The effectiveness of microvascular decompression in various types of vascular compression in patients with trigeminal neuralgia

The aim of the work was to evaluate the efficacy of microvascular decompression (MVD) in different types of vascular compression (VC) in 20 patients with the idiopathic form of trigeminal neuralgia (TN). The typical VC was found in 17 cases. An arterial vessel was the cause of VC in 6 cases, a venous vessel in 5. The mixed type of VC was present in 6 cases. In every case of the mixed VC one of the vessels compressing the 5th nerve predominated: arterial in 5 and venous in 1. In 3 cases of TN no VC was found. Observation time after MVD was from 6 to 61 months (median 26.7 months). In the TN patients with the arterial VC (including the mixed VC with the arterial predominance) pain relief was complete in 7 cases, satisfactory in 2 and none in 1 case. In patients with venous VC (including mixed VC with venous predominance) pain relief was complete in 4 cases and satisfactory in 2. In the TN patients without VC pain relief was satisfactory in 1, unsatisfactory in 1 and none in 1 case. Long term results of MVD in the analyzed series of the TN patients confirm the efficacy of MVD when vascular compression of the 5th nerve--either arterial or venous--is found intraoperatively.

Use of the World Health Organization guidelines on cancer pain relief before referral to a specialized pain service

In 1986 the World Health Organization (WHO) released guidelines for cancer pain relief. Since then, several controlled studies on effectiveness and practicability of these guidelines have been published. Various authors described inadequate use of these guidelines.We analysed, whether the pain medication of 160 cancer patients referred to the anesthesiological pain clinic at the university hospital of Vienna corresponded to the WHO guidelines or not. Adequacy of pain treatment was assessed using the pain management index (PMI). Multiple criteria were chosen to assess the conformity of the treatment with the guidelines. Furthermore we studied the effect of a strict use of the WHO guidelines in these patients.The average pain intensity of the referred patients was 75 mm (VAS). Negative PMI scores, indicating inadequate pain therapy, were fount in 39 % of cases. A violation of the rules was found in 38% of the therapy schedules. Pain medication was then modified by switching to fixed time intervals, escalation of the steps of the WHO ladder, increasing the dosage or treating neuropathic pain with adjuvant drugs. Two weeks later the average pain score of the patients was reduced to 27 mm (VAS). At that time 72% of the patients quoted an adequate reduction of pain.Inadequate knowledge or disregard of the WHO guidelines for cancer pain relief are common and result in unnecessary and prolonged suffering in these patients.

Single-dose oral Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) for acute postoperative pain: a quantitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) and Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium are non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs used in a variety of painful conditions, including the treatment of postoperative pain. This review aims to assess the efficacy, safety and duration of action of a single oral dose of Naproxen ( Naprosyn )/Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium for moderate to severe acute postoperative pain in adults, compared with placebo. METHODS: The Cochrane Library (issue 4 2002), EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE and an in-house database were searched for randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trials of a single dose of orally administered Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) or Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium in adults with acute postoperative pain. pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into dichotomous information to give the number of patients with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours. Relative benefit and number-needed-to-treat were then calculated. The percentage of patients with any adverse event, number-needed-to-harm, and time to remedication were also calculated. RESULTS: Ten trials with 996 patients in met the inclusion criteria. Six trials compared Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium 550 mg (252 patients) with placebo (248 patients); the NNT for at least 50% pain relief over six hours was 2.6 (95% confidence interval 2.2 to 3.2). There was no significant difference between the number of patients experiencing any adverse event on treatment compared with placebo. Weighted mean time to remedication was 7.6 hours for Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium 550 mg (206 patients) and 2.6 hours for placebo (205 patients). Four other trials used lower doses. CONCLUSION: A single oral dose of Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium 550 mg is an effective analgesic in the treatment of acute postoperative pain. A low incidence of adverse events was found, although these were not reported consistently.

pain relief following tennis elbow release.

