Back to Journals » Journal of Pain Research » Volume 4

Pharmacological versus microvascular decompression approaches for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: clinical outcomes and direct costs

Authors Lemos, Alegria, Oliveira, Machado, Oliveira J, Almeida A

Published 24 August 2011 Volume 2011:4 Pages 233—244

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S20555

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 3

Laurinda Lemos1,2, Carlos Alegria3, Joana Oliveira3, Ana Machado2, Pedro Oliveira4, Armando Almeida1
1Life and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), School of Health Sciences, Campus de Gualtar, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal; 2Hospital Center of Alto Ave, Unit of Fafe, Fafe, Portugal; 3Department of Neurosurgery, Hospital São Marcos; 4Products and Systems Engineering, Campus de Azurém, University of Minho, Guimarães, Portugal

Abstract: In idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia (TN) the neuroimaging evaluation is usually normal, but in some cases a vascular compression of trigeminal nerve root is present. Although the latter condition may be referred to surgery, drug therapy is usually the first approach to control pain. This study compared the clinical outcome and direct costs of (1) a traditional treatment (carbamazepine [CBZ] in monotherapy [CBZ protocol]), (2) the association of gabapentin (GBP) and analgesic block of trigger-points with ropivacaine (ROP) (GBP+ROP protocol), and (3) a common TN surgery, microvascular decompression of the trigeminal nerve (MVD protocol). Sixty-two TN patients were randomly treated during 4 weeks (CBZ [n = 23] and GBP+ROP [n = 17] protocols) from cases of idiopathic TN, or selected for MVD surgery (n = 22) due to intractable pain. Direct medical cost estimates were determined by the price of drugs in 2008 and the hospital costs. Pain was evaluated using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and number of pain crises; the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Sickness Impact Profile, and satisfaction with treatment and hospital team were evaluated. Assessments were performed at day 0 and 6 months after the beginning of treatment. All protocols showed a clinical improvement of pain control at month 6. The GBP+ROP protocol was the least expensive treatment, whereas surgery was the most expensive. With time, however, GBP+ROP tended to be the most and MVD the least expensive. No sequelae resulted in any patient after drug therapies, while after MDV surgery several patients showed important side effects. Data reinforce that, (1) TN patients should be carefully evaluated before choosing therapy for pain control, (2) different pharmacological approaches are available to initiate pain control at low costs, and (3) criteria for surgical interventions should be clearly defined due to important side effects, with the initial higher costs being strongly reduced with time.

Keywords: trigeminal neuralgia, carbamazepine, gabapentin associated with ropivacaine, microvascular decompression, clinical outcomes, direct costs
 

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]

 

Other article by this author:

Effectiveness of the association between carbamazepine and peripheral analgesic block with ropivacaine for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia

Laurinda Lemos, Ramalho Fontes, Sara Flores, et al

Journal of Pain Research 2010, 3:201-212

Published Date: 25 October 2010

Readers of this article also read:

Green synthesis of water-soluble nontoxic polymeric nanocomposites containing silver nanoparticles

Prozorova GF, Pozdnyakov AS, Kuznetsova NP, Korzhova SA, Emel’yanov AI, Ermakova TG, Fadeeva TV, Sosedova LM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1883-1889

Published Date: 16 April 2014

Methacrylic-based nanogels for the pH-sensitive delivery of 5-Fluorouracil in the colon

Ashwanikumar N, Kumar NA, Nair SA, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5769-5779

Published Date: 15 November 2012

A novel preparation method for silicone oil nanoemulsions and its application for coating hair with silicone

Hu Z, Liao M, Chen Y, Cai Y, Meng L, Liu Y, Lv N, Liu Z, Yuan W

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5719-5724

Published Date: 12 November 2012

The amorphous solid dispersion of the poorly soluble ABT-102 forms nano/microparticulate structures in aqueous medium: impact on solubility

Frank KJ, Westedt U, Rosenblatt KM, Hölig P, Rosenberg J, Mägerlein M, Fricker G, Brandl M

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5757-5768

Published Date: 12 November 2012

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Corrigendum: Softec HD hydrophilic acrylic intraocular lens: biocompatibility and precision

Espandar L, Sikder S, Moshirfar M

Clinical Ophthalmology 2011, 5:159-160

Published Date: 6 February 2011

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010

Wound care in the geriatric client

Steve Gist, Iris Tio-Matos, Sharon Falzgraf, Shirley Cameron, Michael Beebe

Clinical Interventions in Aging 2009, 4:269-287

Published Date: 8 June 2009