Applied Evidence

Complex regional pain syndrome: Which treatments show promise?

Author and Disclosure Information

 

References

Psychological therapy starts with teaching patients that 1) pain sensations in CRPS type 1 do not indicate tissue damage, and 2) reactivation of the affected limb is important. With persistent symptoms, clinical psychological assessment is recommended, eventually followed by cognitive behavioral therapy.

Pain management starts with oral or topical medications typically used for other neuropathic pain conditions (eg, amitriptyline (Elavil), gabapentin (Neurontin), opioids, and nonsteroidal antidepressants). The guideline also recommends steroids, calcitonin, and alpha-1 adrenoceptor antagonists (terazosin [Hytrin] or phenoxybenzamine [Dibenzylene]). With persistent symptoms, intravenous regional sympathetic blocks (IRSBs) and somatic nerve blocks are recommended. According to the guideline, treatment for resistant cases may progress to epidural catheters for sympathetic blockade, spinal cord stimulation, intrathecal baclofen (Lioresal), or sympathectomy.1

Reviews of medication trials show minimal effectiveness

Meta-analyses and systematic reviews of the literature reveal that many of the treatments recommended in the guidelines are minimally if at all effective, or have been inadequately researched.6-12 This is particularly so concerning invasive therapies such as sympathetic ganglion block,13 sympathectomy,12 and spinal cord stimulation9,10 that introduce the possibility of adverse effects. Yet, evidence is equally sparse for common pain therapies in CRPS type 1, such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antidepressants, opiates, or antiseizure medications.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of medication trials for CRPS only partially agree.6-8,11 A 1999 systematic review concluded that oral corticosteroids demonstrated a consistent and long-term analgesic effect in CRPS.6 This review identified only limited data to suggest an analgesic effect from topical dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO), epidural clonidine and IRSB with ketanserin (not available in the US), and bretylium. The review concluded there was contradictory evidence of an analgesic effect from calcitonin or intravenous phentolamine and most likely no effect, and evidence against the effectiveness of guanethidine and reserpine IRSBs, and droperidol and atropine IRSBs.6

A 1995 systematic review of IRSBs concluded as well that overall there was no effect on pain, but a single RCT of each bretylium and ketanserin showed an analgesic effect.8 In a systematic review focused on upper extremity post-stroke CRPS (also known as shoulder-hand syndrome), 1 RCT was identified, and indicated that corticosteroids had an analgesic effect.11 High-quality evidence for the use of intramuscular calcitonin was lacking.11

Calcitonin may be one exception. A systematic review of medical treatment for CRPS type 1 identified 21 randomized trials, enough to undertake a statistical analysis of the analgesic effect of 4 types of treatment: sympathetic suppressors, guanethidine, intravenous regional blocks, and calcitonin.7 Of the 4, only calcitonin appeared to have a significant beneficial effect on pain.7

IV bisphosphonates show promise. More recently, intravenous bisphosphonates have demonstrated clinical and analgesic benefits in 2 small but high-quality RCTs.14,15 Strikingly, short-term therapy of 3 to 10 days of IV alendronate (Fosamax) or clodronate (Bonefos) without adverse effects resulted in significant overall improvements for the duration of the 2 trials, 4 weeks14 and 180 days.15

Nonpharmacologic treatments

Nonmedical treatments that have been studied include spinal cord stimulation, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and acupuncture. Spinal cord stimulation demonstrated a modest long-term (2-year) reduction in pain and improvement in health related quality of life in 1 RCT,16 but with no improvement in patient functioning and a 34% rate of adverse occurrences.9 Similarly, physical therapy and occupational therapy have been studied only in 1 large RCT (n=135).

Treatment with physical therapy did decrease pain compared with occupational therapy and control therapy,17 but revealed no improvement in active range of motion with physical or occupational therapy compared with control therapy.17 Furthermore, physical therapy led only to uncertain diminishment of impairment when data were analyzed in 2 different ways, 1 of which showed a benefit of physical and occupational therapy over control treatment,18 1 of which did not.19

Acupuncture demonstrated no improvement over sham treatment.20

Applying the evidence: Medical treatment

Choose any of the therapies least likely to do harm and supported by evidence of efficacy: topical 50% DMSO cream (SOR: B), intravenous bisphosphonates (SOR: A), or limited courses of oral corticosteroids (SOR: B). Despite some contradictory findings in the literature,6,17,18 other studies demonstrate that physical therapy18,19 and calcitonin7 reduce pain, and neither is likely to cause harm (SOR: B).

Epidural clonidine injection,6 IRSB with bretylium,6-8 and spinal cord stimulation9,16 have demonstrated some efficacy, but due to the invasiveness of the treatments and the modest benefits, patients should be counseled carefully before initiating these therapies (SOR: B) (TABLE 1).

Therapies to avoid. Therapies to avoid due to lack of evidence, lack of efficacy, or likelihood of adverse outcomes include IV regional blocks with everything but bretylium,6-8 sympathetic ganglion blocks with local anesthetics (very short duration of analgesia),13 systemic intravenous sympathetic inhibition,6 acupuncture,20 and sympathectomy (SOR: B).12

Next Article: