomidine. Time to return of sensory function, of motor function, of first pain sensation, amount of opioid medication consumed at 24 hours and 48 hours post-operatively were measured.

RESULTS

The 24-hour median (25th- 75th percentile) opioid consumption in morphine equivalents was similar between groups 22.5 mg (10 - 30), 15 mg (0 - 30), and 15 mg (0 - 20.6) in the ropivacaine, dexmedetomidine, and dexamethasone groups, respectively (P = 0.130). The median (25th- 75th percentile) 48 hours post-operatively, the median opioid consumption in morphine equivalents was 40 mg (25 - 67.5) in the ropivacaine group, 30 mg (22 - 50.6) in the dexamethasone group, and 52.5 mg (30 - 75) in the dexmedetomidine group (P = 0.278). The median 24-hour pain scores were 6 (5 - 8) in the ropivacaine control group, 7 (5.5 - 8) in the dexamethasone group, and 7 (4 - 9) in the dexmedetomidine group (P = 0.573).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no statistical difference in opioid consumption at 24 and 48 hours post-operatively when comparing dexmedetomidine, dexamethasone, and no adjuvant. However, intraoperative opioid use was significantly lower with dexmedetomidine compared to dexamethasone and plain 0.5% ropivacaine. The safe side effect profile of dexmedetomidine makes it a reasonable alternative as an adjuvant for peripheral nerve blockade when dexamethasone use may be contraindicated.

Comparison of Ultrasound-Guided Supra-scapular Plus Axillary Nerve Block with Interscalene Block for Postoperative Pain Management in Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery; A Double-Blinded Randomized Open-Label Clinical Trial

Background

Post-arthroscopic shoulder surgery pain is severe enough to interfere with initial recovery and rehabilitation.

Objectives

We aimed to evaluate the analgesic effects of postoperative ultrasound-guided suprascapular plus axillary nerve blocks superficial subepidermal axon bundles (SSAB) with interscalene block (ISB) in arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

Methods

In this single-blind randomized, open-label clinical trial, 80 candidates of elective arthroscopic shoulder surgery were randomly allocated to receive either SSAB or ISB at a postoperative care unit. The severity of resting and changing position pain was measured using visual analogue scale (VAS) score at 4h, 8h, 12h, 16h, and 24h, postoperatively. Timing of first opioid request, 24h dose requirement, patients' satisfaction rate, and side effects were also recorded. All registered data were analyzed using SPSS software version 23 for Windows (SPSS, Chicago, IL).

Results

Resting and changing position pain scores were comparable between SSAB and ISB groups in the most time intervals. At 12h, moving and resting pain was significantly lower in ISB than SSAB group, while moving pain was more severe in ISB group at 24h assessment. Patient satisfaction scores were comparable between the two groups except for 12h assessment. Time to first analgesic requirement and total dose of 24h opioid requirement were not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusions

Suprascapular plus axillary nerve block could be an effective and safe alternative for interscalene block for pain management after arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

Etiology Diagnosis and Management of Radial Nerve Entrapment

Context

The anatomy of the radial nerve is prone to entrapment, each with different symptomology. Compression of entrapment of the radial nerve can occur near the radiocapitellar joint, the spiral groove, the arcade of Frohse, the tendon of the extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB), and at the radial tunnel. Those who require repetitive motions are at increased risk of peripheral neuropathy syndromes, including repetitive pronation and supination, trauma, or systemic disease; however, t the influence of all risk factors is not well understood. Depending on the location of entrapment, radial nerve entrapment syndrome presents different symptoms. It may include both a motor component and a sensory component. The motor component includes a dropped arm, and the sensory component can include pain and paresthesia in the distribution of the radial nerve that resolves with rest and exacerbates by repetitive pronation and supination.

Evidence Acquisition

Diagnostic evaluation for radial nerve entrapment, apart from clinical symptoms and physical exam, includes electromyography, nerve conduction studies, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Conservative management for radial nerve entrapment includes oral anti-inflammatory medications, activity modification, and splinting. Some recently performed studies mentioned promising minimally invasive techniques, including corticosteroid injections, peripheral nerve stimulation, and pulsed radiofrequency.

