Injection of BoNT-A directly into trigger points did not improve cervicothoracic myofascial pain. The role of direct injection of trigger points with BoNT-A is discussed in comparison to other injection methodologies in the potential genesis of pain relief.

Evidence-based medicine depends on the existence of controlled clinical trials that establish the safety and efficacy of specific therapeutic techniques. Many interventions in clinical practice have achieved widespread acceptance despite little evidence to support them in the scientific literature; the critical appraisal of these interventions based on accumulating experience is a goal of medicine. To clarify the current state of knowledge concerning the use of various drugs for intraspinal infusion in pain management, an expert panel conducted a thorough review of the published literature. The exhaustive review included 5 different groups of compounds, with morphine and bupivacaine yielding the most citations in the literature. The need for additional large published controlled studies was highlighted by this review, especially for promising agents that have been shown to be safe and efficacious in recent clinical studies.

No abstract

Consensus guidelines developed by an expert panel are helpful to clinicians when there is variation in practice and lack of a firm evidence base for an intervention, such as intraspinal therapy for pain. An internet-based survey of practitioners revealed remarkable variation in practice patterns surrounding intraspinal therapy. This prompted an interdisciplinary panel with extensive clinical experience in intraspinal infusion therapy to evaluate the results of the survey, the systematic reviews of the literature pertaining to this approach, and their own clinical experience with long-term spinal infusions. The panel proposed a scheme for the selection of drugs and doses for intraspinal therapy, and suggested guidelines for administration that would increase the likelihood of a successful outcome. These expert panel guidelines were designed to provide an initial structure for clinical decision making that is based on the best available evidence and the perspectives of experienced clinicians.

Patients with noncancer pain treated with intrathecal opioid therapy experience increased mortality compared to similar patients treated by using other therapies. Respiratory depression as a consequence of intrathecal drug overdosage or mixed intrathecal and systemic drug interactions is one plausible, but hypothetical mechanism. The exact causes for patient deaths and the proportion of those deaths attributable to intrathecal opioid therapy remain to be determined. These findings, although based on incomplete information, suggest that it may be possible to reduce mortality in noncancer intrathecal opioid therapy patients.

This study was performed in order to determine concentration-effect, and graded and quantal dose-response relationships for the clinical administration of intravenous (IV) lidocaine to patients with neuropathic pain. Thirteen patients were administered 500 mg of IV lidocaine at a rate of 8.35 mg/min over 60 min. Visual analog pain scores and venous blood samples were obtained concomitantly at 10 min intervals for 60 min. Blood samples were also obtained for determination of serum and serum water lidocaine concentrations at the onset of analgesia and at the time complete pain relief was attained. Lidocaine concentrations were determined by gas chromatography. Graded dose-response curves were prepared individually and for the group as a whole, and a quantal dose-response curve was prepared for the entire group. The dose-response relationship for IV lidocaine was characterized by large increases in pain relief for concomitant minimal increases in dosage. The difference between the ED50 (372.0 mg) and the ED90 (416.5 mg) was 44.5 mg of lidocaine (5.3 min of infusion). The concentration-effect relationship was also steep with pain scores abruptly decreasing over a range of 0.62 microgram/mL of lidocaine. Interestingly, the free concentration of lidocaine had no better correlation with the onset of analgesia or the attainment of complete analgesia than the serum concentration of lidocaine. This suggests that the mechanism of analgesia to IV lidocaine may not be based upon a conventional concentration-effect relationship. In conclusion, the results of this study suggest that the analgesic response to IV lidocaine is best characterized by a precipitous "break in pain" over a narrow dosage and concentration range.

The use of a background infusion with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) increases drug consumption without any additional contribution to analgesia. There are no data on the potential advantage of a background infusion administered with patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) for labor and delivery. Sixty women were randomized to one of four groups and received either: (a) demand dose PCEA (demand dose = 3 mL; lockout interval = 10 min); (b) continuous infusion plus demand dose PCEA (two separate infusion rates: 3 mL/h and 6 mL/h); or (c) a fixed-rate continuous epidural infusion (CEI) at 12 mL/h. All patients received 0.125% bupivacaine with 2 micrograms/mL of fentanyl. The study protocol was double-blind and placebo-controlled. Visual analog pain scores, motor strength, and bilateral pinprick analgesia were assessed every half hour by a blinded observer. Pain scores, cephalad extent of sensory analgesia, and motor block were no different among the study groups during the first and second stages of labor. Cumulative hourly bupivacaine use was similar among all PCEA study groups. However, use of PCEA (in whatever mode) provided a 35% dose-sparing effect in comparison to CEI. The PCEA groups receiving no background infusion or a 3-mL/h background infusion had a greater need for physician-administered supplemental bupivacaine during the first stage of labor. While not statistically significant, a trend toward increased need for supplementation was seen in these same patient groups over the entire course of labor and delivery.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

No abstract