Kubrova, Eva

Objectives Ultrasound‐guided percutaneous needle fenestration (UPNF) and percutaneous needle tenotomy (UPNT) are minimally invasive procedures commonly used to treat chronic tendinopathies. However, these techniques can be painful, potentially limiting patient tolerance, satisfaction, and procedural feasibility. Although local anesthetics (LAs) provide analgesia, their potential inhibitory effects on tenocyte activity and the efficacy of orthobiologics raise concerns regarding their impact on tendon healing. The objectives of this study is to propose a practical, anatomy‐based approach for the use of ultrasound‐guided peripheral nerve blocks (USG‐PNBs) as a strategy to reduce pain and improve patient comfort during UPNF and UPNT, with or without orthobiologic adjuncts. Methods We reviewed commonly affected anatomical sites in chronic tendinopathies and identified corresponding peripheral nerve targets that can be reliably and safely blocked under ultrasound guidance. For each condition, we outline appropriate nerve block techniques, anatomical landmarks, and recommended patient positioning to optimize procedural analgesia. Results A set of targeted USG‐PNBs was defined for commonly treated tendinopathies, including supraspinatus tendinopathy, lateral and medial epicondylitis, gluteus medius and/or minimus tendinopathy, patellar tendinopathy, Achilles tendinopathy, and plantar fasciopathy. Conclusion Ultrasound‐guided peripheral nerve blocks represent a practical and effective approach to manage pain during percutaneous procedures for chronic tendinopathies. By reducing procedural discomfort and avoiding the potential drawbacks of peritendinous LAs, these techniques may enhance patient tolerance, procedural success, and overall clinical outcomes.

Abstract Background: Lumbar facet joint arthropathy (LFJA) is a major cause of low back pain (LBP), with current treatments offering limited long-term benefits. Bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs) show promise due to their immunomodulatory and trophic effects, potentially addressing underlying degenerative processes in LFJA. Objectives: This initial report describes the outcomes of the first treated patient in an ongoing mutidisciplinary phase 1 clinical trial evaluating the safety and feasibility of intra-articular allogeneic BM-MSCs for painful LFJA. Methods: Following enrollment in our IRB-approved protocol, symptomatic LFJA was confirmed through double blocks on L4 and L5 medial branches. Two 1-mL syringes, each containing 10 million BM-MSCs, were prepared in the cGMP facility and administered bilaterally to the patient’s L4-L5 lumbar facet joints. The patient underwent standardized follow-ups, including clinical examinations and functional and imaging assessments for 2 years, utilizing patient-reported outcomes measurement information system—computer adaptive tests (PROMIS CATs), visual analogue scale, Oswestry disability index, work functional status and opioid pain medication use, and MR imaging Fenton–Czervionke score. Results: The patient tolerated the procedure well, with no drug-related adverse events during the study period. Pain, spine function, and work functional status improved at multiple follow-ups. This patient also reported improvements in mental and social health, along with a notable improvement in the grade of facet synovitis observed at the one-year follow-up MRI evaluation. Conclusions: This case report suggests the safety and feasibility of administering intra-articular allogeneic BM-MSCs, offering therapeutic benefits for pain management and functional activities.

AbstractPersistent chest pain (PCP) following acute COVID‐19 infection is a commonly reported symptom with an unclear etiology, making its management challenging. This scoping review aims to address the knowledge gap surrounding the characteristics of PCP following COVID‐19, its causes, and potential treatments. This is a scoping review of 64 studies, including observational (prospective, retrospective, cross‐sectional, case series, and case–control) and one quasi‐experimental study, from databases including Embase, PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Google Scholar, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. Studies on patients with PCP following mild, moderate, and severe COVID‐19 infection were included. Studies with patients of any age, with chest pain that persisted following acute COVID‐19 disease, irrespective of etiology or duration were included. A total of 35 studies reported PCP symptoms following COVID‐19 (0.24%–76.6%) at an average follow‐up of 3 months or longer, 12 studies at 1–3 months and 17 studies at less than 1‐month follow‐up or not specified. PCP was common following mild—severe COVID‐19 infection, and etiology was mostly not reported. Fourteen studies proposed potential etiologies including endothelial dysfunction, cardiac ischemia, vasospasm, myocarditis, cardiac arrhythmia, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, postural tachycardia syndrome, or noted cardiac MRI (cMRI) changes. Evaluation methods included common cardiopulmonary tests, as well as less common tests such as flow‐mediated dilatation, cMRI, single‐photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Only one study reported a specific treatment (sulodexide). PCP is a prevalent symptom following COVID‐19 infection, with various proposed etiologies. Further research is needed to establish a better understanding of the causes and to develop targeted treatments for PCP following COVID‐19.

