Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a persistent pain condition that remains incompletely understood and challenging to treat. Historically, a wide range of different outcome measures have been used to capture the multidimensional nature of CRPS. This has been a significant limiting factor in the advancement of our understanding of the mechanisms and management of CRPS. In 2013, an international consortium of patients, clinicians, researchers, and industry representatives was established, to develop and agree on a minimum core set of standardised outcome measures for use in future CRPS clinical research, including but not limited to clinical trials within adult populations. The development of a core measurement set was informed through workshops and supplementary work, using an iterative consensus process. "What is the clinical presentation and course of CRPS, and what factors influence it?" was agreed as the most pertinent research question that our standardised set of patient-reported outcome measures should be selected to answer. The domains encompassing the key concepts necessary to answer the research question were agreed as follows: pain, disease severity, participation and physical function, emotional and psychological function, self-efficacy, catastrophizing, and patient's global impression of change. The final core measurement set included the optimum generic or condition-specific patient-reported questionnaire outcome measures, which captured the essence of each domain, and 1 clinician-reported outcome measure to capture the degree of severity of CRPS. The next step is to test the feasibility and acceptability of collecting outcome measure data using the core measurement set in the CRPS population internationally.
Stem cell therapy has emerged as a promising approach to improve healing of the infarcted myocardium, to treat or prevent cardiac failure, and to restore lost cardiac function. Despite initial excitement, recent clinical trials using nonhomogenous human stem cells preparations showed variable results, raising concerns about the best cell type to transplant. Selected CD133(+) hematopoietic stem cells are promising candidate cells with great potential. COMPARE-acute myocardial infarction (AMI) study is a phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of intracoronary CD133(+)-enriched hematopoietic bone marrow stem cells in patients with acute myocardial infarction and persistent left ventricular dysfunction. Patients who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention and present a persistent left ventricular ejection fraction <50% will be eligible to have bone marrow aspiration and randomized for intracoronary injection of selected CD 133(+) bone marrow cells vs placebo. The primary end point is a composite of a safety and efficacy end points evaluating the change at 4 months in the coronary atherosclerotic burden progression proximal and distal to the coronary stent in the infarct related artery; and the change in global left ventricular ejection fraction at 4 months relative to baseline as measured by magnetic resonance imaging. The secondary end point will be the occurrence of a major adverse cardiac event. To date, 14 patients were successfully randomized and treated without any protocol-related complication. COMPARE-AMI trial will help identify the effect of a selected population of the bone marrow stem cells on cardiac recovery of infarcted myocardium.
Those with longstanding CRPS may no longer meet diagnostic criteria but still be symptomatic. Defining recovery is therefore problematic in CRPS. Our study has identified patients' definition of recovery from CRPS, in order of priority, as relief from: their CRPS-related pain, generalised pain, movement restriction, reliance on medication, and stiffness.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.