Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29066862›Full record

ReviewDrug design, development and therapy2017

Localized neuropathic pain: an expert consensus on local treatments.

Gisèle Pickering, Elodie Martin, Florence Tiberghien, Claire Delorme, Gérard Mick

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReviewConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Review in Drug design, development and therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06030297 (Diode Laser as a Biomarker for Neuropathic Pain of Peripheral Origin.), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06030297 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Diode Laser as a Biomarker for Neuropathic Pain of Peripheral Origin.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of UtahRan2023 to 2026Enrolled75ConditionsPeripheral NeuropathyArmsDiode Laser fiber type Selective Stimulator, ZTlido 1.8 % Topical System, PeriCam PSI NR, Medoc Quantitative Sensory Testing, Inactive Topical System
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Comprehensive Review of Topical Analgesics for Chronic Pain.Current pain and headache reports · 2021
    Review
  15. Topical Lidocaine for Chronic Pain Treatment.Drug design, development and therapy · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Gisèle PickeringCentre de Pharmacologie Clinique, CHU Clermont-Ferrand.
Elodie MartinCentre de Pharmacologie Clinique, CHU Clermont-Ferrand.
Florence TiberghienCentre d'Evaluation et de Traitement de la Douleur, CHU Jean Minjoz, Besançon.
Claire DelormeCentre d'Evaluation et Traitement de la Douleur, Bayeux.
Gérard MickUnité d'Evaluation et Traitement de la Douleur, Voiron.
Université Clermont Auvergne · FRCentre Hospitalier de la Côte Basque · FRHôpital Privé Jean Mermo · FRParcours santé systémique

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPain localization is one of the hallmarks for the choice of first-line treatment in neuropathic pain. This literature review has been conducted to provide an overview of the current knowledge regarding the etiology and pathophysiology of localized neuropathic pain (LNP), its assessment and the existing topical pharmacological treatments. MATERIALS AND

methodsLiterature review was performed using Medline from 2010 to December 2016, and all studies involving LNP and treatments were examined. A multidisciplinary expert panel of five pain specialists in this article reports a consensus on topical approaches that may be recommended to alleviate LNP and on their advantages in clinical practice.

resultsSuccessive international recommendations have included topical 5% lidocaine and 8% capsaicin for LNP treatment. The expert panel considers that these compounds can be a first-line treatment for LNP, especially in elderly patients and patients with comorbidities and polypharmacy. Regulatory LNP indications should cover the whole range of LNP and not be restricted to specific etiologies or sites. Precautions for the use of plasters must be followed cautiously.

conclusionAlthough there is a real need for more randomized controlled trials for both drugs, publications clearly demonstrate excellent risk/benefit ratios, safety, tolerance and continued efficacy throughout long-term treatment. A major advantage of both plasters is that they have proven efficacy and may reduce the risk of adverse events such as cognitive impairment, confusion, somnolence, dizziness and constipation that are often associated with systemic neuropathic pain treatment and reduce the quality of life. Topical modalities also may be used in combination with other drugs and analgesics with limited drug-drug interactions.

Indexed as

Administration, TopicalAgedAnalgesicsAnesthetics, LocalAnimalsCapsaicinHumansLidocaineNeuralgiaQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnalgesicsAnesthetics, LocalCapsaicinLidocainelocalizedmedicated plasterneuropathic painpatchreviewtopical

Identifiers

PMID29066862
PMCPMC5604568
OpenAlexW2756077492

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.