Management of neuropathic pain after surgical and non-surgical trauma with lidocaine 5% patches: study of 40 consecutive cases

Comparative Benefit-Risk Assessment for Lidocaine 700 mg Medicated Plaster and Pregabalin in Peripheral Neuropathic Pain Following a Structured Framework Approach

Introduction

Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) is difficult to treat. Several oral drugs are recommended as first-line treatments. Nevertheless, many patients cannot obtain sufficient pain relief or do not tolerate systemically active treatments. Topical treatments, with a lower risk of systemic side effects such as lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster, are also recommended in treatment guidelines. This analysis compares the benefit–risk balance of topical 700 mg lidocaine medicated plaster with the benefit–risk balance of oral pregabalin administration for the treatment of PNP following current recommendations on benefit–risk assessment (BRA) methodology.

Methods

The Benefit–Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework was used as structured approach. Selection of key benefits and risks was supported by a patient survey. Published randomized controlled clinical trials were the main source to identify data related to key benefits and risks. The outcome of randomized clinical trials was compared with real-world evidence (RWE) data for consistency.

Results

Identified key benefits were pain reduction and improvement in quality of life. Key risks identified were application site reactions, dizziness, confusion, weight gain, peripheral edema, and blurred vision. Overall, there was similarity in key benefits between the comparators; however, a clear advantage regarding key risks in favor of lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster was observed. This observation was consistent across data from a direct comparison trial, randomized placebo-controlled trials, as well as data from RWE studies. The low number of randomized controlled trials for lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster was the main limitation.

Conclusion

Guided by the opinion of patients regarding key benefits and risks deemed important for treatments of peripheral neuropathic pain, our analysis showed that lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster has a more favorable benefit–risk balance compared to pregabalin (300 and 600 mg daily).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40122-021-00340-2.

The PATCH trial: efficacy and safety of 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster for the treatment of patients with trigeminal neuralgia: a study protocol for a multicentric, double-blind, enriched enrolment randomised withdrawal, vehicle-controlled study

INTRODUCTION

Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is characterised by a sudden, severe, electric shock like paroxysmal pain, which is almost always associated with triggers. Carbamazepine is the first-line medical management of TN. However, side effects are common. Currently, there is no ideal treatment for TN. Since there is a known abnormality of Na+ channels in the trigger zone, 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster (LMP), which can block the Na+ channels on Aδ and C fibres, is an effective treatment method in many chronic pain conditions. A case report has found the benefit of LMP for the treatment of TN without any side effects. Whether LMP is an option for the treatment of TN is worth exploring.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The PATCH trial is a double-blind, enriched enrolment with randomised withdrawal, vehicle-controlled trial, aiming to explore the effects and safety of LMP in patients with TN. There is a 3-week initial open-label phase, followed by a 4-week double-blind treatment phase for responders. In the double-blind phase, patients will have to withdraw from this PATCH study if they meet one of the following criteria for treatment failure such as: >50% increase in pain intensity or paroxysms, lack of efficacy or side effects. The primary outcome will be the number of treatment failures. Adverse events will also be monitored throughout the study.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study protocol has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Tiantan Hospital (approval number: KY 2020-102-02). The results will be disseminated in international academic meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04570293.

5% Lidocaine Hydrochloride Cream for Wound Pain Relief: A Multicentre Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Lidocaine hydrochloride is frequently used for management of painful wounds. This prospective, multicentre study examined the effects of 5% lidocaine cream on wound pain relief.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 78 patients with painful wounds treated with 5% Lidocaine cream for two weeks in two Italian Hospitals. Patients' perception of pain was recorded by, using the 5-point Visual Rate Scale and the 11-point Numerical Pain Rating Scale. All medications and adverse events were evaluated in a daily diary. The primary outcome of the study was establishing the wound pain relief based on the results of 5-VRS and pain intensity based on the 11-NPRS testing from baseline to the end of treatment. Clinical aspects and adverse events were also collected.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients had a median age of 67.5 years (range 18-96 years). 62.8% were women. The wounds included traumatic wounds (n = 39), venous ulcers (n = 25), post-surgical wounds (n = 6) pyoderma gangrenosum (n = 6), vasculitis (n = 1) and pressure ulcer (n = 1). The intensity of pain significantly decreased from the baseline level established at the beginning of treatment (mean score 6.7 - 1.90) - to the level at end of treatment (3.0 - 2.23-; p < 0.0001). 9 patients prematurely stopped the treatment for healing (n = 4), wound improvement (n = 2) and adverse events related to the treatment. (n = 3). 13 patients presented a total of 25 adverse events, 4 of them were related to the treatment.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of painful wounds with 5% Lidocaine Cream for 14 days resulted in reduced pain intensity, and showed high safety and tolerability.

