Background: Postoperative pillar pain (deep-seated wrist pain worsened by leaning on the heel of the hand) sometimes occurs after carpal tunnel release (CTR), leading to weakness in the hand and delayed return to work. Increased pain sensitivity has been found to be associated with worse symptoms and poorer treatment response in a number of chronic musculoskeletal conditions, but few studies have investigated the association of pain sensitization with pillar pain after CTR.
Questions/purposes: (1) Is preoperative pain sensitization in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) associated with increased severity of pillar pain after open CTR? (2) What other demographic, electrophysiological, or preoperative clinical characteristics are associated with pillar pain after CTR?
Methods: Over a 35-month period, one surgeon performed 162 open carpal tunnel releases. Patients were eligible if they had sufficient cognitive and language function to provide informed consent and completed a self-reported questionnaire; they were not eligible if they had nerve entrapment other than CTR or if the surgery was covered by workers compensation insurance. Based on these criteria, 148 (91%) were approached for this study. Of those, 17 (9%) were lost to followup before 12 months, leaving 131 for analysis. Their mean age was 54 years (range, 32-78 years), and 81% (106 of 131) were women; 34% (45 of 131) had less than a high school education. We preoperatively measured pain sensitization by assessing the patients' pressure pain thresholds by stimulating pressure-induced pain in the pain-free volar forearm and administering a self-reported Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire minor subscale, an instrument that assesses pain intensity in daily life situations. We evaluated postoperative pillar pain using the "table test" (having the patient lean on a table with their weight on their hands placed on the table's edge with elbows straight) with an 11-point ordinal scale at 3, 6, and 12 months after their surgical procedures. We conducted bivariate and multivariable analyses to determine whether the patients' clinical, demographic, and pain sensitization factors were associated with their postoperative pillar pain severity after CTR.
Results: After controlling for relevant confounding variables such as age, education level, and functional states, we found that increased pillar pain severity was associated with the pressure pain threshold (β = -1.02 [-1.43 to -0.61], partial R = 11%, p = 0.021) and Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire minor (β = 1.22 [0.73-1.71], partial R = 17%, p = 0.013) at 3 months, but by 6 months, only Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire minor (β = 0.92 [0.63-1.21], partial R = 13%, p = 0.018) remained an associated variable for pillar pain. Additionally, gender (women) was associated with increased pain severity at 3 (β = 0.78 [0.52-1.04], partial R = 9%, p = 0.023) and 6 months (β = 0.72 [0.41-1.01], partial R = 8%, p = 0.027). At 3 months, pressure pain threshold, Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire minor, and gender (women) collectively accounted for 37% of the variance in pillar pain severity; at 6 months, Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire minor and gender (women) accounted for 21% of the variance, but no relationship between those factors and pillar pain was observed at 12 months.
Conclusions: Gender (women) and preoperative pain sensitization measured by pressure pain threshold and self-reported Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire were associated with pillar pain severity up to 3 and 6 months after CTR, respectively. However, the influence of pain sensitization on pillar pain was diminished at 6 months and it did not show persistent effects beyond 12 months. Pain sensitization seems to be more important in the context of recovery from surgical intervention (in the presence of a pain condition) than in healthy states, and clinicians should understand the role of pain sensitization in the postoperative management of CTS. Future research may be needed to determine if therapeutic interventions to reduce sensitization will decrease the risk of pillar pain.
Level Of Evidence: Level III, prognostic study.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6260053 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999.0000000000000096 | DOI Listing |
Anesth Analg
January 2025
Reversal Therapeutics, Inc., National Harbor, Maryland.
Trauma Case Rep
February 2025
Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Universitas, Indonesia.
Introduction: The prevalence of maxillofacial fractures is rising due to increased road traffic accidents, necessitating prompt and effective management, especially in cases of panfacial fractures. The primary objective in treating such fractures is to restore occlusion and stabilize midface buttresses and pillars.
Case Report: This article presents the case of a 56-year-old male who sustained panfacial fractures following a road accident, exhibiting symptoms including facial pain and nosebleeds.
J Cannabis Res
January 2025
Anesthesiology Department, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA.
Introduction: Chronic pain is common among Veterans, some of whom use cannabis for pain. We conducted a feasibility pilot study of a novel coaching intervention to help Veterans optimize use of medical cannabis products for pain management (NCT06320470).
Methods: The intervention drew from scientific literature, consultation with cannabis experts, Veteran input via a Community Advisory Board, and tenets of motivational interviewing.
J Crit Care Med (Targu Mures)
October 2024
"Carol Davila" University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
Opioids represent one of the key pillars in postoperative pain management, but their use has been associated with a variety of serious side effects. Thus, it is crucial to investigate the timing and course of opioid administration in order to ensure a best efficacy to side-effect profile. The aim of our article was to investigate the analgesic effects of locally administered morphine sulfate (intraplantar) in a carrageenan-induced inflammation model in rats.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEur J Anaesthesiol
March 2025
From the Département d'Anesthésie, Chirurgie et Interventionnel (LB), U1138 Metabolism, Cancer and Immunity, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France (LB), Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA (LB), Aberdeen Centre for Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Health (Epidemiology Group), Institute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition (PF), Anaesthesia department, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, UK (PF), IMAGINE UR UM 103, Montpellier University, Anesthesia Critical Care, Emergency and Pain Medicine Division, Nîmes University Hospital, Nîmes, France (PF), Pain and Opioids after Surgery (PANDOS) European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ID ESAIC_RG_PAND) Research Group, Brussels, Belgium (PF), Department of Anaesthesiology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (MWH), School of Pharmacy, The University of Queensland, Pharmacy Australia Centre of Excellence, Woolloongabba Qld, Australia (M-OP), Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany (TP), EuroPeriscope, ESAIC Onco-Anaesthesiology Research Group, Brussels, Belgium (TP, LB, PF, MWH).
The management of peri-operative pain is one of the pillars of anaesthesia and is of particular importance in patients undergoing surgery for solid malignant tumours. Amongst several options, the most commonly employed analgesic regimens involve opioids, NSAIDs and regional anaesthesia techniques with different local anaesthetics. In recent years, several research reports have tried to establish a connection between peri-operative anaesthesia care and outcome after cancer surgery.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!