We studied the outcome of tennis elbow release in 27 patients at an average of 29.6 months after surgery. We found that 44% of patients had obtained complete pain relief, 37% of patients experienced occasional pain and 19% of patients still experienced moderate pain. pain relief was significantly better in those patients with the shorter duration of preoperative symptoms. We therefore conclude that surgery for tennis elbow should be employed at an earlier stage than is currently practised.

The evaluation of the effectiveness of half-body irradiation as palliative treatment in patients with multiple bone metastases

The results of simplified method of hemibody irradiation of 23 patients with multiple painful bone metastases are presented. In all cases without proven bone metastases in skull and distal part of limbs, these parts of the body were excluded from irradiated field. The study comprised 25 cases of hemibody irradiation. The degree of pain relief and performance status improvement was assessed one and two months after treatment, depending on clinical and histopathological diagnosis and type of bone metastases. The best symptomatic results were obtained in the cases of multiple myelomas (100% of pain relief), prostate cancers (the average degree of 78%) and lung cancers (88%). Considering histopathological diagnosis, the best answer was found in multiple myeloma and squamous cell cancer (88%). Taking into account type of metastases the best result was obtained in the cases of osteolytic metastases (65%). No difference between upper and lower hemibody irradiation was found. The statistically significant correlation between pain relief, performance status improvement and decrease of analgetics use was found. The obtained results suggest that presented simplified form of hemibody irradiation is an effective symptomatic treatment modality in the cases with multiple painful bone metastases, giving an increase of life quality without significant radiation morbidity.

Perceptions of pain relief after surgery.

OBJECTIVE--To assess patients' satisfaction with postoperative pain relief. DESIGN--A descriptive and questionnaire study of patients' experience. SETTING--Two surgical and two gynaecological wards. PATIENTS--50 Patients admitted to hospital for cholecystectomy and 51 admitted for hysterectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Visual analogue scales with no divisions were completed by the patients immediately after each dose of postoperative analgesia was administered throughout their stay in hospital. A questionnaire completed on the fifth postoperative day recorded patients' recollections of their experience. Opinions were also sought from medical and nursing staff. RESULTS--During the first 24 hours after surgery recorded pain levels were 60% of the maximum and were not influenced by age, sex, or the type of operation performed. The median interval between the return of pain and a further injection of analgesic was 2 hours (interquartile range 1 to 3.5 hours). Expectations of pain relief were low, and for 70% of the patients the pain was at least as bad as they had expected. Only half of the medical and nursing staff questioned thought that postoperative analgesia should relieve pain completely; drugs were prescribed and administered with too little attention to the patient's response and too much concern about adverse effects and opioid dependence. CONCLUSIONS--The results suggest that the standard of postoperative pain relief is poor because of inadequate education of patients in what to expect (and demand), and of medical and nursing staff in how to prescribe and administer analgesia with reference to individual drug response.

Sublingual buprenorphine for premedication and postoperative pain relief in orthopaedic surgery.

The effect of sublingual buprenorphine (Temgesic) as a premedicant and for postoperative pain relief compared with morphine/pethidine was studied in 50 patients scheduled for elective surgery of the knee joint. Twenty-five patients received buprenorphine 0.4 mg sublingually 1 h before surgery and the same dose on demand postoperatively. Twenty-five patients were given morphine intramuscularly (7.5 mg or 10 mg to females and males respectively) 1 h preoperatively. This group received pethidine (75 mg) intramuscularly on demand postoperatively. All the patients were anaesthetized with halothane N2O/O2 after induction with thiopentone. No significant differences were found with regard to sedation, dizziness, nausea and vomiting during the study period. Emergence shivering, confusion and restlessness just after termination of the operation were equal in the two groups. In the recovery room, however, there was a higher frequency of shivering (P less than 0.05) in the morphine group. During the first 24 h postoperatively the buprenorphine group was given an average of 3.8 doses compared with 2.3 in the pethidine group (P greater than 0.05). It is concluded, that buprenorphine sublingually is as good as morphine intramuscularly for premedication and therefore should be recommended to patients who wish to avoid injections. For postoperative pain relief the initial dose of buprenorphine should be given intravenously. Only minor and unimportant side effects were seen.