HPLC-MS/MS measurement of lidocaine in rat skin and plasma. Application to study the release from medicated plaster

A simple, sensitive HPLC-MS/MS method was developed and validated for the determination of lidocaine in skin and plasma of rats. The methods were established and validated assessing lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ), linearity, intra and inter-day precision and accuracy, selectivity, recovery and matrix effect. Chromatography was done on a Gemini column embedded with C18 stationary phase (50 mm × 2.0 mm, 5 µm particle size), using a gradient with mobile phases consisting of 0.1% HCOOH in bidistilled water and 0.1% HCOOH in acetonitrile. The mass spectrometer worked with electrospray ionization in positive ion mode and selected reaction monitoring, using target ions m/z 235.10 for lidocaine and m/z 245.10 for lidocaine-d10, used as internal standard. RESULTS: The linearity of the method was in the ranges of lidocaine concentrations 10.0-200.0 ng/mL for skin homogenate (accuracy 94.1-105.5%; R² ≥ 0.998) and 0.025-2 ng/mL for plasma (accuracy 96.2-104.8%; R² ≥ 0.996). The intra- and inter-day precision and accuracy determined on three quality control samples (20, 75 and 170 ng/mL for skin and 0.075, 0.4 and 1.5 ng/mL for plasma) were ≤4.2% and 103.8-108.2% for skin and ≤12.4% and 95.5-101.4% for plasma. The LLOQ was 10 ng/mL in skin homogenate and 0.025 ng/mL in plasma. The applicability of the method was demonstrated by measuring lidocaine in skin and plasma after exposure to medicated patches containing 5% lidocaine.

Lidocaine medicated plaster, an additional potential treatment option for localized post-surgical neuropathic pain: efficacy and safety results of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of lidocaine 700 mg medicated plaster (lidocaine plaster) compared to placebo in patients with moderate to severe chronic post-surgical neuropathic pain (PSNP).

METHODS

Patients (n = 363) with a diagnosis of PSNP for a minimum of 3 months to 36 months were randomized (1:1) to lidocaine plaster or placebo for a 12 week double-blind treatment period. Randomization was stratified as "plaster-only" (no concomitant medication for PSNP) or as "add-on" (stable systemic medication for PSNP). The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in 24 hour average pain intensity at Week 12, assessed by 11 point numerical rating scale (NRS). The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01752322) and EudraCT (2012-000347-28).

RESULTS

Treatment with lidocaine or placebo plaster led to a clinically relevant reduction in average pain intensity. Pain reduction (least squares mean [LS mean] standard error [SE], [95% confidence interval, CI]) with lidocaine plaster (-1.70 [0.16], [-2.03, -1.38]) was numerically higher than with placebo (-1.47 [0.16], [-1.78, -1.15]) but the difference was not statistically significant (-0.23 [0.23], [-0.69, 0.22]). Pre-specified exploratory subgroup analyses showed the largest differentiation between lidocaine and placebo in patients without concomitant pain medication, and in patients with more than 1 year between surgery and enrollment. Many secondary outcomes showed a numerically larger improvement in favor of lidocaine. The most commonly reported adverse events were administration site reactions linked to topical administration.

CONCLUSIONS

A clinically relevant pain reduction was observed with lidocaine plaster in patients with PSNP. The safety and tolerability profile is consistent with current knowledge.

