+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Can treatment success with 5% lidocaine medicated plaster be predicted in cancer pain with neuropathic components or trigeminal neuropathic pain?

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          An expert group of 40 pain specialists from 16 countries performed a first assessment of the value of predictors for treatment success with 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster in the management of cancer pain with neuropathic components and trigeminal neuropathic pain. Results were based on the retrospective analysis of 68 case reports (sent in by participants in the 4 weeks prior to the conference) and the practical experience of the experts. Lidocaine plaster treatment was mostly successful for surgery or chemotherapy-related cancer pain with neuropathic components. A dose reduction of systemic pain treatment was observed in at least 50% of all cancer pain patients using the plaster as adjunct treatment; the presence of allodynia, hyperalgesia or pain quality provided a potential but not definitively clear indication of treatment success. In trigeminal neuropathic pain, continuous pain, severe allodynia, hyperalgesia, or postherpetic neuralgia or trauma as the cause of orofacial neuropathic pain were perceived as potential predictors of treatment success with lidocaine plaster. In conclusion, these findings provide a first assessment of the likelihood of treatment benefits with 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster in the management of cancer pain with neuropathic components and trigeminal neuropathic pain and support conducting large, well-designed multicenter studies.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Incidence of facial pain in the general population.

          Facial pain has a considerable impact on quality of life. Accurate incidence estimates in the general population are scant. The aim was therefore to estimate the incidence rate (IR) of trigeminal neuralgia (TGN), postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), cluster headache (CH), occipital neuralgia (ON), local neuralgia (LoN), atypical facial pain (AFP), glossopharyngeal neuralgia (GPN) and paroxysmal hemicrania (PH) in the Netherlands. In the population-based Integrated Primary Care Information (IPCI) medical record database potential facial pain cases were identified from codes and narratives. Two medical doctors reviewed medical records, questionnaires from general practitioners and specialist letters using criteria of the International Association for the Study of Pain. A pain specialist arbitrated if necessary and a random sample of all cases was evaluated by a neurologist. The date of onset was defined as date of first specific symptoms. The IR was calculated per 100,000PY. Three hundred and sixty-two incident cases were ascertained. The overall IR [95% confidence interval] was 38.7 [34.9-42.9]. It was more common among women compared to men. Trigeminal neuralgia and cluster headache were the most common forms among the studied diseases. Paroxysmal hemicrania and glossopharyngeal neuralgia were among the rarer syndromes. The IR increased with age for all diseases except CH and ON, peaking in the 4th and 7th decade, respectively. Postherpetic neuralgia, CH and LoN were more common in men than women. From this we can conclude that facial pain is relatively rare, although more common than estimated previously based on hospital data.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Neuropathic pain: quality-of-life impact, costs and cost effectiveness of therapy.

            A number of different diseases or injuries can damage the central or peripheral nervous system and produce neuropathic pain (NP), which seems to be more difficult to treat than many other types of chronic pain. As a group, patients with NP have greater medical co-morbidity burden than age- and sex-adjusted controls, which makes determining the humanistic and economic burden attributable to NP challenging. Health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) is substantially impaired among patients with NP. Patients describe pain-related interference in multiple HR-QOL and functional domains, as well as reduced ability to work and reduced mobility due to their pain. In addition, the spouses of NP patients have been shown to experience adverse social consequences related to NP. In randomized controlled trials, several medications have been shown to improve various measures of HR-QOL. Changes in HR-QOL appear to be tightly linked to pain relief, but not to the development of adverse effects. However, in cross-sectional studies, many patients continue to have moderate or severe pain and markedly impaired HR-QOL, despite taking medications prescribed for NP. The quality of NP treatment appears to be poor, with few patients receiving recommended medications in efficacious dosages. The substantial costs to society of NP derive from direct medical costs, loss of the ability to work, loss of caregivers' ability to work and possibly greater need for institutionalization or other living assistance. No single study has measured all of these costs to society for chronic NP. The cost effectiveness of various interventions for the treatment or prevention of different types of NP has been assessed in several different studies. The most-studied diseases are post-herpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy, for which tricyclic antidepressants (both amitriptyline and desipramine) have been found to be either cost effective or dominant relative to other strategies. Increasing the use of cost-effective therapies such as tricyclic antidepressants for post-herpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy may improve the HR-QOL of patients and decrease societal costs. Head-to-head clinical trials comparing NP therapies are needed to help assess the relative clinical efficacy of treatments, ideally using HR-QOL and utility outcomes. The full costs to society of NP, including productivity loss costs, have not been determined for chronic NP. Improved relative efficacy, utility and cost estimates would facilitate future cost-effectiveness research in NP.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The International Classification of Headache Disorders.

               Jes Olesen (2008)
              A set of related medical disorders that lack a proper classification system and diagnostic criteria is like a society without laws. The result is incoherence at best, chaos at worst. For this reason, the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD) is arguably the single most important breakthrough in headache medicine over the last 50 years. The ICHD identifies and categorizes more than a hundred different kinds of headache in a logical, hierarchal system. Even more important, it has provided explicit diagnostic criteria for all of the headache disorders listed. The ICHD quickly became universally accepted, and criticism of the classification has been minor relative to that directed at other disease classification systems. Over the 20 years following publication of the first edition of the ICHD, headache research has rapidly accelerated despite sparse allocation of resources to that effort. In summary, the ICHD has attained widespread acceptance at the international level and has substantially facilitated both clinical research and clinical care in the field of headache medicine.

                Author and article information

                J Pain Res
                J Pain Res
                Journal of Pain Research
                Dove Medical Press
                05 April 2013
                : 6
                : 261-280
                [1 ]Institute for Pain Medicine, Wiesbaden, Germany
                [2 ]International Clinical Research Institute, Overland Park, KS, USA
                [3 ]Institut Curie, Saint Cloud, France
                [4 ]Eastman Dental Hospital, University College London Hospitals, London, UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Kai-Uwe Kern, Institut für Schmerzmedizin/Schmerzpraxis Wiesbaden, Sonnenberger Strasse 68, 65193 Wiesbaden, Germany, Tel +49 611 2059 2636, Fax +49 611 2059 2637, Email dr.kern@ 123456schmerzpraxis-wiesbaden.de
                © 2013 Kern et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.

                Case Series


                Comment on this article