Comparison of etomidate and methohexital as anesthetic agents for continuation and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy: A retrospective analysis of seizure quality and safety.

BACKGROUND: The ideal hypnotic agent for electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is still under debate and previous studies comparing etomidate and methohexital have produced conflicting results. This retrospective study compares etomidate and methohexital as anesthetic agents in continuation and maintenance (m)ECT with regard to seizure quality and anesthetic outcomes. METHODS: All subjects undergoing mECT at our department between October 1st, 2014 and February 28th, 2022 were included in this retrospective analysis. Data for each ECT session were obtained from the electronic health records. Anesthesia was performed with either methohexital/succinylcholine or etomidate/succinylcholine. Standard seizure quality parameters, anesthesiological monitoring data, pharmacological interventions and side-effects were recorded. RESULTS: 573 mECT treatments in 88 patients were included (methohexital n = 458, etomidate n = 115). Seizures lasted significantly longer after using etomidate (electroencephalography: +12.80 s [95 %-CI:8.64-16.95]; electromyogram +6.59 s [95 %-CI:4.14-9.04]). Time to maximum coherence was significantly longer with etomidate (+7.34 s [95 %-CI:3.97-10.71]. Use of etomidate was associated with longer procedure duration (+6.51 min [95 %-CI:4.84-8.17]) and higher maximum postictal systolic blood pressure (+13.64 mmHg [95 %-CI:9.33-17.94]). Postictal systolic blood pressure > 180 mmHg, the use of antihypertensives, benzodiazepines and clonidine (for postictal agitation), as well as the occurrence of myoclonus was significantly more common under etomidate. CONCLUSIONS: Due to longer procedure duration and an unfavorable side effect profile, etomidate appears inferior to methohexital as an anesthetic agent in mECT despite longer seizure durations.

Understanding osteoporotic pain and its pharmacological treatment: supplementary presentation.

Osteoporosis, a disorder that affects millions of people worldwide, is characterized by decreased bone mass and microstructural alterations giving rise to an increased risk of fractures. Osteoporotic fractures can cause acute and chronic nociceptive and neuropathic pain that mainly affects elderly patients with multiple comorbidities and commonly on different drug regimens. Central sensitization seems to play a pivotal role in developing and maintaining chronicity of post-fracture pain in osteoporosis. Antiosteoporosis drugs are able to partially control pain, but additional analgesics are always necessary for pain due to bone fractures. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective COX-2 inhibitors reduce acute pain but with a poor effect on the chronic neuropathic component of pain and with relevant side effects. Opioid drugs can control the whole spectrum of acute and chronic bone pain, but they differ with respect to their efficacy on neuropathic components, their tolerability and safety. Chronic pain after osteoporotic fractures requires a multifaceted approach, which includes a large spectrum of drugs (antiosteoporosis treatment, acetaminophen, NSAIDs, selective COX-2 inhibitors, weak and strong opioids) and non-pharmacological treatment. Based on a better understanding of the pathogenesis of osteoporotic and post-fracture pain, a guided stepwise approach to post-fracture osteoporotic pain will also better meet the needs of these patients.

Understanding osteoporotic pain and its pharmacological treatment.

Osteoporosis, a disorder that affects millions of people worldwide, is characterized by decreased bone mass and microstructural alterations giving rise to an increased risk of fractures. Osteoporotic fractures can cause acute and chronic pain that mainly affects elderly patients with multiple comorbidities and commonly on different drug regimens. The aim of this paper is to summarize the pathogenesis and systemic treatment of osteoporotic pain. This narrative review summarizes the main pathogenetic aspects of osteoporotic pain and the cornerstones of its treatment. Osteoporotic fractures induce both acute and chronic nociceptive and neuropathic pain. Central sensitization seems to play a pivotal role in developing and maintaining chronicity of post-fracture pain in osteoporosis. Antiosteoporosis drugs are able to partially control pain, but additional analgesics are always necessary for pain due to bone fractures. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and selective COX-2 inhibitors reduce acute pain but with a poor effect on the chronic neuropathic component of pain and with relevant side effects. Opioid drugs can control the whole spectrum of acute and chronic bone pain, but they differ with respect to their efficacy on neuropathic components, their tolerability and safety. Chronic pain after osteoporotic fractures requires a multifaceted approach, which includes a large spectrum of drugs (antiosteoporosis treatment, acetaminophen, NSAIDs, selective COX-2 inhibitors, weak and strong opioids) and non-pharmacological treatment. Based on a better understanding of the pathogenesis of osteoporotic and post-fracture pain, a guided stepwise approach to post-fracture osteoporotic pain will also better meet the needs of these patients.

