Faculty Bibliography

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has become an option for those with chronic or refractory sacroiliac (SI) joint pain. The purpose of this critical review is to assess the existing literature and conduct a meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of RFA of the SI joint for pain relief at 3 and 6 months' after an RFA procedure. An electronic search of PubMed, OVID, Medline, and CINAHL were conducted with keywords; sacroiliac joint, sacroiliac pain, sacroiliac syndrome, sacroiliac radiofrequency ablation, sacroiliac neurolysis, sacroiliac injection, and low back pain. Articles that addressed RFA of the SI joint were reviewed. Ten articles ranging from inception to January 1, 2010, were found. The main outcome measure was a reduction of pain by >/=50% post-RFA procedure. At 3 months, 7 groups met the criteria and at 6 months, 6 groups met the criteria. A meta-analysis with a forest plot was done at the 3- and 6-month patient follow-up intervals. The associated standard error was calculated for each study group. An overall weighted average with respective standard error was also obtained. A calculation of 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) was then derived. A test for heterogeneity, publication bias, and file drawer effect was also done at the 3- and 6-month intervals. At 3 months, a range of 0.538-0.693 was found to have a 95% CI, with a pooled mean of 0.616. At 6 months, a 95% CI of 0.423-0.576 was found, with a pooled mean of 0.499. The meta-analysis demonstrated that RFA is an effective treatment for SI joint pain at 3 months and 6 months. This study is limited by the available literature and lack of randomized controlled trials. Further standardization of RFA lesion techniques needs to be established, coupled with prospective randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: Essential oxygen oil (OxyRub from CreoMed Inc., Naples, FL, U.S.A.) is a novel topical analgesic currently commercially available in Europe and now available in the U.S.A. It represents an important alternative to other treatments (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, menthol, camphor) for managing mild to moderate acute and chronic pain. Several clinical trials of this oil will be reviewed. RESULTS: One large (n = 455) open-label trial found essential oxygen oil to be a safe and effective analgesic for a broad range of patients with acute and chronic pain. In that study, 80% of patients reported that their pain decreased by more than 75%. A double-blind placebo-controlled study (n = 50) found significant pain reduction for tendonitis in patients using essential oxygen oil. Another trial of essential oxygen oil vs. placebo (n = 50) with various pain diagnoses found that 98% of patients with various pain diagnoses reported 'very good' pain relief in the oil group compared to 48% in the placebo group. Furthermore, a randomized controlled trial in 10 women to measure oxygen microcirculatory effect in the skin showed an increased microcirculatory effect with improved oxygenation (increased partial pressure of oxygen in the skin) after application of essential oxygen oil. In all studies, the oil was well tolerated. None of these studies has been previously published. CONCLUSIONS: Based on studies completed, essential oxygen oil has shown itself to be safe, has demonstrated positive analgesic effects for the treatment of acute and chronic pain, and has improved oxygen content in the skin as well as other dermatological parameters

It is estimated that 10 million Americans are disabled by low back pain and lumbosacral radiculopathy (LSR), which leads to approximately 19 million physician visits per year. While there is debate over the best treatment paradigm for LSR, steroids are among the mainstays. Oral and epidural steroids have both shown favorable results in LSR. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether response to oral steroids is a predictor of response to epidural steroid injections (ESI). Methods: A retrospective study of 142 patients with LSR presenting to the NYU Pain Management Center with >1 month of symptoms. Thirty two subjects received a five day course of oral prednisone 10 mg four times per day, and were later given interlaminar ESI when the oral steroids did not help or when the pain returned. All injections were administered under fluoroscopy, with epidural injectate consisting of 80 mg of DepoMedrol and 2 cc 0.9 NS. After 2 weeks, patients were assessed for pain relief on a scale of 0 to 10. Results: Of 32 people receiving oral steroids, 16 reported pain relief (>40% reductionresponders), with mean improvement score of 7 points, and 14 subjects did not show improvement (non-responders). After receiving ESI, both the responders and nonresponders had 70% pain reduction. Conclusion: Failure of oral steroids does not prognosticate failure of epidural steroids. Patients who did not respond to oral steroids can still get excellent pain relief after epidural steroid injections

A majority of patients with acute and chronic pain experience breakthrough pain above their baseline, despite a fixed regimen. The characteristics of current short-acting oral medications are not optimal because they often peak too late and last beyond the duration of pain. Oral absorption limits the onset time, whereas the development of newer routes can shorten onset times. A number of medications, both opioid and nonopioid, are being developed for intranasal delivery with promising results. In addition to the intranasal administration route being efficacious, it also provides better patient satisfaction by allowing the patient to titrate their own pain medication. There are legitimate concerns for abuse and addiction with these medications, which will need to be minimized with proper dispensing modifications. A number of nonopioid agents are also entering the market that will allow for multimechanistic analgesic plans. Although ketamine is not a common component of current pain treatment plans, the development of an intranasal formulation may potentially produce wider acceptance. Many traditional medications, including ibuprofen and acetaminophen, have been developed for parenteral administration. Intravenous ibuprofen or diclofenac can be administered for a longer duration and have a lower bleeding risk then ketorolac. Intravenous acetaminophen can provide balanced analgesia when nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are contraindicated, as is common in the postoperative period. The role of individual agents in each specialty is not currently clear, but the future treatment of pain, both acute and chronic, is brighter with the addition of these formulations