Chronic postsurgical pain: current evidence for prevention and management

Chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) is an unwanted adverse event in any operation. It leads to functional limitations and psychological trauma for patients, and leaves the operative team with feelings of failure and humiliation. Therefore, it is crucial that preventive strategies for CPSP are considered in high-risk operations. Various techniques have been implemented to reduce the risk with variable success. Identifying the risk factors for each patient and applying a timely preventive strategy may help patients avoid the distress of chronic pain. The preventive strategies include modification of the surgical technique, good pain control throughout the perioperative period, and preoperative psychological intervention focusing on the psychosocial and cognitive risk factors. Appropriate management of CPSP patients is also necessary to reduce their suffering. CPSP usually has a neuropathic pain component; therefore, the current recommendations are based on data on chronic neuropathic pain. Hence, voltage-dependent calcium channel antagonists, antidepressants, topical lidocaine and topical capsaicin are the main pharmacological treatments. Paracetamol, NSAIDs and weak opioids can be used according to symptom severity, but strong opioids should be used with great caution and are not recommended. Other drugs that may be helpful are ketamine, clonidine, and intravenous lidocaine infusion. For patients with failed pharmacological treatment, consideration should be given to pain interventions; examples include transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, botulinum toxin injections, pulsed radiofrequency, nerve blocks, nerve ablation, neuromodulation and surgical management. Physical therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy and lifestyle modifications are also useful for relieving the pain and distress experienced by CPSP patients.

Efficacy of the topical 5% lidocaine medicated plaster in the treatment of chronic post-thoracotomy neuropathic pain

Aim: To assess the efficacy of the topical 5% lidocaine medicated plaster (Versatis®, Grünenthal GmbH, Aachen, Germany) in patients with post-thoracotomy neuropathic pain. Patients & methods: Patients were randomized to receive the topical 5% lidocaine medicated plaster (n = 33) or non-medicated placebo plasters (n = 30) for 12 h every day for 8 weeks. Laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) were measured, and various questionnaires/scales completed. Results: Numeric Rating Scale pain scores improved significantly (p < 0.01) more in topical 5% lidocaine medicated plaster than in placebo recipients. The same was true for N2 and P2 LEP latency and amplitude, and other parameters. Conclusion: The study included neurophysiological findings and confirmed the efficacy of the topical 5% lidocaine medicated plaster in patients with chronic post-thoracotomy neuropathic pain.

The Efficacy of Systemic Lidocaine in the Management of Chronic Pain: A Literature Review

Context

Despite recent advances in the understanding of the chronic pain concept, its diagnosis and management remains a daily challenge for clinicians and patients. Based on the published literature, this review discusses and tries to organize the current knowledge and the up-to-date clinical experience about the efficacy and safety of the use of intravenous lidocaine in treatment and prevention of chronic pain.

Evidence Acquisition

To prepare this narrative review, we performed an in depth literature review using the PubMed searching engine. We extracted all relevant articles published in English, up to April 2016.

Results

Lidocaine, administered as transdermal patch or intravenous lidocaine, is a safe and effective modality in the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN), complex regional pain syndrome, as well and for prevention of chronic pain. It may be effective in the management of neuropathic pain syndromes, chronic pain, post-operative pain, and refractory cancer pain.

Conclusions

Intravenous lidocaine and lidocaine patch are effective and safe for the treatment of several chronic or neuropathic pain syndromes. The use of lidocaine during surgery could prevent the development of some chronic post-surgical pain syndromes.