Piroxicam, acetylsalicylic acid and placebo for postoperative pain.

A double-blind comparison of the pain-relieving effect of piroxicam 5 and 10 mg, acetylsalicylic acid 648 mg and placebo was performed in 120 patients with moderate to severe pain on the morning after orthopedic surgery. The changes in pain intensity and pain relief during the 8 h following medication were recorded by a trained nurse observer. 67% of the placebo-treated patients needed rescue drugs compared to 41% of the acetylsalicylic acid, 43% of the piroxicam 5 mg, and 45% of the piroxicam 10 mg treated patients. One to three hours after ingestion of the test drug, the piroxicam and the acetylsalicylic acid groups had significantly improved verbal rating pain intensity scores compared to placebo. In the overall assessment of pain relief at the end of the observation period, the patients' own assessment was significantly superior for acetylsalicylic acid and piroxicam 10 mg compared with placebo. In the observer's assessment of overall pain relief, placebo was significantly inferior to the three other groups. Thus piroxicam 5 mg and 10 mg give relief of pain after orthopedic surgery similar to that given by acetylsalicylic acid 648 mg. The pain-relieving effect of these drugs can be distinguished from placebo, but not from each other. They are not potent enough when pain is moderate to severe after orthopedic surgery.

Clinical experiences and dosage pattern in subcutaneous single-injection digital block technique

100 patients with injuries to their fingers were treated using the subcutaneous digital block as described by Low et al.. Different dosages ranging from 2 to 3 millilitres of a local anesthetic were required to obtain appropriate anesthesia according to the location of injury. 108 finger injuries were treated, 18 thumb injuries, 90 finger injuries. The anesthetic was administered using a 0.55 x 25 mm needle and injected strictly subcutaneously into the flexor crease at the base of the finger or thumb. Injuries to the palmar aspect of the fingers were anesthetized using 2 ml of a local anesthetic (1% Lidocain), whereas 3 ml were needed for sufficient pain relief in case of injury to the dorsal aspect of the fingers. Injury to the thumb required a higher dosage (3 ml subcutaneously), and only offered sufficient pain relief for palmar injuries. In the case of dorsal injuries, we found that this technique was not sufficient in providing pain relief. Additionally, we performed a deep local nerve block (Oberst), if the patient still felt discomfort or pain. The severity or type of injury did not play a role according to our findings. The subcutaneous finger block as described by Low et al., therefore, is the method of choice treating injuries to the fingers and to the palmar aspect of the thumb, since it offers a decrease in the amount of anesthetic required and increases patient comfort.

Studies on the effectiveness of obstetric epidural analgesia. I. Vaginal delivery (author's transl)

In a retrospective study 1,000 women who in 1979 had undergone a delivery either under epidural-anaesthesia or without, and instead either relation training or pethidine in small doses (20-30 mg i.v.) at the Ulm Department of Obstetrics, were followed up by questionnaire. The women of the epidural group felt that they had been adequately informed about the various possibilities of pain relief during labour, while some of the control group felt that they had been inadequately or even incorrectly informed. In the epidural group, pain relief during labour was such that 90% had hardly experienced any, or only mild discomfort, similar degree of pain relief was described by a many as 68.7% of the control group. Especially in the case of primigravida, the women of the epidural group had an insufficient urge to bear down, hence the rate of forceps delivery was relatively high, whereas this problem did not arise in the control group, where the forceps rate was markedly lower. The incidence of headache and back pain was only slightly higher in the epidural as compared to the control group, where other complaints were more frequent. 82% of the epidural group said that they would again choose this form of analgesia for future deliveries, 15% would not. In the control group 22% said that they would like an epidural for future deliveries, while 21% would not. The Apgar scoring and pH values of the newborn showed no significant differences between the groups.