4.6 Review

Interventional management of neuropathic pain: NeuPSIG recommendations

Journal

PAIN
Volume 154, Issue 11, Pages 2249-2261

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2013.06.004

Keywords

Neuropathic pain; Evidence-based recommendations; Neural blockade; Spinal cord stimulation; Intrathecal medication; Neurosurgery; Clinical trials

Funding

  1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration
  2. U.S. National Institutes of Health
  3. GlaxoSmithKline
  4. Allergan
  5. Alpharma
  6. Schering-Plough
  7. Medtronic
  8. Pfizer
  9. QRx Pharma
  10. Abbott
  11. Astra Zeneca
  12. Cadence
  13. Celgene
  14. Lilly
  15. Nektar
  16. Bioness
  17. Codman
  18. Medtronic Neurological
  19. Northstar Neuroscience
  20. St. Jude Neuromodulation
  21. Stryke
  22. Endo
  23. Grunenthal
  24. Johnson Johnson
  25. Merck
  26. NeurogesX
  27. UCB Pharma
  28. Astellas
  29. AstraZeneca
  30. Biogen
  31. Boehringer Ingelheim
  32. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  33. Desitin
  34. Eisai
  35. Genzyme
  36. Mundipharma
  37. Novartis
  38. Sanofi Pasteur
  39. Schwarz
  40. Teva
  41. UCB Biosciences
  42. Biodelivery Sciences
  43. Xenoport
  44. AWD Pharma
  45. Feering
  46. GTx
  47. Ortho-McNeil Janssen
  48. Shire

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Neuropathic pain (NP) is often refractory to pharmacologic and noninterventional treatment. On behalf of the International Association for the Study of Pain Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group, the authors evaluated systematic reviews, clinical trials, and existing guidelines for the interventional management of NP. Evidence is summarized and presented for neural blockade, spinal cord stimulation (SCS), intrathecal medication, and neurosurgical interventions in patients with the following peripheral and central NP conditions: herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN); painful diabetic and other peripheral neuropathies; spinal cord injury NP; central poststroke pain; radiculopathy and failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS); complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS); and trigeminal neuralgia and neuropathy. Due to the paucity of high-quality clinical trials, no strong recommendations can be made. Four weak recommendations based on the amount and consistency of evidence, including degree of efficacy and safety, are: 1) epidural injections for herpes zoster; 2) steroid injections for radiculopathy; 3) SCS for FBSS; and 4) SCS for CRPS type 1. Based on the available data, we recommend not to use sympathetic blocks for PHN nor radiofrequency lesions for radiculopathy. No other conclusive recommendations can be made due to the poor quality of available data. Whenever possible, these interventions should either be part of randomized clinical trials or documented in pain registries. Priorities for future research include randomized clinical trials, long-term studies, and head-to-head comparisons among different interventional and noninterventional treatments. (C) 2013 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available