Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0344307 (analgesia)
 28,200 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Spinal cord stimulation is considered to be ineffective in relieving deafferentation pain. We have retrospectively analyzed the results obtained in a series of 41 patients. Sixteen suffered from pain associated with an incomplete traumatic spinal lesion, 15 from a posttherapeutic neuralgia, and 10 from pain due to root and/or nerve damage. At the end of the test period, 43.7% of the patients with paraplegic pain, (40% of those with peripheral deafferentation pain and 66.6% of the ones with postherapeutic neuralgia), reported satisfactory pain relief and were connected to a chronic stimulation system. At mean follow-up (15 months), only 20% of the patients of the first two groups reported sufficient pain relief. In the postherapeutic group the figure of responders was unchanged. The mean analgesia achieved was 70%. From this analysis we conclude that the results achieved in the postherapeutic pain patients, although positive in only 66% of them, are remarkably stable with time. Therefore, we recommend a percutaneous test trial of SCS in every case of postherapeutic pain resistant to medical treatment.
 ...
PMID:Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in deafferentation pain. 247 55

SCS is considered to be of poor value in treating postherpetic pain. We have retrospectively analyzed the results obtained in 10 patients suffering from postherpetic neuralgia. An epidural electrode was implanted, aiming the tip in a position where stimulation could produce paraesthesiae over the painful area. At the end of the test period 6 out of 10 patients reporting a mean analgesia of 52.5% underwent a permanent implant. At mean follow-up (15 months) all the 6 patients were still reporting a satisfactory pain relief (74% of mean analgesia). These figures remained unchanged at the next follow-ups (max 46 months). The result of SCS in our patients, although positive in only 60% of them, are remarkably stable with time. We therefore recommend a percutaneous test trial of SCS in every case of postherpetic neuralgia resistent to medical treatment.
 ...
PMID:Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in the treatment of postherpetic pain. 278 76

We include in this article the results of a postal inquiry into chronic pain in SCI patients in Valencia (Spain), and our experience with their management. A mailed questionnaire including lesion and chronic pain data was sent to all of the 380 SCI patients who live in the region of Valencia. We received 202 answers, with 145 questionnaires being accurately answered and these were analysed for this study. The results show that chronic pain (that is, lasting more than 6 months) is very common (65.5%). The most frequent type was deafferentation pain (phantom pain), described as burning or a painful numbness. Since 1988 we have been treating a sample of 33 patients suffering from resistant pain according to the following therapies: 1 amitriptyline + clonazepam+NSAID (nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs); 2 amitriptyline + clonazepam + 5-OH-tryptophane + TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation); 3 amitriptyline + clonazepam + SCS (spinal cord stimulation); 4 morphine, by continuous intrathecal infusion. After almost 4 years using these therapies we can affirm that the results regarding analgesia reached 80% in all cases, and that morphine used by intrathecal route is very safe and useful in selected patients.
 ...
PMID:Chronic pain in the spinal cord injured: statistical approach and pharmacological treatment. 750 85

After suffering some setbacks since its introduction in 1967, stimulation of the spinal and peripheral nervous systems has undergone rapid development in the last ten years. Based on principles enunciated in the Gate Control Hypothesis that was published in 1968, stimulation-produced analgesia [SPA] has been subjected to intensive laboratory and clinical investigation. Historically, most new clinical ideas in medicine have tended to follow a three-tiered course. Initial enthusiasm gives way to a reappraisal of the treatment or modality as side-effects or unanticipated problems arise. The last and third phase proceeds at a more measured pace as the treatment is refined by experience. This review is divided into three parts as it traces the progress of spinal cord stimulation [SCS] and peripheral nerve stimulation [PNS]. The review commences with a discussion of the theory of SCS and PNS, and is followed by early reports during which it became apparent that the modality is essentially only effective in the treatment of neuropathic pain. The last section describes the modern experience including efficacy in specific types of pain and concludes with recent accomplishments that dramatize the relief of pain which can be achieved in nonoperable peripheral vascular disease or myocardial ischemia. Over the years, a search for those transmitters that might be influenced by spinal cord stimulation focused on somatostatin, cholecystokinin (CCK), vasoactive intestinal polypeptide (VIP), neurotensin and other amines, although only substance "P" was implicated. More recently, in animal studies, evidence that GABA-ergic systems are affected may explain the frequent successful suppression of allodynia that follows spinal cord stimulation. During the past eight years, much attention has been directed to studies that use a chronic neuropathic pain model. While PNS held significant promise as a pain relieving modality, early electrode systems and their surgical implantation yielded variable results due to evolving technical and surgical skills. These results dramatically reduced the continued development of PNS, which then gave way to a preoccupation with SCS. Modern development of SCS with outcome studies, particularly in relation to failed back surgery syndrome [FBSS] and the outcome of peripheral nerve surgery for chronic regional pain syndromes, has earned both modalities a place in the ongoing management of patients with intractable neuropathic pain. The last section, dealing with pain of peripheral vascular and myocardial ischemia, is perhaps one of the more exciting developments in stimulation produced analgesia and as the papers discussed demonstrate, can provide a level of analgesia and efficacy that is unattainable by other treatment modalities. SCS and PNS has an important role to play in the management of conditions that are otherwise refractory to conservative or other conventional management.
 ...
PMID:Stimulation of the central and peripheral nervous system for the control of pain. 901 59

Anesthesiological and neurosurgical methods in the treatment of cancer pain have to be considered as parts of a holistic approach. To treat cancer pain patients appropriately, an interdisciplinary setting is essential. In the eyes of experienced pain specialists as well as physicians in palliative medicine invasive procedures are only of minor importance. Their use has been steadily decreasing while neuromodulatory (e.g. intraspinal opioids) or stimulatory (e.g. TENS, DBS, SCS) methods gained wider acceptance. The only neurolytic procedure which still has some importance is the neurolysis of the celiac ganglion for alleviation of pain in the upper abdomen mostly due to pancreatic cancer. This approach seems to be highly effective and tends to be afflicted with only minor complications. Other neurolytic blocks have shown solely local and temporal efficacy. In their majority they are unprecise and often accompanied by severe complications. Therefore these procedures should be scheduled only after carefully weighing risk versus benefit. Where suitable, the use of neurolytics is replaced by radiofrequency thermocoagulation, to a lesser degree by cryoanalgesia. Both procedures normally do not yield better analgesia but do result in fewer complications. Physicians tend to treat pain as a completely somatic disorder, but chronic pain states are always bio-psycho-social in nature. In order to achieve an effective pain treatment all influencing variables have to be taken into account. Anesthesiological and neurosurgical procedures are only a part of the possible and necessary treatment options. Especially before using one of the invasive methods described here, it seems imperative to involve the patient in the process of decision making more closely than currently practiced.
 ...
PMID:[Pain therapy in tumor patients and in palliative medicine. 2: Invasive measures]. 970 41