Results

When minimally invasive techniques fail, open or endoscopic surgery can be performed to release the nerve

Conclusions

Endoscopic surgery has the benefit of decreasing incision size and reducing time to functional recovery.

Adductor Canal Block in the Outpatient Clinic for Pain Control Following Knee Surgery

Background

Effective postoperative pain control is an important factor for the success of rehabilitation programs. Adductor canal block (ACB) is a recently developed technique.

Objectives

This study aimed to evaluate the application of ACB in patients who underwent knee surgery.

Methods

We performed ACB guided with ultrasonography for patients who underwent knee surgery. ACB was performed 14 days after surgery in the outpatient clinic with a ropivacaine mixture. The pain was evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS) every two days.

Results

In this study, 115 patients were included. The mean score of VAS before ACB on the fifth, seventh, and ninth days was 7.4, 7.2, and 6.2, respectively. Mean VAS was significantly decreased after providing the intervention. However, the VAS score was increased gradually until the 23rd day and then flattened. Analgesic (etoricoxib) consumption was 102 mg, 98 mg, and 98 mg in postoperative days (POD), 5th, 7th, and 9th, respectively. Analgesic consumption was significantly decreased (16 mg) after ACB (POD 15th) and gradually increased in PODs 17th, 19th, and 21st. Only one patient complained of thigh hematoma after the ACB procedure.

Conclusions

Single-shot ACB, provided in outpatient clinics, is a safe intervention that could significantly decrease both pain and analgesic consumption. It may enhance the postoperative rehabilitation program.

Surgical and Non-surgical Treatment Options for Piriformis Syndrome: A Literature Review

Context

Piriformis syndrome is a solely clinical diagnosis that often eludes the practitioner and goes underdiagnosed. PS is a pain syndrome and for those it affects, causes persistent pain and limits daily activity and work capacity. It is a form of deep gluteal syndrome that needs to be considered on the differential of low back pain as it comprises between 0.3% - 6% of all low back pain cases and is frequently underdiagnosed. Piriformis syndrome may be primary due anatomic anomalies or secondary, though the majority of cases are secondary to some insult. The objective of this manuscript is to provide a description of the epidemiology and presentation of piriformis as well as both non-operative and operative treatment options. We review all of the recent clinical evidence regarding the aforementioned therapies.

Evidence Acquisition

Literature searches were performed using the below MeSH Terms using Mendeley version 1.19.4. Search fields were varied until further searches revealed no new articles. All articles were screened by title and abstract. Decision was made to include an article based on its relevance and the list of final articles was approved three of the authors. This included reading the entirety of the article. Any question regarding the inclusion of an article was discussed by all authors until an agreement was reached.

Results

Medical management and physical therapy show some promise; however, when conservative treatment fails minimally invasive methods such as steroid injections, botulinum toxin injections, dry needling are all efficacious and there is substantial clinical evidence regarding these therapies. In those patients in which minimally invasive techniques do not result in an adequate relief of pain and return of function, endoscopic release can be considered. Endoscopic release is far superior to open release of the piriformis syndrome given the higher success and lower rate of complications.

Conclusions

Piriformis syndrome is an important differential diagnosis in the work up of lower back pain and should not be ruled out with proper examination and testing. Clinicians should consider medical management and conservative management in the initial treatment plan for piriformis syndrome. There are many options within the conservative management and the literature shows much promise regarding these. Physical therapy, steroid injections, botulinum toxin injections, and dry needling are all potentially effective therapies with few adverse effects. Surgical options remain as gold standard, but only when conservative management has failed and the symptoms are significant to affect daily living activities. Endoscopic decompression of the sciatic nerve with or without release of the piriformis muscle has a reported high likelihood of success and a low complication rate. Current literature supports the preference of the endoscopic approach over the open approach due to improved outcomes and decreased complications. Further research is to well define the metrics for the diagnosis of piriformis syndrome and may include a need to develop diagnostic criteria.

Endoscopic radiofrequency facet joint treatment in patients with low back pain: technique and long-term results. A prospective cohort study

Aims:

The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic rhizotomy (ER) for denervation of lumbar facet joints in patients with chronic low back pain (LBP) due to facet joint syndrome (FJS).

