RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Lidocaína/administración & dosificación , Neuralgia/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor Postoperatorio/tratamiento farmacológico , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Lidocaína/efectos adversos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Dimensión del Dolor , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
No study has directly compared the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) in neuropathic pain (NP). In this 2-centre randomised double-blind sham-controlled study, we compared the efficacy of 10-Hz rTMS and anodal 2-mA tDCS of the motor cortex and sham stimulation contralateral to the painful area (3 daily sessions) in patients with NP due to lumbosacral radiculopathy. Average pain intensity (primary outcome) was evaluated after each session and 5 days later. Secondary outcomes included neuropathic symptoms and thermal pain thresholds for the upper limbs. We used an innovative design that minimised bias by randomly assigning patients to 1 of 2 groups: active rTMS and tDCS or sham rTMS and tDCS. For each treatment group (active or sham), the order of the sessions was again randomised according to a crossover design. In total, 51 patients were screened and 35 (51% women) were randomized. Active rTMS was superior to tDCS and sham in pain intensity (F = 2.89 and P = 0.023). Transcranial direct-current stimulation was not superior to sham, but its analgesic effects were correlated to that of rTMS (P = 0.046), suggesting common mechanisms of action. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation lowered cold pain thresholds (P = 0.04) and its effect on cold pain was correlated with its analgesic efficacy (P = 0.006). However, rTMS had no impact on individual neuropathic symptoms. Thus, rTMS is more effective than tDCS and sham in patients with NP due to lumbosacral radiculopathy and may modulate the sensory and affective dimensions of pain.