Strand, Natalie H

AbstractObjectiveThis prospective longitudinal study compares outcomes between Medicare beneficiaries receiving percutaneous image‐guided lumbar decompression (PILD) using the mild® procedure and a control group of patients receiving interspinous spacers for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with neurogenic claudication (NC).MethodsPatients diagnosed with LSS with NC and treated with either the mild procedure or a spacer were identified in the Medicare claims database. The incidence of harms, the rate of subsequent interventions, and the overall combined rate of harms and subsequent interventions during 2‐year follow‐up after the index procedure were compared between the two groups and assessed for statistical significance with p = 0.05.ResultsThe study included 2229 patients in the mild group and 3401 patients who were implanted with interspinous spacers. The rate of harms for those treated with the mild procedure was less than half that of patients implanted with a spacer (5.6% vs. 12.1%, respectively; p < 0.0001) during 2‐year follow‐up. The rate of subsequent interventions was not significantly different between the two groups (24.9% and 26.1% for the mild and spacer groups, respectively; p = 0.7679). The total rate of harms and subsequent interventions for mild was found to be noninferior to spacers (p < 0.0001).ConclusionsThis comprehensive study of real‐world Medicare claims data demonstrated a significantly lower rate of harms for the mild procedure compared to interspinous spacers for patients diagnosed with LSS with NC, and a similar rate of subsequent interventions during 2‐year follow‐up.

Calciphylaxis is a serious and rare medical condition that leads to substantial clinical manifestations including pain, creating perioperative and treatment challenges. No standard treatment protocol exists nor are comprehensive guidelines available for perioperative management of patients with calciphylaxis. In this review, we evaluate existing literature (January 2000 to May 2021) with the aim to offer guidance for treating patients with this challenging disease through the perioperative period. Although no therapies are currently considered standard for treating calciphylaxis, multiple interventions are available for improving symptoms. Preoperative and intraoperative management involves monitoring and optimizing patient comorbid conditions and any possible electrolyte imbalances. Postoperative management can be challenging when potential calciphylaxis triggers are indicated, such as warfarin and corticosteroids. In addition, poor wound healing and difficult pain control are common. Therefore, a multifactorial approach to controlling postoperative pain is recommended that includes the use of nerve blocks, renal-sparing opioids, benzodiazepines, and/or ketamine. We present preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative recommendations for treating calciphylaxis with levels of evidence when appropriate.

Background: Neuropathies, the most common complication of diabetes, manifest in various forms, including entrapments, mononeuropathies or, most frequently, a distal symmetric polyneuropathy. Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) in the classic “stocking” distribution is a disease of increasing prevalence worldwide and a condition for which standard medical treatment only provides modest relief. Neuromodulation offers a potential alternative to pharmacotherapies given its demonstrated efficacy in other refractory chronic neuropathic pain syndromes. High-quality evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is available in these other settings for two approaches to spinal cord stimulation (SCS): (1) conventional low-frequency SCS (LF-SCS), which modulates axonal activity in the dorsal column and is paresthesia-dependent, and (2) high-frequency SCS delivered at 10 kilohertz (10 kHz SCS), which targets neurons in the superficial dorsal horn and is paresthesia-independent. Method: This review examines the evidence for SCS from published RCTs as well as prospective studies exploring the safety and effectiveness of treating PDN with neuromodulation. Results: Two RCTs enrolling 60 and 36 participants with PDN showed treatment with LF-SCS reduced daytime pain by 45% to 55% for up to two years. An RCT testing 10 kHz SCS versus conventional medical management (CMM) in 216 participants with PDN revealed 76% mean pain relief after six months of stimulation. None of the studies revealed unexpected safety issues in the use of neuromodulation in this patient population. Conclusion: These well-designed RCTs address the unmet need for improved PDN therapies and provide data on the safety, effectiveness, and durability of SCS therapy.

Summary Chronic pain causes significant suffering, limitation of daily activities and reduced quality of life. Infection from COVID ‐19 is responsible for an ongoing pandemic that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome, leading to systemic complications and death. Led by the World Health Organization, healthcare systems across the world are engaged in limiting the spread of infection. As a result, all elective surgical procedures, outpatient procedures and patient visits, including pain management services, have been postponed or cancelled. This has affected the care of chronic pain patients. Most are elderly with multiple comorbidities, which puts them at risk of COVID ‐19 infection. Important considerations that need to be recognised during this pandemic for chronic pain patients include: ensuring continuity of care and pain medications, especially opioids; use of telemedicine; maintaining biopsychosocial management; use of anti‐inflammatory drugs; use of steroids; and prioritising necessary procedural visits. There are no guidelines to inform physicians and healthcare providers engaged in caring for patients with pain during this period of crisis. We assembled an expert panel of pain physicians, psychologists and researchers from North America and Europe to formulate recommendations to guide practice. As the COVID ‐19 situation continues to evolve rapidly, these recommendations are based on the best available evidence and expert opinion at this present time and may need adapting to local workplace policies.

Abstract Background: Genicular nerve radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is an intervention to treat patients with chronic knee pain who have failed previous conservative, pharmacologic, and surgical interventions. Vascular complications following interventional procedures of the knee are extremely rare. A delay in diagnosis may be detrimental for the viability of the affected limb and may ultimately require amputation. Case Presentation: A 76-year-old man with a history of severe bilateral knee osteoarthritis and grade 4 chondromalacia presented to our clinic with refractory, severe bilateral knee pain and received a bilateral genicular nerve RFA. He returned 4 days later with right medial thigh pain and a magnetic resonance imaging study revealing a hematoma along the anteromedial aspect of the right distal femoral diaphysis measuring 13.3 × 4.5 × 3.0 cm. After collaboration between pain medicine and orthopedic surgery services, decision was made to treat patient conservatively with rest, compression, elevation, ice application, tramadol, and gabapentin, but with close follow-up and a low threshold to intervene with diagnostic and therapeutic angiography with embolization if bleeding worsened; he reported resolution of his pain after a 4-day and 1-month follow-up. Conclusion: This is the first report describing iatrogenic vascular injury in the knee after a genicular RFA procedure. Pain medicine physicians should be aware of the vascular anatomy of the knee, particularly paying close attention to variations after previous surgeries. Future trials should investigate modalities that minimize vascular complications including concomitant use of ultrasonography with fluoroscopy and other forms of RFA including pulsed or cooled RFA.