Methods:

A total of 50 consecutive patients suffering from chronic LBP due to facet joints were screened to be treated with ER. The patients participating in the study had a 2-year follow up. Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were assessed in the preoperative and postoperative period. To evaluate secondary endpoints, patients were divided into groups. One group included the patients previously treated with percutaneous radiofrequency (RF). The other group comprised patients at their first interventional treatment. We also compared patients dividing them by age and by number of joints treated, trying to elucidate if these parameters could be predictive of effectiveness of the procedure.

Results:

All patients had a reduction in NRS and an improvement in ODI. NRS was reduced significantly after 1 month and remained the same until the end of the study. ODI was significantly improved from T1 (1 month after surgery) up to T7 (end of the study). The improvements did not differ whether already treated with percutaneous rhizotomy or not. Patients less than 60 years or with 1–2 joints treated had better improvement compared with the others.

Conclusion:

The results obtained demonstrate that ER for denervation of the facet joint is an effective treatment in patients with chronic LBP, with consistent and stable results at 2-year follow up. The technique has a rapid learning curve and no major complications occurred. Moreover, the previous percutaneous RF treatment had no influence on the results obtained with endoscopic technique. There is evidence that best results are obtained in younger patients and/or in patients with 1–2 joints treated.

Lay summary

Low-back pain has facet joints inflammation or degeneration as pain generator in 20–40% of cases. Nervous lesion of the dorsal ramus innervating the facet joints has been shown as an efficacious treatment to obtain good analgesia. Percutaneous techniques have provided short term results for several reasons. This research aimed to see whether endoscopic denervation, which guarantees a more precise approach to anatomical structure, would result in more durable results. The study conducted on 40 patients has made it clear that this approach gives significant analgesia for at least 2 years, which was the time of patient follow up.

Peripheral Neuromodulation for the Management of Headache

Context

Neuromodulation is an expanding field of study for headache treatment to reduce pain by targeting structures within the nervous system that are commonly involved in headache pathophysiology, such as the vagus nerve (VNS), occipital nerves, or sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) for stimulation. Pharmaceutical medical therapies for abortive and prophylactic treatment, such as triptans, NSAIDs, beta-blockers, TCAs, and antiepileptics, are effective for some individuals, but the role that technology plays in investigating other therapeutic modalities is essential. Peripheral neuromodulation has gained popularity and FDA approval for use in treating certain headaches and migraine headache conditions, particularly in those who are refractory to treatment. Early trials found FDA approved neurostimulatory implant devices, including Cephaly and SpringTMS, improved patient-oriented outcomes with reductions in headaches per month (frequency) and severity.

Evidence Acquisition

This was a narrative review. The sources for this review are as follows: Searching on PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, and ScienceDirect from 1990 - 2019 using keywords: Peripheral Neuromodulation, Headache, vagus nerve, occipital nerves, sphenopalatine ganglion.

Results

The first noninvasive neurostimulator device approved for migraine treatment was the Cefaly device, an external trigeminal nerve stimulation device (e-TNS) that transcutaneously excites the supratrochlear and supraorbital branches of the ophthalmic nerve. The second noninvasive neurostimulation device receiving FDA approval was the single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulator, SpringTMS, positioned at the occiput to treat migraine with aura. GammaCore is a handheld transcutaneous vagal nerve stimulator applied directly to the neck at home by the patient for treatment of cluster headache (CH) and migraine. Several other devices are in development for the treatment of headaches and target headache evolution at different levels and inputs. The Scion device is a caloric vestibular stimulator (CVS) which interfaces with the user through a set of small cones resting in the ear canal on either side and held in place by modified over-ear headphones. The pulsante SPG Microstimulator is a patient-controlled device implanted in the patient’s upper jaw via an hour-long oral procedure to target the sphenopalatine ganglion. The occipital nerve stimulator (ONS) is an invasive neuromodulation device for headache treatment that consists of an implanted pulse generator on the chest wall connected to a subcutaneous lead with 4 - 8 electrodes that is tunneled the occiput.

Conclusions

The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the efficacy, preliminary outcomes, and limitations of neurostimulatory implants available for use in the US and those pending further development.