Assessment and manifestation of central sensitisation across different chronic pain conditions.

Different neuroplastic processes can occur along the nociceptive pathways and may be important in the transition from acute to chronic pain and for diagnosis and development of optimal management strategies. The neuroplastic processes may result in gain (sensitisation) or loss (desensitisation) of function in relation to the incoming nociceptive signals. Such processes play important roles in chronic pain, and although the clinical manifestations differ across condition processes, they share some common mechanistic features. The fundamental understanding and quantitative assessment of particularly some of the central sensitisation mechanisms can be translated from preclinical studies into the clinic. The clinical perspectives are implementation of such novel information into diagnostics, mechanistic phenotyping, prevention, personalised treatment, and drug development. The aims of this paper are to introduce and discuss (1) some common fundamental central pain mechanisms, (2) how they may translate into the clinical signs and symptoms across different chronic pain conditions, (3) how to evaluate gain and loss of function using quantitative pain assessment tools, and (4) the implications for optimising prevention and management of pain. The chronic pain conditions selected for the paper are neuropathic pain in general, musculoskeletal pain (chronic low back pain and osteoarthritic pain in particular), and visceral pain (irritable bowel syndrome in particular). The translational mechanisms addressed are local and widespread sensitisation, central summation, and descending pain modulation. SIGNIFICANCE: Central sensitisation is an important manifestation involved in many different chronic pain conditions. Central sensitisation can be different to assess and evaluate as the manifestations vary from pain condition to pain condition. Understanding central sensitisation may promote better profiling and diagnosis of pain patients and development of new regimes for mechanism based therapy. Some of the mechanisms underlying central sensitisation can be translated from animals to humans providing new options in development of therapies and profiling drugs under development.

[Interdisciplinary position paper "Perioperative pain management"]. / Interdisziplinäres Positionspapier "Perioperatives Schmerzmanagement".

Despite many positive developments, postoperative pain and its treatment is still not always given the necessary attention. Severe pain after surgical procedures affects a significant proportion of patients. This very fact is not only detrimental to the immediate recovery process, but can also form the basis for the development of chronic pain conditions.An adequate and effective management of perioperative pain requires appropriate organizational structures. This multidisciplinary paper which was initiated by the Austrian Society for Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and the Austrian Pain Society and developed together with numerous specialist and professional societies dealing with the subject aims at supporting the organization of perioperative pain management structures and to make best use of proven concepts. Additional recommendations describe specific interventions for selected types of intervention.

European Pain Federation position paper on appropriate opioid use in chronic pain management.

Poorly controlled pain is a global public health issue. The personal, familial and societal costs are immeasurable. Only a minority of European patients have access to a comprehensive specialist pain clinic. More commonly the responsibility for chronic pain management and initiating opioid therapy rests with the primary care physician and other non-specialist opioid prescribers. There is much confusing and conflicting information available to non-specialist prescribers regarding opioid therapy and a great deal of unjustified fear is generated. Opioid therapy should only be initiated by competent clinicians as part of a multi-faceted treatment programme in circumstances where more simple measures have failed. Throughout, all patients must be kept under close clinical surveillance. As with any other medical therapy, if the treatment fails to yield the desired results and/or the patient is additionally burdened by an unacceptable level of adverse effects, the overall management strategy must be reviewed and revised. No responsible clinician will wish to pursue a failed treatment strategy or persist with an ineffective and burdensome treatment. In a considered attempt to empower and inform non-specialist opioid prescribers, EFIC convened a European group of experts, drawn from a diverse range of basic science and relevant clinical disciplines, to prepare a position paper on appropriate opioid use in chronic pain. The expert panel reviewed the available literature and harnessed the experience of many years of clinical practice to produce these series of recommendations. Its success will be judged on the extent to which it contributes to an improved pain management experience for chronic pain patients across Europe. SIGNIFICANCE: This position paper provides expert recommendations for primary care physicians and other non- specialist healthcare professionals in Europe, particularly those who do not have ready access to specialists in pain medicine, on the safe and appropriate use of opioid medications as part of a multi-faceted approach to pain management, in properly selected and supervised patients.

