Neuropathic pain is accompanied by both positive and negative sensory signs. To explore the spectrum of sensory abnormalities, 1236 patients with a clinical diagnosis of neuropathic pain were assessed by quantitative sensory testing (QST) following the protocol of DFNS (German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain), using both thermal and mechanical nociceptive as well as non-nociceptive stimuli. Data distributions showed a systematic shift to hyperalgesia for nociceptive, and to hypoesthesia for non-nociceptive parameters. Across all parameters, 92% of the patients presented at least one abnormality. Thermosensory or mechanical hypoesthesia (up to 41%) was more frequent than hypoalgesia (up to 18% for mechanical stimuli). Mechanical hyperalgesias occurred more often (blunt pressure: 36%, pinprick: 29%) than thermal hyperalgesias (cold: 19%, heat: 24%), dynamic mechanical allodynia (20%), paradoxical heat sensations (18%) or enhanced wind-up (13%). Hyperesthesia was less than 5%. Every single sensory abnormality occurred in each neurological syndrome, but with different frequencies: thermal and mechanical hyperalgesias were most frequent in complex regional pain syndrome and peripheral nerve injury, allodynia in postherpetic neuralgia. In postherpetic neuralgia and in central pain, subgroups showed either mechanical hyperalgesia or mechanical hypoalgesia. The most frequent combinations of gain and loss were mixed thermal/mechanical loss without hyperalgesia (central pain and polyneuropathy), mixed loss with mechanical hyperalgesia in peripheral neuropathies, mechanical hyperalgesia without any loss in trigeminal neuralgia. Thus, somatosensory profiles with different combinations of loss and gain are shared across the major neuropathic pain syndromes. The characterization of underlying mechanisms will be needed to make a mechanism-based classification feasible.

Background: Whether reducing time-to-surgery for elderly patients suffering from hip fracture results in better outcomes remains subject to controversial debates. Methods: As part of a prospective observational study conducted between January 2002 and September 2003 on hip-fracture patients from 268 acute-care hospitals all over Germany, we investigated the relationship of time-to-surgery with frequency of post-operative complications and one-year mortality in elderly patients (age ≥65) with isolated proximal femoral fracture (femoral neck fracture or pertrochanteric femoral fracture). Patients with short (≤12 h), medium (> 12 h to ≤36 h) and long (> 36 h) times-to-surgery, counting from the time of the fracture event, were compared for patient characteristics, operative procedures, post-operative complications and one-year mortality. Results: Hospital data were available for 2916 hip-fracture patients (mean age (SD) in years: 82.1 (7.4), median age: 82; 79.7% women). Comparison of groups with short (n = 802), medium (n = 1191) and long (n = 923) time-to-surgery revealed statistically significant differences in a few patient characteristics (age, American Society of Anesthesiologists ratings classification and type of admission) and in operative procedures (total hip endoprosthesis, hemi-endoprosthetic implants, other osteosynthetic procedures). However, comparison of these same groups for frequency of postoperative complications revealed only some non-significant associations with certain complications such as post-operative bleeding requiring treatment (early surgery patients) and urinary tract infections (delayed surgery patients). Both unadjusted rates of one-year all-cause mortality (between 18.1% and 20.5%), and the multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HR for time-to-surgery: 1.04; p = 0.55) showed no association between mortality and time-to-surgery. Conclusion: Although this study found a trend toward more frequent post-operative complications in the longest time-to-surgery group, there was no effect of time-to-surgery on mortality. Shorter time-to-surgery may be associated with somewhat lower rates of post-operative complications such as decubitus ulcers, urinary tract infections, thromboses, pneumonia and cardiovascular events, and with somewhat higher rates of others such as post-operative bleeding or implant complications.