The 5% Lidocaine-Medicated Plaster: Its Inclusion in International Treatment Guidelines for Treating Localized Neuropathic Pain, and Clinical Evidence Supporting its Use

When peripheral neuropathic pain affects a specific, clearly demarcated area of the body, it may be described as localized neuropathic pain (LNP). Examples include postherpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic neuropathy, as well as post-surgical and post-traumatic pain. These conditions may respond to topical treatment, i.e., pharmaceutical agents acting locally on the peripheral nervous system, and the topical route offers advantages over systemic administration. Notably, only a small fraction of the dose reaches the systemic circulation, thereby reducing the risk of systemic adverse effects, drug–drug interactions and overdose. From the patient’s perspective, the analgesic agent is easily applied to the most painful area(s). The 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster has been used for several years to treat LNP and is registered in approximately 50 countries. Many clinical guidelines recommend this treatment modality as a first-line option for treating LNP, particularly in frail and/or elderly patients and those receiving multiple medications, because the benefit-to-risk ratios are far better than those of systemic analgesics. However, some guidelines make only a weak recommendation for its use. This paper considers the positioning of the 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster in international treatment guidelines and how they may be influenced by the specific criteria used in developing them, such as the methodology employed by randomized, placebo-controlled trials. It then examines the body of evidence supporting use of the plaster in some prevalent LNP conditions. Common themes that emerge from clinical studies are: (1) the excellent tolerability and safety of the plaster, which can increase patients’ adherence to treatment, (2) continued efficacy over long-term treatment, and (3) significant reduction in the size of the painful area. On this basis, it is felt that the 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster should be more strongly recommended for treating LNP, either as one component of a multimodal approach or as monotherapy.

Alleviation of neuropathic scar pain using autologous fat grafting

Traumatic wounds inflict small- and large-fiber sensory nerve damage, causing neuropathic pain in scar tissue, thus impairing patients' quality of life and leading to the development of psychological disorders. Autologous fat grafting has been clinically shown to improve scar quality, but few studies have explored the effects of this technique on pain. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of fat grafting on treating neuropathic scar pain. From February 2008 to January 2013, 13 patients who were identified using the Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions (scores>4/10) were enrolled in this study. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI) were used to evaluate pain preoperatively and 1 week, 4 weeks, and 24 weeks postoperatively. The mechanism of trauma, scar location and size, duration of allodynia, fat graft volume, pharmacologic therapy duration, and total follow-up time were recorded. Thirteen patients experiencing neuropathic pain were enrolled in this study. The mean±SD age was 33.08±16.35 years. The mean duration of pain was 4.29±2.85 months. The mean VAS score before treatment was 7.54±1.05. The mean VAS scores decreased by 4.38±1.66 after 1 week of treatment (P=0.009), 5.38±2.06 after 4 weeks of treatment, and 5.62±2.18 after 24 weeks of treatment. The mean NPSI scores were 49.38±13.25 before treatment, 25±14.4 after 1 week of treatment (P=0.004), 21±17.78 after 4 weeks of treatment, and 14.62±16.88 after 24 weeks of treatment. The 13 patients followed a mean of 24 weeks; 10 (77%) of the patients had improvement of 5 or greater on the VAS score. The mean follow-up period was 19.3±12.26 months (range, 6-38 months). No surgical complications were noted in this series. In our study, both VAS and NPSI scores decreased significantly, revealing that the autologous fat grafting can alleviate neuropathic scar pain 1 week after operation and in the long term.

[Analgesic treatment of cancer pain]

Cancer pain can be nociceptive, neuropathic or mixed. It is linked to the tumour, to the metastases and to the treatments for the disease and is managed by multimodal analgesia corresponding to the pain relief drugs of the WHO's pain ladder, antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs and local anaesthetics.

Treatment of localized neuropathic pain of different etiologies with the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster - a case series

Objective

To assess the efficacy and safety of the topical 5% lidocaine medicated plaster in the treatment of localized neuropathic pain.

Study design

This was a case series at an Austrian pain clinic, using retrospective analysis.

Patients and methods

Data of 27 patients treated for localized neuropathic pain with the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster were retrospectively analyzed. Assessment included changes in overall pain intensity, in intensity of different pain qualities, and of hyperalgesia and allodynia, and changes in sleep quality.