Prescription opioid abuse is a growing problem that has become a critical public health issue. The development of abuse-resistant opioid formulations is an emerging strategy aimed at curbing the abuse of opioid analgesics. Over the next few months to years, new products within this category will enter the market. This article serves to provide an introduction to many of the upcoming formulations that may find their way into the therapeutic arsenal of pain management practitioners

Pudendal neuralgia (PN) involves severe, sharp pain along the course of the pudendal nerve, often aggravated with sitting. Current therapies include medication management, nerve blocks, decompression surgery, and neuromodulation. The ideal management for PN has not been determined. We present a case of a female with 1.5 years of sharp, burning pain of the left gluteal and perineal regions. She could not sit for longer than 10 to 15 minutes. Sacroiliac joint, epidural, and piriformis injections did not improve her pain. She had tried physical therapy, occupational therapy, massage, and acupuncture but the pain persisted. Medication treatment with oxycodone-acetaminophen, extended release morphine sulfate, amitriptyline, and gabapentin provided only minor relief and she had failed other multianalgesic therapy. She had been unable to work at her desk job for over a year. She had a positive response to 2 diagnostic pudendal nerve blocks with lidocaine that provided pain relief for several hours. This patient elected to undergo pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) of the left pudendal nerve in hopes of achieving a longer duration and improved pain relief. PRF was carried out at a frequency of 2 Hz and a pulse width of 20 milliseconds for a duration of 120 seconds at 42 degrees Celsius. After the procedure she reported tolerating sitting for 4 to 5 hours. Her multianalgesic therapy was successfully weaned. At 5 months follow-up she felt motivated to return to work. One and a half years after the procedure the patient is only taking oxycodone-acetaminophen for pain relief and still has good sitting tolerance. There were no procedure-related complications. To our knowledge PRF for the treatment of PN has not been reported elsewhere in the literature. PRF is a relatively new procedure and is felt to be safer than continuous radiofrequency. Current literature suggests that PRF delivers an electromagnetic field, which modifies neuro-cellular function with minimal cellular destruction. We conclude that PRF of the pudendal nerve offers promise as a potential treatment of PN that is refractory to conservative therapy

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are the most commonly performed intervention in the United States to manage chronic and subacute low back and neck pain with radiculopathy. ESIs have been used for decades for the treatment of discogenic and osteoarthritic radicular conditions originating from the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine, as well as spondylosis, nonspecific radiculitis, and spinal stenosis. With the ever-increasing use of epidural steroids, there has been a disproportionate increase in popularity of transforaminal ESIs in particular. Since 2002, there has been a growing body of largely transforaminal epidural steroid case report literature that describes paralysis, stroke, and death that immediately follows the performance of these procedures. These complications are thought to be related to a combination of factors, which may include the technique used, underlying pathophysiology that is being treated, anatomical variations in the blood supply, as well as the specific injectate used. This article discusses the pathogenesis of these complications and puts the role of steroids in their causation into perspective

Objective. Spinal cord stimulator (SCS) parameter settings have been well studied; however, the goal of this exploratory study was to examine the SCS parameters used during intra-operative stimulation (IOS) at trial lead placement. Methods. In this retrospective study, we report the IOS parameter settings for 22 patients who underwent thoracic SCS lead trial for treatment of refractory low back and/or leg pain. Results. Paresthesia coverage was shown to differ depending upon the pain syndrome and the region involved (back and/or leg, p = 0.03). Certain stimulation parameters were demonstrated to be linked, including pulse width with rate (p = 0.04) and bipolar activation distance with amplitude (p < 0.01). Important variations in field configuration practice patterns also emerged. Conclusions. Larger prospective studies are required to confirm and extend the current results. The ultimate goal for this report is to establish a foundation for future studies to create an evidence-based standardized algorithm for IOS to enhance the success rate of SCS trial screening

Phantom limb pain has been well described in the literature. However, new-onset lumbar radicular pain superimposed on baseline lower extremity phantom pain is a clinical scenario that can be challenging to recognize. Furthermore, literature on recognition and treatment of phantom radiculopathy is all but lacking. We present a patient who experienced new-onset lumbar radiculopathy superimposed on her phantom pain that was successfully treated with fluoroscopic interlaminar and transforaminal epidural steroid injections