Abstract Background Chronic intractable pain from peripheral neuropathy is a debilitating condition that might not respond to conventional medical management and pharmacotherapy. The primary objective of this systematic review was to assess change (or reduction) in pain intensity in patients with length-dependent peripheral neuropathy after spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapy. Methods This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The primary outcome was change (or reduction) in pain intensity after 12 months of SCS therapy compared with baseline in participants with length-dependent peripheral neuropathy. Secondary outcomes included change in pain intensity after 6 months and change in opioid consumption after 12 months. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines were used to appraise the quality of evidence. Results Nineteen studies consisting of 376 participants who underwent SCS implantation met the inclusion criteria. Qualitative synthesis revealed that all eligible studies reported a significant improvement in pain intensity after 12 months of SCS therapy as compared with baseline. Mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for 4 studies, all of which achieved the minimal clinically important difference for change in pain intensity at 12 months. The GRADE quality of evidence for this outcome was appraised as very low quality. Conclusion This systematic review highlights that SCS could lead to significant improvement in pain intensity for length-dependent peripheral neuropathy, although future well-powered randomized controlled trials are warranted to increase the certainty of evidence in this finding. Study registration PROSPERO (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/) ID: CRD42022377572.

Background Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has emerged as an important treatment for chronic pain disorders. While there is evidence supporting improvement in pain intensity with SCS therapy, efforts to synthesize the evidence on physical functioning are lacking. Objective The primary objective of this meta-analysis was to assess long-term physical function following 12 months of SCS for chronic back pain. Evidence review PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases were searched for original peer-reviewed publications investigating physical function following SCS. The primary outcome was physical function at 12 months following SCS therapy for chronic back pain compared with baseline. A random effects model with an inverse variable method was used. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to determine the certainty of evidence. Findings A total of 518 studies were screened, of which 36 were included. Twenty-two studies were pooled in the meta-analysis. There was a significant reduction in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores at all time frames up to 24 months following implantation. Pooled results revealed significant improvement in ODI scores at 12 months with a mean difference of −17.00% (95% CI −23.07 to −10.94, p<0.001). There was a very low certainty of evidence in this finding as per the GRADE framework. There was no significant difference in subgroup analyses based on study design (randomised controlled trials (RCTs) vs non-RCTs), study funding, or stimulation type. Conclusion This meta-analysis highlights significant improvements in physical function after SCS therapy. However, this finding was limited by a very low GRADE certainty of evidence and high heterogeneity.

Back pain with radicular symptoms is associated with detrimental physical and emotional functioning and economic burden. Conservative treatments including physical, pharmacologic and injection therapy may not provide clinically significant or long-standing relief. Regenerative medicine research including Platelet rich plasma (PRP), Platelet lysate (PL) or Plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) continues to develop, however evidence appraisal for treatment of radicular pain remains lacking. Thus, we performed a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of epidural steroid injections containing PRP or related products to treat radicular pain. Embase, PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Google Scholar databases were queried. Twelve studies were included in qualitative analysis, consisting of three randomized controlled trials and nine observational studies. The primary outcome was pain intensity, and secondary outcomes included functional improvement, anatomical changes on advanced imaging, and adverse events. All studies identified improved pain intensity and functional outcomes after epidural injection of PRP, PRGF and/or PL. Similar or longer lasting pain relief was noted in the PRP cohort compared to the cohort receiving epidural steroid injections with effects lasting up to 12–24 months. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis revealed a very-low certainty of evidence due to risk of bias, indirectness, and imprecision.