4.7 Article

Postherpetic neuralgia: Topical lidocaine is effective in nociceptor-deprived skin

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
卷 252, 期 6, 页码 677-686

出版社

DR DIETRICH STEINKOPFF VERLAG
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-005-0717-z

关键词

zoster; allodynia; neuropathic pain; pathophysiological mechanisms

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives Topical lidocaine is effective in postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). The aim of the present investigation was to classify patients according to their predominant peripheral nociceptor function and to compare these data with the results of a controlled study using dermal lidocaine patch. Methods Within the skin area of maximal pain QST (thermotest) and QCART (histamine iontophoresis and laser Doppler flowmetry) were performed prospectively in 18 PHN patients. A controlled study using cutaneous lidocaine (lidocaine 5% patch, IBSA) followed. Results Six patients (group I, sensitised nociceptors) had no sensory loss. Heat pain thresholds were equal or lower than on the contralateral side. Histamine-induced flare and axon reflex vasodilatation were not different on both sides. Histamine evoked pain increased. In 12 patients (group II, nociceptor impairment) heat pain thresholds were higher than contralateral. Histamine-induced flare was impaired or abolished. Histamine did not induce any sensation. Lidocaine was efficacious in the entire group of patients. Subgroup analysis revealed that patients with impairment of nociceptor function had significantly greater pain reduction under lidocaine vs placebo. Patients with preserved and sensitised nociceptors demonstrated no significant pain relief. Conclusions. PHN patients differ concerning their cutaneous nociceptor function: In the group I pain is caused by pathologically sensitised nociceptors. In subset II there is a loss of function of cutaneous C-nociceptors within the allodynic skin. Patients responded well to topical lidocaine even if the skin was completely deprived of nociceptors. Different underlying mechanims of lidocaine action in nociceptor-deprived skin are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据