Diagnostic epidural opioid technique.

Diagnostic epidural blocks were performed on 27 chronic pain patients sequentially using saline, fentanyl, and lidocaine solution. The patients were divided into one of four groups based on their response to the epidural solutions: placebo response group--pain relief with placebo solutions; fentanyl response group--pain relief with epidural fentanyl; lidocaine response group (LRG)--pain relief with lidocaine but not fentanyl; and no response group--no pain relief with any of the solutions used. The four groups were compared on the basis of age, sex, site of pain, duration of pain, narcotic use, pain assessment index, and workmen's compensation claims. The comparisons resulted in the conclusion that LRG patients had a much longer average duration of pain than the other groups. On the basis of the information gathered, it was theorized that, despite their response to epidural lidocaine, LRG patients may actually be a group of operant pain patients. Their failure to receive analgesia from epidural fentanyl may be a learned response such that they associate any sensory input from the affected area as painful. If follow-up studies support these findings, then the diagnostic opioid technique may be a more sensitive tool in diagnosing chronic pain.

Continuous intracisternal and high cervical intrathecal bupivacaine analgesia in refractory head and neck pain.

BACKGROUND: The upper cervical component of the spinomesencephalic tract and cranial nerves V, VII (nervus intermedius), IX, and X are involved in mechanisms of acute and chronic pain from head and neck structures. To date there is no reliable method for relief of refractory pain (i.e., pain that cannot be relieved by conventional pharmacologic therapies) from these structures. Therefore, we explored continuous intracisternal infusion of bupivacaine for the treatment of refractory pain of the head and neck. METHODS: Intracisternal catheters were inserted in 13 adults with refractory nonmalignant (n = 4) and malignant (n = 9) pain from the head, face, mouth, neck, and upper extremities; 0.5% plain bupivacaine was infused continuously at rates of 1-7 (median 1.5) mg/h with optional bolus doses of 0.5-2.0 mg 4-2 times/h. The efficacy was assessed from pain relief (daily VAS(max), VAS(min), and VAS(mean) scores 0-10), daily doses of intracisternal bupivacaine and total opioid (expressed as mg parenteral morphine-eq), amount of nocturnal sleep, and rates of adverse effects. RESULTS: The 13 patients were treated for 3-182 days (median 37, total 712 days), 3 patients being treated at home for 10-112 days (median 88, total 210 days). In one patient, the efficacy of the treatment could not be estimated because of advanced senility. Eleven of the remaining 12 patients obtained acceptable pain relief with daily doses of intracisternal bupivacaine ranging from 20 to 118 mg (median 37 mg): VAS(mean) scores decreased from 7 to 2, mean pain relief increased for 30% to 80%, total opioid daily dose decreased from 53 to 36 mg parenteral morphine-eq, and nocturnal sleep increased from 2 to >6h (all figures are median values). Speech, eating, walking, and natural functions were generally not affected. Side effects such as tiredness and malaise, somnolence and sleep, feeling of coldness in the neck and skull base, transient post-spinal puncture headache, paresthesias, hoarseness, dysphagia, transient paresis of the upper/lower extremities, episodic miosis and conjunctival hyperemia, and transient orthostatic arterial hypotension were each observed in one or two patients. No patient presented clinical evidence of phrenic nerve paralysis. There was no nausea or vomiting. No persistent neurologic deficit or death could be attributed to the intracisternal pain treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous intracisternal infusion of bupivacaine may be a useful method in exceptional, well selected patients with refractory pain from the head and neck structures. Further studies are necessary to establish the indications and the safety of the method.

Attitudes to pain and pain relief in adult surgical patients.

pain relief after surgery is frequently inadequate. In the last few years much research has been devoted to improving the situation. Unfortunately, very little work has been undertaken to explore the patients' contribution to pain management. The beliefs and attitudes held by patients when they enter the hospital environment may be responsible in some instances for their not achieving optimal pain relief from the available techniques. We have studied some of these attitudes with a survey of 180 adult patients admitted for elective surgery. We found that most patients still expect pain following surgery. However, they are not afraid to ask for analgesics when in pain and do not attribute pain to their own wrong doing. There are, however, some patients who appear to have 'deviant' pain beliefs that could hinder their appropriate use of analgesics. Sadly, it is impossible to identify these patients according to age, gender, socio-economic group or previous experience of pain or surgery.

Degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine treated with intervertebral titanium cages and posterior instrumentation for circumferential fusion.

Thirty-five consecutive patients were evaluated at an average follow-up time of 20 months after circumferential lumbar spinal fusion. All patients had degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine and same-day anterior spinal fusion by using titanium cages packed with autograft bone and posterior instrumentation combined with a posterolateral autogenous bone graft. The purpose of this study was to determine whether anterior titanium cage placement and posterior instrumentation with autologous bone graft was a safe and efficacious procedure in patients with degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Fusion rates, complications, pain relief, medication use, and work status were specifically analyzed. Although previous reports documented the use of this technique for trauma and tumor cases, few studies assessed clinical and radiographic results in patients with degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine. Plain radiographs were used to determine spinal fusion at each spinal level. All patients were administered preoperative and postoperative questionnaires regarding three specific clinical-outcome parameters. These consisted of pain level, medication use, and work status. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were also documented. Radiographic results showed that 61 (97%) of 63 lumbar levels undergoing an arthrodesis procedure fused either anteriorly, posteriorly, or both. Of the 35 patients in this series, 33 (94%) fused at all levels, and two did not. Substantial pain relief was reported in 46% of all patients. Thirteen (37%) patients had one or more surgical complications. Circumferential spinal fusion in patients with degenerative etiologies yields excellent radiographic fusion rates and good pain relief. The procedure is technically demanding and is associated with a high rate of complications.