Direct conversion from tramadol to tapentadol prolonged release for moderate to severe, chronic malignant tumour-related pain.

BACKGROUND: A recent randomized-withdrawal, active- and placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 study showed that tapentadol prolonged release (PR) was effective and well tolerated for managing moderate to severe, chronic malignant tumour-related pain in patients who were opioid naive or dissatisfied with current treatment (Pain Physician, 2014, 17, 329-343). This post hoc, subgroup analysis evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol PR in patients who previously received and were dissatisfied with tramadol for any reason and who had a pain intensity ≥5 (11-point numerical rating scale) before converting directly to tapentadol PR. METHODS: In the original study, eligible patients had been randomized (2:1) and titrated to their optimal dose of tapentadol PR (100-250 mg bid) or morphine sulphate-controlled release (40-100 mg bid) over 2 weeks. The present report focuses on results during the titration period for a subgroup of patients randomized to tapentadol PR after having been on tramadol treatment prior to randomization in the study (n = 129). Results for this subgroup are compared with results for all 338 patients who received tapentadol PR during titration (overall tapentadol PR group). RESULTS: Responder rates (responders: completed titration, mean pain intensity <5 [0-10 scale] and ≤20 mg/day rescue medication during last 3 days) were slightly better for the tramadol/tapentadol PR subgroup (69.8% [90/129]) vs. the overall tapentadol PR group (63.9% [214/335]). Tolerability profiles were comparable for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this subgroup analysis indicate that patients with cancer pain could safely switch from prior treatment with the weak centrally acting analgesic tramadol directly to the strong centrally acting analgesic tapentadol PR, for an improved analgesic therapy for severe pain. WHAT DOES THIS STUDY ADD?: Results of this post hoc analysis show that patients who had received prior tramadol therapy could switch directly to tapentadol PR, with the majority (˜70%) experiencing improved efficacy.

Acute pain: a multifaceted challenge - the role of nimesulide.

BACKGROUND: This article summarizes the outcome from an international consensus meeting, which took place in Vienna on 4 November 2014. SCOPE: The aim of the meeting was to provide the state of the art on the pathophysiology and treatment of acute pain with special emphasis on nimesulide, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) indicated for the treatment of acute pain and primary dysmenorrhea. Besides the data on the mechanisms of acute inflammatory pain and on the efficacy and safety of nimesulide in patients affected by different forms of acute pain, the clinical experience of attending experts was discussed based on selected case reports. RESULTS: The members of this consensus group recognized that nimesulide is a NSAID highly effective in the treatment of several painful situations with an acute inflammatory component including primary dysmenorrhea. Although safety concerns regarding nimesulide have emerged in recent years, both robust new epidemiological data and clinical experience confirm a positive benefit/risk profile of nimesulide in the treatment of several forms of acute pain. CONCLUSIONS: The members of this international consensus group concluded that nimesulide, when used appropriately, remains a particularly valuable and safe option for the treatment of several conditions characterized by the presence of acute inflammatory pain because of the rapid onset of the analgesic action, and the positive evidence-based benefit/risk profile.

Pan-European, open-label dose titration study of fentanyl buccal tablet in patients with breakthrough cancer pain.

BACKGROUND: Fentanyl buccal tablet (FBT), a rapid onset opioid used to treat breakthrough cancer pain, must be titrated to an effective dose that provides adequate analgesia and minimizes undesirable events. This open-label, randomized study compared the percentage of patients achieving an effective dose of FBT when starting titration at 100 or 200 µg. METHODS: Opioid-tolerant patients with chronic cancer-related pain who experienced up to four breakthrough pain episodes daily were randomized to a starting dose of 100 or 200 µg for the titration period. The dose was increased until an effective dose (100, 200, 400, 600 or 800 µg) providing adequate analgesia with acceptable adverse events was achieved. Patients achieving an effective dose entered a treatment period during which they treated up to eight breakthrough pain episodes with their effective dose. RESULTS: A total of 442 patients from 135 sites in seven European countries were screened. Non-inferiority was established with the percentage of patients achieving an effective dose starting titration at 200 µg (81.4%) compared with the 100-µg (75.2%) starting dose. The most common effective doses of FBT were 200 µg (39.6%) and 400 µg (26.9%). No new safety concerns were identified with use of FBT at doses up to 800 µg per episode. CONCLUSIONS: This study involving a real clinical practice setting showed a similar percentage of patients safely achieving an effective dose by titration starting with 100 versus 200 µg of FBT.