Results

Patients (17 female, ten male; mean age 53.4±11.4 years) presented mainly with dorsalgia (16 patients) or postoperative/posttraumatic pain (seven patients); one patient suffered from both. The mean overall pain intensity prior to treatment with lidocaine medicated plaster was 8.4±1.2 on the 11-point Likert scale. In the majority of cases, the lidocaine plaster was applied concomitantly with preexisting pain medication (81.5% of the patients). During the 6-month observation period, overall mean pain intensity was reduced by almost 5 points (4.98) to 3.5±2.6. Substantial reductions were also observed for neuralgiform pain (5 points from 7.9±2.6 at baseline) and burning pain (3 points from 5.2±4.1). Sleep quality improved from 4.6±2.6 at baseline to 5.5±1.8. Stratification by pain diagnosis showed marked improvements in overall pain intensity for patients with dorsalgia or postoperative/posttraumatic pain. The lidocaine plaster was well tolerated.

Conclusion

Overall, topical treatment with the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster was associated with effective pain relief and was well tolerated.

Building a diagnostic algorithm on localized neuropathic pain (LNP) and targeted topical treatment: focus on 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster

Within the broad definition of neuropathic pain, the refinement of clinical diagnostic procedures has led to the introduction of the concept of localized neuropathic pain (LNP). It is characterized by consistent and circumscribed area(s) of maximum pain, which are associated with negative or positive sensory signs and/or spontaneous symptoms typical of neuropathic pain. This description outlines the clinical features (currently lacking in guidelines and treatment recommendations) in patients for whom topical targeted treatment with 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster is suggested as first-line therapy. Few epidemiologic data are present in the literature but it is generally estimated that about 60% of neuropathic pain conditions are localized, and therefore identifiable as LNP. A mandatory clinical criterion for the diagnosis of LNP is that signs and symptoms must be present in a clearly identified and defined area(s). Cartographic recordings can help to define each area and to assess variations. The diagnosis of LNP relies on careful neurological examination more than on pain questionnaires, but it is recognized that they can be extremely useful for recording the symptom profiles and establishing a more targeted treatment. The most widely studied frequent/relevant clinical presentations of LNP are postherpetic neuralgia, diabetic neuropathy, and neuropathic postoperative pain. They successfully respond to treatment with 5% lidocaine-medicated plaster with equal if not better pain control but with fewer side effects versus conventional systemic treatments. Generally, the more localized the pain (ie, the area of an A4 sheet of paper) the better the results of topical treatment. This paper proposes an easy-to-understand algorithm to identify patients with LNP and to guide targeted topical treatments with 5% lidocaine medicated plaster.

Lidocaine Patch (5%) in Treatment of Persistent Inguinal Postherniorrhaphy Pain

Background:

Evidence-based pharmacological treatment options for patients with persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain are lacking.

Methods:

Twenty-one male patients, with severe, unilateral, persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain, participated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial, receiving lidocaine patch (5%) and placebo patch treatments in periods of 14 days separated by a 14-day wash-out period. Pain intensities (at rest, during movement, and pressure evoked [Numerical Rating Scale]) were assessed before treatment and on the last 3 days of each treatment period. Patients were a priori divided into two subgroups based on quantitative sensory testing (+/− thermal “hyposensitivity”). Skin biopsies for intraepidermal nerve fiber density assessment were taken at baseline, and quantitative sensory testing was performed before and after each treatment period. The primary outcome was change in pain intensity assessed as the difference in summed pain intensity differences between lidocaine and placebo patch treatments.

Results:

There was no difference in summed pain intensity differences between lidocaine and placebo patch treatments in all patients (mean difference 6.2% [95% CI = −6.6 to 18.9%]; P = 0.33) or in the two subgroups (+/− thermal “hyposensitivity”). The quantitative sensory testing (n = 21) demonstrated an increased pressure pain thresholds after lidocaine compared with placebo patch treatment. Baseline intraepidermal nerve fiber density (n = 21) was lower on the pain side compared with the nonpain side (−3.8 fibers per millimeter [95% CI = −6.1 to −1.4]; P = 0.003). One patient developed mild erythema in the groin during both treatments.

Conclusions:

Lidocaine patch treatment did not reduce combined resting and dynamic pain ratings compared with placebo in patients with severe, persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain.

