Pharmacological Interventions for Neuropathic Pain Associated withCompressive Myelopathy

T. Tachibana, K. Maruo, Fumihiro Arizumi, Kazuki Kusuyama, K. Kishima, S. Yoshiya
{"title":"Pharmacological Interventions for Neuropathic Pain Associated withCompressive Myelopathy","authors":"T. Tachibana, K. Maruo, Fumihiro Arizumi, Kazuki Kusuyama, K. Kishima, S. Yoshiya","doi":"10.4172/2167-0846.1000258","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury (SCI) is a common problem in patients with SCI, which influences the quality of life of such patients. However, in our experiments of treatments for patients with compressive myelopathy, neuropathic pain was identified in patients with not only SCI, but also those with compressive myelopathy. The objective of this study was the evaluation of pharmacological interventions for neuropathic pain associated with compressive myelopathy (NePCM). Forty-five consecutive patients with NePCM who underwent pharmacological interventions from 2005 to 2016 were included in the study. Patient records were analyzed retrospectively. Evaluated factors were visual analog scale (VAS) and grid score (GS), which were used for quantification of pain. Effective pharmacological interventions were identified when VAS or GS decreased more than 10 points after treatments. The patients’ diagnoses were as follows: cervical or thoracic ossification of posterior longitude ligaments in 17 patients, cervical spondylotic myelopathy in 12 patients, disc herniation in 3 patients, and other diagnoses in 13 patients. All patients received decompression surgery with or without spinal fusion except 7 patients. Cervical lesions were in 32 patients, thoracic lesions were in 11 patients, and both cervical and thoracic lesions were in 2 patients. Pain distribution was at-level in 10 patients, below-level in 23 patients, and both at-level and below-level in 12 patients. Effective interventions were anticonvulsants for 19 patients, antidepressants for 10 patients, and other interventions for 3 patients. The effective anticonvulsants were pregabalin for 9 patients, gabapentin for 6 patients, and chronazepam for 5 patients. The effective antidepressants were duloxetine for 7 patients. However, 15 patients did not respond to any medications. Anticonvulsants and antidepressants are likely to be effective for NePCM, however, some patients do not respond to these interventions. Therefore, advanced treatments have to be developed for NePCM.","PeriodicalId":16641,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain and Relief","volume":"17 1","pages":"1-3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain and Relief","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-0846.1000258","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury (SCI) is a common problem in patients with SCI, which influences the quality of life of such patients. However, in our experiments of treatments for patients with compressive myelopathy, neuropathic pain was identified in patients with not only SCI, but also those with compressive myelopathy. The objective of this study was the evaluation of pharmacological interventions for neuropathic pain associated with compressive myelopathy (NePCM). Forty-five consecutive patients with NePCM who underwent pharmacological interventions from 2005 to 2016 were included in the study. Patient records were analyzed retrospectively. Evaluated factors were visual analog scale (VAS) and grid score (GS), which were used for quantification of pain. Effective pharmacological interventions were identified when VAS or GS decreased more than 10 points after treatments. The patients’ diagnoses were as follows: cervical or thoracic ossification of posterior longitude ligaments in 17 patients, cervical spondylotic myelopathy in 12 patients, disc herniation in 3 patients, and other diagnoses in 13 patients. All patients received decompression surgery with or without spinal fusion except 7 patients. Cervical lesions were in 32 patients, thoracic lesions were in 11 patients, and both cervical and thoracic lesions were in 2 patients. Pain distribution was at-level in 10 patients, below-level in 23 patients, and both at-level and below-level in 12 patients. Effective interventions were anticonvulsants for 19 patients, antidepressants for 10 patients, and other interventions for 3 patients. The effective anticonvulsants were pregabalin for 9 patients, gabapentin for 6 patients, and chronazepam for 5 patients. The effective antidepressants were duloxetine for 7 patients. However, 15 patients did not respond to any medications. Anticonvulsants and antidepressants are likely to be effective for NePCM, however, some patients do not respond to these interventions. Therefore, advanced treatments have to be developed for NePCM.
压迫性脊髓病相关神经性疼痛的药物干预
脊髓损伤后神经性疼痛是脊髓损伤患者的常见问题,影响了脊髓损伤患者的生活质量。然而,在我们对压缩性脊髓病患者的治疗实验中,神经性疼痛不仅存在于脊髓损伤患者中,也存在于压缩性脊髓病患者中。本研究的目的是评估与压迫性脊髓病(NePCM)相关的神经性疼痛的药物干预措施。该研究纳入了2005年至2016年连续45例接受药物干预的NePCM患者。回顾性分析患者记录。评估因素为视觉模拟量表(VAS)和网格评分(GS),用于疼痛的量化。当治疗后VAS或GS下降超过10分时,确定有效的药物干预。诊断为颈、胸后经韧带骨化17例,脊髓型颈椎病12例,椎间盘突出3例,其他诊断13例。除7例患者外,其余患者均行减压手术,伴或不伴脊柱融合术。宫颈病变32例,胸椎病变11例,胸、颈双病变2例。10例患者疼痛分布处于正常水平,23例患者疼痛分布低于正常水平,12例患者疼痛分布处于正常水平和低于正常水平。有效干预措施为抗惊厥药物19例,抗抑郁药物10例,其他干预措施3例。有效的抗惊厥药物为普瑞巴林9例,加巴喷丁6例,氟西泮5例。7例患者有效的抗抑郁药物为度洛西汀。然而,15名患者对任何药物都没有反应。抗惊厥药和抗抑郁药可能对NePCM有效,然而,一些患者对这些干预措施没有反应。因此,必须为NePCM开发先进的治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信