Quantitative methods for somatosensory evaluation in atypical odontalgia

A systematic review was conducted to identify reliable somatosensory evaluation methods for atypical odontalgia (AO) patients. The computerized search included the main databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library). The studies included used the following quantitative sensory testing (QST) methods: mechanical detection threshold (MDT), mechanical pain threshold (MPT) (pinprick), pressure pain threshold (PPT), dynamic mechanical allodynia with a cotton swab (DMA1) or a brush (DMA2), warm detection threshold (WDT), cold detection threshold (CDT), heat pain threshold (HPT), cold pain detection (CPT), and/or wind-up ratio (WUR). The publications meeting the inclusion criteria revealed that only mechanical allodynia tests (DMA1, DMA2, and WUR) were significantly higher and pain threshold tests to heat stimulation (HPT) were significantly lower in the affected side, compared with the contralateral side, in AO patients; however, for MDT, MPT, PPT, CDT, and WDT, the results were not significant. These data support the presence of central sensitization features, such as allodynia and temporal summation. In contrast, considerable inconsistencies between studies were found when AO patients were compared with healthy subjects. In clinical settings, the most reliable evaluation method for AO in patients with persistent idiopathic facial pain would be intraindividual assessments using HPT or mechanical allodynia tests.

Los pacientes con fibrilación auricular no se benefician del ácido acetilsalicílico

Objetivo: la anticoagulación oral es el tratamiento recomendado para la prevención del accidente cerebrovascular en pacientes con fibrilación auricular. Sin embargo, muchos pacientes reciben ácido acetilsalicílico (AAS) como monoterapia. Nuestro objetivo fue investigar si los pacientes con fibrilación auricular se beneficiaban del AAS como monoterapia para la prevención de accidente cerebrovascular. Métodos y resultados: estudio retrospectivo de los pacientes con diagnóstico clínico de fibrilación auricular ingresados en el Registro Nacional Sueco de Pacientes entre el 1 de julio de 2005 y el 1 de enero de 2009, combinado con datos del Registro Nacional de Medicamentos Recetados. Las variables evaluables fueron accidente cerebrovascular isquémico, evento tromboembólico, hemorragia intracraneana, y sangrado mayor. La población en estudio consistió en 115.185 pacientes con fibrilación auricular, 58.671 de los cuales recibieron AAS como monoterapia y 56.514 no recibieron ningún tratamiento antitrombótico a nivel basal. La media de seguimiento fue de 1,5 años. El tratamiento con AAS se asoció a un mayor riesgo de presentar un accidente cerebrovascular isquémico y eventos tromboembólicos comparado con la ausencia de tratamiento antitrombótico. Conclusión: el AAS como monoterapia en la prevención del accidente cerebrovascular provocado por fibrilación auricular no posee ningún efecto discernible de protección contra el accidente cerebrovascular, y puede incluso aumentar el riesgo de accidente cerebrovascular isquémico en pacientes añosos. Por lo tanto, nuestros datos avalan las nuevas recomendaciones de las guías europeas, en el sentido que no debería utilizarse el AAS como monoterapia en la prevención del accidente cerebrovascular provocado por la fibrilación auricular.

Aims: Oral anticoagulation is the recommended treatment for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Notwithstanding, many patients are treated with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) as monotherapy. Our objective was to investigate if atrial fibrillation patients benefit from ASA as monotherapy for stroke prevention. Methods and results: retrospective study of patients with a clinical diagnosis of atrial fibrillation between 1 July 2005 and 1 January 2009 in the National Swedish Patient register, matched with data from the National Prescribed Drugs register. Endpoints were ischaemic stroke, thrombo-embolic event, intracranial haemorrhage, and major bleeding. The study population consisted of 115 185 patients with atrial fibrillation, of whom 58 671 were treated with ASA as monotherapy and 56 514 were without any antithrombotic treatment at baseline. Mean follow-up was 1.5 years. Treatment with ASA was associated with higher risk of ischaemic stroke and thrombo-embolic events compared with no antithrombotic treatment. Conclusion: acetylsalicylic acid as monotherapy in stroke prevention of atrial fibrillation has no discernable protective effect against stroke, and may even increase the risk of ischaemic stroke in elderly patients. Thus, our data support the new European guidelines recommendation that ASA as monotherapy should not be used as stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.