Lumbosacral radicular pain is characterized by a radiating pain in one or more lumbar or sacral dermatomes; it may or may not be accompanied by other radicular irritation symptoms and/or symptoms of decreased function. The annual prevalence in the general population, described as low back pain with leg pain traveling below the knee, varied from 9.9% to 25%, which means that it is presumably the most commonly occurring form of neuropathic pain. The patient's history may give a suggestion of lumbosacral radicular pain. The best known clinical investigation is the straight-leg raising test. Final diagnosis is made based on a combination of clinical examination and potentially additional tests. Medical imaging studies are indicated to exclude possible serious pathologies and to confirm the affected level in patients suffering lumbosacral radicular pain for longer than 3 months. Magnetic resonance imaging is preferred. Selective diagnostic blocks help confirming the affected level. There is controversy concerning the effectiveness of conservative management (physical therapy, exercise) and pharmacological treatment. When conservative treatment fails, in subacute lumbosacral radicular pain under the level L3 as the result of a contained herniation, transforaminal corticosteroid administration is recommended (2 B+). In chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, (pulsed) radiofrequency treatment adjacent to the spinal ganglion (DRG) can be considered (2 C+). For refractory lumbosacral radicular pain, adhesiolysis and epiduroscopy can be considered (2 B+/-), preferentially study-related. In patients with a therapy-resistant radicular pain in the context of a Failed Back Surgery Syndrome, spinal cord stimulation is recommended (2 A+). This treatment should be performed in specialized centers.

The sacroiliac joint accounts for approximately 16% to 30% of cases of chronic mechanical low back pain. Pain originating in the sacroiliac joint is predominantly perceived in the gluteal region, although pain is often referred into the lower and upper lumbar region, groin, abdomen, and/ or lower limb(s). Because sacroiliac joint pain is difficult to distinguish from other forms of low back pain based on history, different provocative maneuvers have been advocated. Individually, they have weak predictive value, but combined batteries of tests can help ascertain a diagnosis. Radiological imaging is important to exclude "red flags" but contributes little in the diagnosis. Diagnostic blocks are the diagnostic gold standard but must be interpreted with caution, because false-positive as well as false-negative results occur frequently. Treatment of sacroiliac joint pain is best performed in the context of a multidisciplinary approach. Conservative treatments address the underlying causes (posture and gait disturbances) and consist of exercise therapy and manipulation. Intra-articular sacroiliac joint infiltrations with local anesthetic and corticosteroids hold the highest evidence rating (1 B+). If the latter fail or produce only short-term effects, cooled radiofrequency treatment of the lateral branches of S1 to S3 (S4) is recommended (2 B+) if available. When this procedure cannot be used, (pulsed) radiofrequency procedures targeted at L5 dorsal ramus and lateral branches of S1 to S3 may be considered (2 C+).

Occipital neuralgia is defined as a paroxysmal shooting or stabbing pain in the dermatomes of the nervus occipitalis major and/or nervus occipitalis minor. The pain originates in the suboccipital region and radiates over the vertex. A suggestive history and clinical examination with short-term pain relief after infiltration with local anesthetic confirm the diagnosis. No data are available about the prevalence or incidence of this condition. Most often, trauma or irritation of the nervi occipitales causes the neuralgia. Imaging studies are necessary to exclude underlying pathological conditions. Initial therapy consists of a single infiltration of the culprit nervi occipitales with local anesthetic and corticosteroids (2 C+). The reported effects of botulinum toxin A injections are contradictory (2 C+/-). Should injection of local anesthetic and corticosteroids fail to provide lasting relief, pulsed radio-frequency treatment of the nervi occipitales can be considered (2 C+). There is no evidence to support pulsed radio-frequency treatment of the ganglion spinale C2 (dorsal root ganglion). As such, this should only be done in a clinical trial setting. Subcutaneous occipital nerve stimulation can be considered if prior therapy with corticosteroid infiltration or pulsed radio-frequency treatment failed or provided only short-term relief (2 C+).

Background: The sensory recovery of the breast remains an undervalued aspect of autologous breast reconstruction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of nerve coaptation on the sensory recovery of the breast following DIEP flap breast reconstruction and to assess the associations of length of follow-up and timing of the reconstruction. Methods: A prospective comparative study was conducted of all patients who underwent either innervated or noninnervated DIEP flap breast reconstruction and returned for follow-up between September of 2015 and July of 2017. Nerve coaptation was performed to the anterior cutaneous branch of the third intercostal nerve. Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments were used for sensory testing of the native skin and flap skin. Results: A total of 48 innervated DIEP flaps in 36 patients and 61 noninnervated DIEP flaps in 45 patients were tested at different follow-up time points. Nerve coaptation was significantly associated with lower monofilament values in all areas of the reconstructed breast (adjusted difference, −1.2; p < 0.001), which indicated that sensory recovery of the breast was significantly better in innervated compared with noninnervated DIEP flaps. For every month of follow-up, the mean monofilament value decreased by 0.083 in innervated flaps (p < 0.001) and 0.012 in noninnervated flaps (p < 0.001). Nerve coaptation significantly improved sensation in both immediate and delayed reconstructions. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that nerve coaptation in DIEP flap breast reconstruction is associated with a significantly better sensory recovery in all areas of the reconstructed breast compared with noninnervated flaps. The length of follow-up was significantly associated with the sensory recovery.