Objectives Joint and bone alterations are seldom mentioned in the diagnostic criteria for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) even though they are important for long-term outcome. Altered periarticular bone metabolism can be detected by 3-phase bone scintigraphy (TPBS). Although frequently examining the diagnostic efficacy of TPBS is debatable. Methods In all, 78 TPBS (45 CRPS/33 control group) were evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively. Sensitivity and specificity of the qualitative blinded reviewer analysis (n=57) compared with quantitative region of interest (ROI)-based analysis over the metacarpophalangeal, proximal, and distal interphalangeal joints (n=74) were evaluated. Patients' sex, age, duration of CRPS, inciting event, extent of joint alteration, and handedness were included as covariables. Results Qualitative blinded reviewer TPBS analysis had a high specificity (83%-100%). However, sensitivity was 31% to 50%. Interrater reliability was moderate (κ score 0.56). Using the ROI-based evaluation, the highest sensitivity (69%) and specificity (75%) (ROI score ≥1.32) was shown for phase 3, whereas sensitivity of phases 1 and 2 rapidly declined to 50%. Duration of CRPS until TPBS was the only variable with significant impact on ROI scores of phase 3 (F=23.7; P=0.000; R²=0.42). ROI scores declined with increasing duration of CRPS. Discussion In conclusion, TPBS is a highly specific tool for diagnosing CRPS of the upper limb. ROI evaluation of phase 3 within the first 5 months after onset of CRPS is an appropriate additional diagnostic tool to confirm or exclude CRPS of the upper extremity.

Efficacy, long-term effectiveness and safety of opioids in chronic non-tumor associated pain syndromes (NTAS) are still under debate. The study (MONTAS) was performed by physicians and psychologists as a multicenter prospective, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled crossover trial, followed by an open long-term study. Patients were enrolled only when pain relief from specific defined pretreatment was insufficient. Patients were randomly assigned to group I receiving sustained-release morphine (doses: 20mg/d titrated appropriately to a maximum of 180mg/d) in the first week, placebo in the second week or group II receiving study medication in reverse order. The primary endpoint was defined as: (i) adequate pain relief (pain intensity of less than 50% of pretreatment intensity or less than 5 on a 11 point Numerical Rating Scale) and (ii) pain rated as tolerable and (iii) adverse effects rated as tolerable. Full responders (all criteria fulfilled under morphine) and partial responders (less pain relief, but tolerable side effects) were offered continuation of treatment with oral morphine in an open long-term study (LAMONTAS), to be published later. Forty-nine patients of 997 patients screened fulfilled the inclusion criteria for MONTAS and were enrolled. Mean pain intensity in all patients was reduced by morphine from 7.8 to 5.2 (NNT: 2.2); in 17 (35.4%) responders from 7.4 to 2.9, in 17 (35.4%) partial responders from 7.8 to 5.6 and in 14 (29.2%) non-responders from 8.2 to 7.7. Pain reduction correlated with improvement of physical function. Pain disability, depression score, mood and exercise endurance improved, particularly in responders. Gastrointestinal complaints increased, central nervous system-related complaints were reduced. Efficacy and safety of morphine in NTAS were demonstrated in this randomized-controlled trial. Pretreatment failure was the indication for trying morphine treatment; predictive factors for responsiveness could not be identified.

Open injuries bear the risk of foreign body contamination. Commonly encountered materials include gravel debris, glass fragments, wooden splinters or metal particles. While foreign body incorporation is obvious in some injury patterns, other injuries may not display hints of being contaminated with foreign body materials. Foreign objects that have not been detected and removed bear the risk of leading to severe wound infections and chronic wound healing disorders. Besides these severe health issues, medicolegal consequences should be considered. While an accurate clinical examination is the first step for the detection of foreign body materials, choosing the appropriate radiological imaging is decisive for the detection or non-detection of the foreign material. Especially in cases of impaired wound healing over time, the existence of an undetected foreign object needs to be considered.Here, we would like to give a practical radiological guide for the assessment of foreign objects in head and neck injuries by a special selection of patients with different injury patterns and various foreign body materials with regard to the present literature.