Lidocaine 5 % patches as an effective short-term co-analgesic in cancer pain. Preliminary results

PURPOSE

To analyze the short-term efficacy and patients' subjective perception of the use of lidocaine 5 % patches for painful scars (post-thoracotomy and post-mastectomy) and pain caused by chest wall tumors.

METHODS

This is a prospective, descriptive, non-controlled, non-randomized, open-label study of patients seen in the palliative care outpatient clinic. Demographic data, variables relating to the severity of the pain, and concomitant therapy both at the start and end of treatment, the need for interventional anesthetic techniques (IAT), patients' subjective perception and treatment-related side effects were all recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were included with a mean follow-up of 29.2 days. The treatment led to a statistically significant clinical improvement in pain severity. There was no clinically significant opioid dose escalation during the treatment period. Only three patients required IAT to relieve the pain. Sixty five percent of patients were very satisfied with the therapy. No systemic or local adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of lidocaine 5 % patches is effective in the short term for the treatment of neuropathic cancer pain accompanied by allodynia, whether deriving from a painful scar or chest wall tumor. These findings need to be confirmed by randomized controlled trials with larger samples.

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

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.

5% lidocaine medicated plaster use in children with neuropathic pain from burn sequelae

OBJECTIVE

Neuropathic pain is a challenge in children with burn sequelae. Although relatively infrequent, the intensity and chronicity of neuropathic pain negatively impact functionality and quality of life. The use of 5% lidocaine medicated plaster has not previously been reported in children. We explored the effectiveness and safety of 5% lidocaine medicated plaster to treat neuropathic pain in children with burn sequelae.

DESIGN

Three-month prospective, uncontrolled study.

SETTING

Corporation of Aid to Burned Children (COANIQUEM), a nonprofit pediatric burn rehabilitation center in Chile.

SUBJECTS

Fourteen pediatric patients with burn sequelae neuropathic pain.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographics, burn and pain evolution (type, intensity [using Wong-Baker FACES], and Douleur Neuropathique 4 [DN4]), and patient functionality. Plasma lidocaine levels were measured at 0, 12, 36, and 60 hours after treatment commencement.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients were evaluable for plasma lidocaine levels. Twelve patients were available for clinical assessment (two patients lost to follow-up) [mean (standard deviation)]: age, 11 years 7 months (2 years 6 months); weight, 45 kg (11.9 kg); burn evolution, 5 years 6 months (4 years); time between burn and pain onset, 3 years 6 months (3 years 2 months); time between pain onset and treatment, 5.1 months (4.8 months); lidocaine, between < and ½ plaster; initial pain intensity (FACES), 6.8 (1.6); final pain intensity, 0 in 11/12 patients; DN4, initial-6, final-2.3. All patients reported improved functionality. Plasma lidocaine levels were ≤27.45 ng/mL (>180 times below critical levels). No adverse reactions occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

These are the first published data suggesting that 5% lidocaine medicated plaster improves patient functionality, and is effective and safe for the treatment of neuropathic pain in pediatric patients with burn sequelae.

Aloe vera gel and thyroid hormone cream may improve wound healing in Wistar rats

Therapeutic effects of various treatment options in wound healing have been one of the most controversial issues in surgical science. The present study was carried out to examine and compare the effects of Aloe vera gel, thyroid hormone cream and silver sulfadiazine cream onsutured incisions in Wistar rats. In a randomized controlled trial, thirty-six Wistar male rats, 250 to 300 g, received surgical incisions followed by topical application of Aloe vera gel, thyroid hormone cream and silver sulfadiazine 1%. To assess the efficacy of each treatment technique, a histological approach was used to evaluate the mean number of fibroblasts, macrophages, neutrophils, blood vessel sections and thickness of the regenerating epithelium and dermis on days 4, 7 and 14. Re-epithelialization and angiogenesis were significantly improved in Aloe vera gel group compared with the other treatments while thyroid hormone cream had positive effects on day 4 (P≤0.05). Topical administration of Aloe vera gel is recommended as the treatment of choice for surgical incisions.

