ArticleInterventional pain medicine2025
Intrathecal drug delivery for chronic abdominal pain: A case series.
Article in Interventional pain medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Chronic Abdominal Pain (CAP) is a pervasive and challenging global health issue. In a 2023 United States National Health Interview Survey, CAP was present in almost 3 % of all respondents. Various interventional procedures, such as sympathetic nerve blocks (SNBs), thoracolumbar sympathetic ablations, and spinal cord stimulation (SCS), have shown mixed efficacy in managing CAP. This case series describes refractory CAP that is effectively managed with IDD after a treatment algorithm to first distinguish nociceptive pain from a centrally mediated process, but only when the AGA ROME IV criteria for CAP is met. Methods: Four patients were identified in clinical practice as suitable candidates for an IDD for refractory, non-centrally mediated CAP. Two of the patients had constant CAP meeting the ROME IV AGA diagnostic criteria for CAP and therefore underwent a DDE-ultimately with findings suggestive of visceral or somatic pain given a >70 % reduction in pain after administration of the local anesthetic and confirmation of a sensory level change, but not after the administration of normal saline prior. (Tabe 1). All patients underwent a continuous intrathecal catheter trial, except for one patient with cystic fibrosis and unpredictable pancreatitis pain episodes, who had failed a spinal cord stimulator implant and proceeded straight to an IDDS implant. Results: IDD effectively managed refractory CAP across these four cases, with implantation durations ranging from 1.5 to 10 years. All patients remained off systemic opioids and maintained complete functional independence-specifically their Activities of Daily Living (ADLs) as well as Instrumental ADLs. Discussion: Effective management of CAP begins with a precise diagnosis that distinguishes between nociceptive and centrally mediated pain. Once centrally mediated pain is excluded, and provided patients did not experience sufficient analgesia with other less invasive interventions, targeted treatment for visceral/nociceptive pain with intrathecal drug delivery can be attempted. This case series highlights IDD as a promising alternative to other interventional therapies for refractory CAP, offering durable pain relief with potentially fewer complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.