Background and aimsCervicogenic headache (CEH) is a debilitating condition and analgesics have limited effect. Percutaneous cryoneurolysis is thus still in use although the clinical evidence is lacking. We present a randomized, controlled study to assess the clinical efficacy of cryoneurolysis compared with a corticosteroid combined with a local anaesthetic.MethodsIn a university-based outpatient pain clinic we performed a randomized, double blinded, comparative study with an 18-week follow-up. After positive diagnostic test blocks 52 eligible patients were randomly allocated in a ratio of 3:2, 31 participants to occipital cryoneurolysis and 21 participants to injections of 1 mL methylprednisolone 40 mg/mL (Depo-Medrol®) combined with 1 mL bupivacaine 5 mg/mL.ResultsWe observed a significant pain reduction of more than 50% in both treatment groups, slightly improved neck function and reduced number of opioid consumers. After 6–7-weeks, however, pain intensity increased gradually, but did not reach baseline within 18 weeks. Although cryoneurolysis provided a more prolonged effect, the group differences did not reach statistical significance. Health related quality of life and psychological distress improved minimally. A large number reported minor and transient side effects, but we found no significant group differences. After 18 weeks, 29% rated the headache as much improved, and 12 (24%) somewhat improved, but a large proportion (78%) reported need for further intervention/treatment.ConclusionsCryoneurolysis provided substantial, but temporary pain relief, and the effect was not significantly different from injections of a corticosteroid combined with a local anaesthetic. Participants were selected by a single test block, and the neurolytic procedure was guided by anatomical landmarks and nerve stimulation. A stricter patient selection and an ultrasound-guided technique might have improved the results. Cryoneurolysis provides temporary pain relief not significantly superior to corticosteroid injection, and the results question the value of occipital cryoneurolysis for a chronic pain condition like CEH.ImplicationsOccipital cryoneurolysis may be considered when non-invasive treatments appear insufficient, but only for patients who have responded substantially to test blocks. A risk of local scar and neuroma formation by repeated cryoneurolysis, leading to neuropathic pain has been discussed by other researchers.
We measured pain perception during epidural anesthesia by delivering electrical stimuli to the knee and foot. We found that the addition of sodium bicarbonate to the local anesthetic lidocaine enhances analgesia. We observed no effect of adding carbon dioxide to lidocaine.
One patient died of cerebral hypoxia due to an initially undetected subdural catheter placement complicated by severe pre-existent carotid stenosis. In four patients, the epidural analgesia had to be stopped because of catheter migration. There was no clinical evidence of hematoma, abscess or permanent neurological damage. Epidural analgesia works well in terms of analgesia, mobilization and patient satisfaction, bearing in mind the potential side effects and complications. It can be recommended for lumbotomy and long transperitoneal operations however not for extraperitoneal interventions in the lower abdomen such as radical prostatectomy.
A technique facilitating the endoscopic dilatation of pyloric stenoses due to peptic ulcer disease is described. By means of a Dormia basket placed in the 3rd part of the duodenum a guide wire is obtained with the aid of which the balloon catheter can be positioned. Four patients thus treated are described. Short-term follow-up has been uneventful.
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.