Use of 5% lidocaine medicated plaster to treat localized neuropathic pain secondary to traumatic injury of peripheral nerves

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy of 5% lidocaine medicated plaster (LMP) has previously been demonstrated in post-traumatic localized neuropathic pain. This study evaluated the use of LMP in localized neuropathic pain secondary to traumatic peripheral nerve injury.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective observational study enrolled patients with traumatic injuries to peripheral nerves that were accompanied by localized neuropathic pain of more than 3 months duration. Demographic variables, pain intensity (measured using the numeric rating scale; NRS), answers to the Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) questionnaire, and the size of the painful area were recorded.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients were included, aged (mean ± standard deviation) 41.4 ± 15.7 years. Nerve injuries affected the upper (eight patients) or lower (11 patients) limbs. The mean duration of pain before starting treatment with LMP was 22.6 ± 43.5 months (median 8 months). Mean baseline values included: NRS 6.7 ± 1.6, painful area 17.8 ± 10.4 cm(2) (median 18 cm(2)), and DN4 score 6.7 ± 1.4. The mean duration of treatment with LMP was 19.5 ± 10.0 weeks (median 17.4 weeks). Mean values after treatment were: NRS 2.8 ± 1.5 (≥3 point reduction in 79% of patients, ≥50% reduction in 57.9% of patients) and painful area 2.1 ± 2.3 cm(2) (median 1 cm(2), ≥50% reduction in 94.7% of patients). Functional improvement after treatment was observed in 14/19 patients (73.7%).

CONCLUSION

LMP effectively treated traumatic injuries of peripheral nerves which presented with chronic localized neuropathic pain, reducing both pain intensity and the size of the painful area.

Topical pain management with the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster--a review

BACKGROUND

The topical 5% lidocaine medicated plaster is recommended as first-line treatment for localized peripheral neuropathic pain.

SCOPE

In order to provide an overview of the efficacy and safety of the lidocaine plaster in the treatment of different neuropathic pain conditions, all efficacy and safety studies (randomized, controlled, or open-label with well described methodology), case reports, and pharmacological studies on the lidocaine plaster retrieved from a PubMed literature research (1960-March 2012) plus additional references identified from retrieved articles were included.

FINDINGS

The lidocaine plaster is efficacious in the treatment of neuropathic pain symptoms associated with previous herpes zoster infection. Results from a large open-label controlled study suggest that the lidocaine plaster could be at least as effective as systemic pregabalin in the treatment of postherpetic neuralgia and painful diabetic polyneuropathy. Open-label studies indicate efficacy in the treatment of other localized neuropathic pain conditions, such as painful idiopathic sensory polyneuropathy, complex regional pain syndrome, carpal tunnel syndrome sequelae, postsurgical and posttraumatic pain. Quality of life markedly improved in a variety of neuropathic pain conditions and long-term treatment provided sustained relief in patients with neuropathic pain who are responsive to lidocaine plaster. The lidocaine plaster is usually well tolerated. The risk of systemic adverse events and pharmacokinetic interactions with concomitant medication is minimal owing to low systemic exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of several, primarily neuropathic and mixed-pain conditions with the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster was found efficacious and safe. Further controlled studies, in particular where only small open-label studies or case reports are available, should be considered.

Patient perceptions associated with the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster in daily practice

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patients' perceptions of 5% lidocaine medicated plaster for treatment of chronic neuropathic pain in daily clinical practice.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In a prospective, multicentre, non-interventional observation, patient-reported outcome data were collected in clinical practices in Germany using the German Pain Questionnaire for pre-treatment documentation and the German Pain Diary for documentation of weekly treatment-associated changes. Questionnaires were completed by the patients without input from their physicians.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Mean changes over the 12-week treatment period in pain intensity, in impairments of daily activities (modified pain disability index, mPDI) and of quality of life (quality of life impairment by pain inventory, QLIP), in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale scores (HADS-A and HADS-D), and in overall burden of pain.

