Search

Background: A lack of objective outcome measures and overreliance on subjective pain reports in early proof-of-concept studies contribute to the high attrition of potentially effective new analgesics. We studied the utility of neuroimaging in providing objective evidence of neural activity related to drug modulation or a placebo effect in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover trial.Methods: We chronically administered pregabalin or tramadol (first-line and second-line analgesics, respectively), recommended for neuropathic pain, in 16 post-traumatic neuropathic pain patients. We measured subjective pain reports, allodynia-evoked neural activity, and brain resting state functional connectivity from patients during the three sessions and resting state data at baseline from patients after washout of their current medication. All data were collected using a 3 T MRI scanner.Results: When compared with placebo only, pregabalin significantly suppressed allodynia-evoked neural activity in several nociceptive and pain-processing areas of the brain, despite the absence of behavioural analgesia. Furthermore, placebo significantly increased functional connectivity between the rostral anterior cingulate and the brainstem, a core component of the placebo neural network.Conclusions: Functional neuroimaging provided objective evidence of pharmacodynamic efficacy in a proof-of-concept study setting where subjective pain outcome measures are often unreliable. Additionally, we provide evidence confirming the neural mechanism underpinning placebo analgesia as identified in acute experimental imaging studies in patients during the placebo arm of a clinical trial. We explore how brain penetrant active drugs potentially interact with this mechanism.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT0061015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Severe, persistent inguinal postherniorrhaphy pain (PIPP) is a debilitating condition that develops in 2-5% of patients. PIPP may be neuropathic in nature, yet the lesion in the peripheral nervous system has not been located. Most PIPP-patients demonstrate a tender point (TP) in the medial aspect of the inguinal region that triggers pain upon minimal pressure. As TPs may play a role in the pathophysiology of PIPP, the aim of this trial was to investigate the analgesic effects of local anaesthetic TP-blockade.Methods: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial was performed in 14 PIPP-patients and six healthy volunteers. All participated in two sessions, seven days apart, receiving 10 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine or normal saline via an ultrasound-guided fascial plane block at the TP. The TP-area was used for pain assessments (at rest, on movement, with 100 kPa pressure-algometry) and quantitative sensory testing (pressure pain thresholds, thermal detection/pain thresholds, supra-threshold heat perception), before and after the TP-blockade.Results: The median (95% CI) reduction in pain was 63% (44.1 to 73.6%) after bupivacaine compared with 36% (11.6 to 49.7%; P=0.003) after placebo. Significant increases in cool detection (P=0.01) and pressure pain thresholds (P=0.009) with decreases in supra-threshold heat pain perception (P=0.003) were seen after bupivacaine only. In four out of six volunteers, increased thermal and evoked-pain thresholds after bupivacaine compared with placebo, was demonstrated.Conclusions: This trial demonstrates that peripheral afferent input from the TP-area is important for maintenance of spontaneous and evoked pain in PIPP.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02065219. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Unanticipated difficult intubation remains a challenge in anaesthesia. The Simplified Airway Risk Index (SARI) is a multivariable risk model consisting of seven independent risk factors for difficult intubation. Our aim was to compare preoperative airway assessment based on the SARI with usual airway assessment.Methods: From 01.10.2012 to 31.12.2013, 28 departments were cluster-randomized to apply the SARI model or usual airway assessment. The SARI group implemented the SARI model. The Non-SARI group continued usual airway assessment, thus reflecting a group of anaesthetists' heterogeneous individual airway assessments. Preoperative prediction of difficult intubation and actual intubation difficulties were registered in the Danish Anaesthesia Database for both groups. Patients who were preoperatively scheduled for intubation by advanced techniques (e.g. video laryngoscopy; flexible optic scope) were excluded from the primary analysis. Primary outcomes were the proportions of unanticipated difficult and unanticipated easy intubation.Results: A total of 26 departments (15 SARI and 11 Non-SARI) and 64 273 participants were included. In the primary analyses 29 209 SARI and 30 305 Non-SARI participants were included.In SARI departments 2.4% (696) of the participants had an unanticipated difficult intubation vs 2.4% (723) in Non-SARI departments. Odds ratio (OR) adjusted for design variables was 1.03 (95% CI: 0.77-1.38). The proportion of unanticipated easy intubation was 1.42% (415) in SARI departments vs 1.00% (302) in Non-SARI departments. Adjusted OR was 1.26 (0.68-2.34).Conclusions: Using the SARI compared with usual airway assessment we detected no statistical significant changes in unanticipated difficult- or easy intubations.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01718561. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]