Dysfunctional coping in headache: avoidance and endurance is not associated with chronic forms of headache.

INTRODUCTION: About 4% of the population suffer from daily or near daily headache, which in most cases evolved from an episodic type of headache. The impact of psychological factors on this process is unknown. It seems reasonable to assume, that besides somatic and social conditions psychological factors like pain-related coping and cognition play an important role, as has been shown for other pain conditions. METHODS: We performed a cross sectional study on pain coping behaviour in 211 patients with migraine and tension type headache. Pain-related cognition and coping was investigated using the Kiel Pain Inventory. Prevalence of depression, medication intake and headache characteristics were analysed in regard to chronicity of headache. RESULTS: Overall pain intensity was high in the patient sample. The level of depression increased with headache frequency. Dysfunctional coping, characterized by fear and avoidance is frequently used by headache patients. As in low back pain, also endurance is highly prevalent. Other features known to be associated with chronic headache, like depression and medication overuse, could be confirmed. DISCUSSION: Dysfunctional coping was seen with high prevalence in the entire patient sample (66%). Against our hypothesis, it was not confined to chronic forms of headache. In respect to our data, we discuss the role of avoidance and endurance coping in headache and its possible role in chronicity.

Acute psychotropic effects of oral cannabis extract with a defined content of Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in healthy volunteers.

INTRODUCTION: The medical use of cannabinoids is limited mainly by their undesirable effects. With respect to acute psychotropic effects, the aim of this study is the comparison of an oral cannabis extract and low-dose diazepam in a cross-over experiment in drug-naïve healthy women. METHODS: Sixteen healthy females participated in this randomized, double-blind, active comparator-controlled, single-dose, balanced 2-way cross-over study. Cannabis extract with standardised Delta (9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content (20 mg) or active placebo (5 mg diazepam) was administered orally. Subjects were assessed by self- and observer-rated visual analogue scales (VAS), the BRIEF PSYCHIATRIC RATING SCALE (BPRS) and three psychomotor tests up to 6 h after administration. RESULTS: VAS showed significantly elevated fatigue, drowsiness, dizziness, and "feeling high" after cannabis as compared to baseline and diazepam. BPRS scores were significantly higher after cannabis intake. Only in one psychomotor test a decrease of psychomotor activity after cannabis was evident. One subject in the cannabis condition experienced severe transient psychotic symptoms. DISCUSSION: Orally administered cannabis produced significant central depressant side-effects compared to diazepam, mostly subjective effects (VAS) but marginal effects in psychomotor performance in 15 healthy females. Regarding the medical use of cannabis, a rigorous benefit-risk analysis and an exact psychiatric assessment before and during treatment are necessary.

[Risk assessment in pain therapy]. / Risikoabschätzung in der Schmerztherapie.

Analgesic therapy is not without risk. However, the risk of most analgesic interventions is minor compared to the risk of the inadequate treatment of pain and insufficient treatment may lead to chronic pain.A correct diagnosis should be the basis of any specific treatment of pain disorders. Only a diagnosis which implicates a multi-disciplinary assessment and which considers both the pathoanatomical, functional and biopsychosocial dysfunctions can lead to an adequate therapeutic intervention. Furthermore, therapeutic planning should include the personal needs of the patient and should have realistic aims.Pharmacological treatment is guided by the WHO pain ladder. The risks of the relevant substance groups must be considered. NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) which are included in all steps of the WHO pain ladder carry specific risks for the gastrointestinal, cardiovascular and renal systems and are contraindicated in many patients in need of analgesic therapy, e.g. in many elderly patients. Opioids which are recommended at steps 2 and 3 of the WHO pain ladder have less organ toxicity but they are still used reluctantly. Coanalgetics, especially antidepressants bear specific risks and the discussion on suicide rates under antidepressant medication is ongoing.Invasive methods such as the intrathecal application of analgesics are valuable procedures if the indication is correct and the treating physician has sufficient experience. Pain therapy is essential and the risks of the procedures are manageable. Considering the current knowledge on the mechanisms of pain sensitisation, the lack of adequate pain control can lead to chronic pain with severe consequences for the patient.

