We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Systematic Review
Defining the therapeutic role of local anesthetic sympathetic blockade in complex regional pain syndrome: a narrative and systematic review.
OBJECTIVE: There is growing controversy on the value of blocking the sympathetic nervous system for the treatment of complex regional pain syndromes (CRPS). The authors sought to evaluate the efficacy of sympathetic blockade with local anesthetic in these syndromes. In addition, they performed a comprehensive review of the pathophysiology and other treatments for CRPS.
DESIGN: Systematic review of the literature was performed. MEDLINE was searched from 1966 through 1999. The authors identified only three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated sympathetic blockade with local anesthetic, but because of differences in study design they were unable to pool the study data. The authors therefore included nonrandomized studies and case series.
INTERVENTIONS: Studies were included if local anesthetic sympathetic blockade was used in at least 10 patients. Studies were excluded if continuous infusion techniques, somatic nerve blocks, or combined sympatholytic therapies were evaluated.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain relief was classified as full, partial, or absent. The lack of a comparison group in the studies allowed only the calculation of distribution of the response categories, and the sum of the pooled rates does not equal 100%.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were included that evaluated 1,144 patients. Nineteen studies were retrospective, 5 prospective case series, 3 RCTs, and 2 nonrandomized controlled studies. The quality of the publications was generally poor. Twenty-nine percent of patients had full response, 41% had partial response, and 32% had absent response. It was not possible to estimate the duration of pain relief.
CONCLUSIONS: This review raises questions as to the efficacy of local anesthetic sympathetic blockade as treatment of CRPS. Its efficacy is based mainly on case series. Less than one third of patients obtained full pain relief. The absence of control groups in case series leads to an overestimation of the treatment response that can explain the findings.
DESIGN: Systematic review of the literature was performed. MEDLINE was searched from 1966 through 1999. The authors identified only three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated sympathetic blockade with local anesthetic, but because of differences in study design they were unable to pool the study data. The authors therefore included nonrandomized studies and case series.
INTERVENTIONS: Studies were included if local anesthetic sympathetic blockade was used in at least 10 patients. Studies were excluded if continuous infusion techniques, somatic nerve blocks, or combined sympatholytic therapies were evaluated.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain relief was classified as full, partial, or absent. The lack of a comparison group in the studies allowed only the calculation of distribution of the response categories, and the sum of the pooled rates does not equal 100%.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were included that evaluated 1,144 patients. Nineteen studies were retrospective, 5 prospective case series, 3 RCTs, and 2 nonrandomized controlled studies. The quality of the publications was generally poor. Twenty-nine percent of patients had full response, 41% had partial response, and 32% had absent response. It was not possible to estimate the duration of pain relief.
CONCLUSIONS: This review raises questions as to the efficacy of local anesthetic sympathetic blockade as treatment of CRPS. Its efficacy is based mainly on case series. Less than one third of patients obtained full pain relief. The absence of control groups in case series leads to an overestimation of the treatment response that can explain the findings.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app