RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Increased excitability of the motor cortex through transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been described as a non-pharmacological strategy for the treatment of Spinal Cord Injury neuropathic pain (SCINP). It is also believed that the ability to enhance motor cortex excitability (MCE) could be impaired within chronic SCINP individuals. The following case reports describe the MCE behavior in individuals with chronic SCINP submitted to electrical non-invasive neuromodulation. CASE PRESENTATIONS: This article reports 11 cases with chronic SCINP in which each individual was submitted to a 5-day pre-post MCE analysis in order to evaluate its behavior after the anodal tDCS sessions. All cases maintained ongoing pharmacological treatment. Four individuals have shown negative variation of the MCE, two of which reported pain intensity reduction. Three other individuals had MCE-positive variation along 5 days, from which only one reported a VAS 0.5 pain reduction after the 5th day of observation. The other four individuals did not present significant variation of the MCE. DISCUSSION: The positive variation of MCE was significantly altered by adjunctive tDCS only in three individuals, though no clinically relevant reduction in pain intensity was reported among these participants. Key factors such as pain and injury duration, age, chronic medication use and underlying maladaptive neuroplasticity may influence responsiveness to brain stimulation within this population. These case reports try to add evidence for cautious recommendation of tDCS in chronic SCINP individuals and to the necessity of identifying groups of individuals that are most susceptible to neuromodulation.
Assuntos
Excitabilidade Cortical , Córtex Motor , Neuralgia , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal , Estimulação Transcraniana por Corrente Contínua , Humanos , Neuralgia/etiologia , Neuralgia/terapia , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/complicações , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/terapiaRESUMO
Introduction: Acute spinal cord injury is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events. Low-molecular-weight heparins are first-line medications for both the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism. Pharmacological prophylaxis may be indicated for high-risk patients and low-risk patients may be managed with non-pharmacological measures. Case presentation: We report two cases of gluteal hematomas that occurred in patients with chronic spinal cord injury who were under prophylactic doses of enoxaparin at a tertiary rehabilitation hospital. There was no local trauma. The patients needed multiple surgical interventions and rehabilitation treatment was delayed. Discussion: There is a lack of evidence to correctly estimate the thromboembolic risk in chronic spinal cord injury and the duration of prophylaxis. Over-prescription of pharmacological prophylaxis may expose patients to unnecessary risks. These patients frequently present with polypharmacy and reducing the amount of prescribed medication may begin with reducing prophylactic treatments for venous thromboembolism, which may be an overtreatment based on risk overestimation.
Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Enoxaparina/efeitos adversos , Hematoma/induzido quimicamente , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/complicações , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Nádegas , Humanos , Masculino , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost and incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding between two different VTE pharmacological prophylaxis strategies in individuals with spinal cord injury: one based on motor impairment (Protocol 1) and the other based on time from the lesion and presence of associated risk factors for VTE (Protocol 2). SETTING: A tertiary rehabilitation hospital in Brazil. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a total of 1475 charts of individual admissions: 814 individuals received pharmacological prophylaxis according to Protocol 1 and 661 according to protocol 2. These cohorts were compared with respect to age, time and level of injury, length of stay, AIS classification, type of injury, and occurrence of VTE and major bleeding. The number of prescribed doses of enoxaparin and expenditures associated with enoxaparin during each period were evaluated. RESULTS: The median lesion time was 3 years. The risk-based strategy drastically reduced the average monthly use of enoxaparin by 75% and the 12-month enoxaparin expenditure by $119,930.33, without increasing the risk of VTE. The incidence density of thromboembolic events was 0.55/10,000 patient-days, and all events occurred in individuals receiving prophylaxis according to Protocol 1. CONCLUSIONS: Time from injury and risk of VTE-based protocol for indication of pharmacological prophylaxis drastically reduced costs. No difference in occurrence of VTE was observed.