RESULTS

Data of 922 patients were evaluated. Mean average pain intensity over 24 h improved by 5.1 points (74%) from 6.9 ± 1.6 points at baseline. A 30% reduction in overall pain intensity was already observed within the first 2-3 weeks with continuous further reductions until end of observation. Marked improvements in anxiety and depression scores (40% and 52%, respectively), and in pain-related restrictions in daily life activities (66%) and quality of life (157%) were also noted. Burden of pain was reduced by 56.2 points (73%) from 77.5 points at baseline. Stratification by diagnosis showed a treatment effect of lidocaine plaster for all underlying conditions with highest treatment effects for diabetic polyneuropathy and postherpetic neuralgia.

CONCLUSIONS

In a patient population where 46% of individuals already suffered from chronic to markedly chronic pain, patients perceive the 5% lidocaine medicated plaster as an efficacious topical treatment of chronic neuropathic pain in daily clinical practice. Strongest pain relief as well as associated improvements in pain-related restrictions were observed within the first five treatment weeks; however, beneficial effects continued until end of observation.

Outcome predictors for treatment success with 5% lidocaine medicated plaster in low back pain with neuropathic components and neuropathic pain after surgical and nonsurgical trauma

Five percent lidocaine medicated plaster has been proven efficacious for the symptomatic relief of neuropathic pain in diverse pain conditions which might be attributed to a common localized symptomatology in these indications, possibly with common predictors of treatment success. To discuss potential symptoms and other factors predicting response to treatment with lidocaine plaster for the indications of low back pain with neuropathic components and neuropathic pain after surgical and nonsurgical trauma, 44 pain specialists from 17 countries attended a two-day conference meeting in December 2009. Discussions were based on the retrospective analysis of case reports (sent in by participants in the four weeks prior to the meeting) and the practical experience of the participants. The results indicate some predictors for success with 5% lidocaine medicated plaster for the two indications. Localized pain, hyperalgesia and/or allodynia, and other positive sensory symptoms, such as dysesthesia, were considered positive predictors, whereas widespread pain and negative sensory symptoms were regarded as negative predictors. Paresthesia, diagnosis, and site of pain were considered to be of no predictive value. Common symptomatology with other neurologic pathologies suggests that treatment of localized neuropathic pain symptoms with the plaster can be considered across different neuropathic pain indications.

Treatment of localized post-traumatic neuropathic pain in scars with 5% lidocaine medicated plaster

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of 5% lidocaine medicated plaster (LMP) for treating painful scars resulting from burns or skin degloving.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, observational case series study in individuals with painful scars <70 cm(2) in area, caused by burns or skin degloving. The study included a structured questionnaire incorporating demographic variables, pain evaluation using the numeric rating scale (NRS), the DN4 questionnaire, and measurement of the painful surface area. Patients with open wounds in the painful skin or with severe psychiatric disease were excluded.

RESULTS

Twenty-one men and eight women were studied, aged (mean + standard deviation) 41.4 ± 11.0 years, with painful scars located in the upper extremity (n = 9), lower extremity (n = 19), or trunk (n = 1). Eleven patients (37.9%) had an associated peripheral nerve lesion. The scars were caused by burns (n = 13), degloving (n = 7), and/or orthopedic surgery (n = 9). The duration of pain before starting treatment with lidocaine plaster was 9.7 ± 10.0 (median 6) months. The initial NRS was 6.66 ± 1.84 points, average painful area 23.0 ± 18.6 (median 15) cm(2), and DN4 score 4.7 ± 2.3 points. The duration of treatment with LMP was 13.9 ± 10.2 (median 11) weeks. After treatment, the NRS was reduced by 58.2% ± 27.8% to 2.72 ± 1.65. The average painful area was reduced by 72.4% ± 24.7% to 6.5 ± 8.6 (median 5) cm(2). Nineteen patients (69%) showed functional improvement following treatment.

CONCLUSION

LMP was useful for treating painful scars with a neuropathic component, producing meaningful reductions in the intensity of pain and painful surface area. This is the first time that a decrease in the painful area has been demonstrated in neuropathic pain using topical therapy, and may reflect the disease-modifying potential of LMP.