[Importance of intrathecal pain therapy]. / Stellenwert der intrathekalen Schmerztherapie.

Intraspinal drug infusion using implantable pumps and catheter systems is a safe and effective therapy for selected pain patients with severe chronic pain. It improves pain relief, reduces drug-related side effects, decreases the need for oral analgesia and enhances quality of life in a segment of chronic pain patients whose pain has not been controlled with more conservative therapies. Intrathecal drug therapy has therefore established its role in the treatment of malignant pain, benign pain and severe spasticity.Careful patient selection and management as well as a multidisciplinary approach are determinants of successful treatment. Current practices for patient selection and management, screening, drug selection, dosing and implantation for intrathecal drug delivery systems are discussed.

Long-term intrathecal S(+)-ketamine in a patient with cancer-related neuropathic pain.

Neuropathic pain sometimes needs invasive pain therapy. We present the case of a patient with cancer-related neuropathic pain untreatable with conventional pain therapy after tumour-embolization. The patient was treated successfully with intrathecal (i.t.) administration of S(+)-ketamine, in addition to morphine. Plasma concentrations of S(+)-ketamine were measured regularly throughout the treatment. Continuous i.t. administration of S(+)-ketamine over a period of 3 months demonstrated low plasma levels and no unwanted side-effects.

[Use of the World Health Organization guidelines on cancer pain relief before referral to a specialized pain service]. / Einsatz der WHO-Leitlinien für die Tumorschmerztherapie vor Zuweisung in eine Schmerzklinik.

In 1986 the World Health Organization (WHO) released guidelines for cancer pain relief. Since then, several controlled studies on effectiveness and practicability of these guidelines have been published. Various authors described inadequate use of these guidelines. We analysed, whether the pain medication of 160 cancer patients referred to the anesthesiological pain clinic at the university hospital of Vienna corresponded to the WHO guidelines or not. Adequacy of pain treatment was assessed using the pain management index (PMI). Multiple criteria were chosen to assess the conformity of the treatment with the guidelines. Furthermore we studied the effect of a strict use of the WHO guidelines in these patients. The average pain intensity of the referred patients was 75 mm (VAS). Negative PMI scores, indicating inadequate pain therapy, were found in 39 % of cases. A violation of the rules was found in 38% of the therapy schedules. Pain medication was then modified by switching to fixed time intervals, escalation of the steps of the WHO ladder, increasing the dosage or treating neuropathic pain with adjuvant drugs. Two weeks later the average pain score of the patients was reduced to 27 mm (VAS). At that time 72% of the patients quoted an adequate reduction of pain. Inadequate knowledge or disregard of the WHO guidelines for cancer pain relief are common and result in unnecessary and prolonged suffering in these patients.

[Cannabinoids and the immune system. Of men, mice and cells]. / Cannabinoide und Immunsystem. Menschen, Mäuse und Zellen.

The medical use of cannabis or cannabinoid compounds is controversial. Cannabinoids like the Delta(9)-THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) or the synthetic derivative Nabilone are available against cancer- and HIV-associated cachexia, nausea and vomiting. Over the last 20 years, the cannabinoid receptors CB(1) and CB(2) and their endogenous ligands have been found. The involvement of this endogenous cannabinoid signalling system in feeding, appetite, pain perception and immunomodulation could be demonstrated using animal and in vitro studies. Thus, the concern about immunosuppressive effects in humans using medical cannabinoid preparations grew. However, up to now most human studies have failed to demonstrate a well-defined and reproducible immunosuppressive cannabinoid-effect. Only the smoking of marijuana showed a significant local immunosuppression of the bactericidal activity of human alveolar macrophages. In animal studies, cannabinoids were identified as potent modulators of cytokine production, causing a shift from Th1 to Th2 cytokines. In consequence, a compromised cellular immunity was observed in these animals, resulting in enhanced tumor growth and reduced immunity to viral infections. In vitro, immunosuppressive effects were shown in all immune cells, but only at high micromolar cannabinoid concentrations not reached under normal clinical conditions. In conclusion, there is no evidence that cannabinoids induce a serious, relevant immunosuppression in humans, with the exception of marijuana-smoking which may affect local broncho-alveolar immunity.