ReviewPain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain2026
Management of Neuropathic Pain in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A Comprehensive Review.
Review in Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveComplex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a complex and multifaceted condition in which pain may be neuropathic, nociplastic, nociceptive, or mixed in nature. This review aims to summarize the available pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies for managing neuropathic pain in CRPS Types I and II.
methodsScopus, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched for randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, case series, and case reports addressing the management of CRPS, with a focus on neuropathic pain. Studies were analyzed from the perspective of pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches, with attention to differences between CRPS Type I and II.
resultsGabapentin (Level 1 evidence) and physiotherapy (Level 2 evidence) showed the strongest support among the treatments reviewed. Evidence remains limited or inconsistent for other pharmacological options (e.g., anticonvulsants other than gabapentin, opioids, antidepressants, ketamine, botulinum toxin) and for non-pharmacological interventions (e.g., mirror therapy, spinal cord stimulation, acupuncture). No significant differences in treatment efficacy were identified between CRPS Type I and II.
conclusionGiven the complex and heterogeneous nature of CRPS, a multimodal, individualized treatment approach is recommended. Further well-structured studies are needed to strengthen the evidence base for the management of neuropathic pain in CRPS.
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.