Objective: Given there are conflicting recommendations for the perioperative management of buprenorphine, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of our surgery patients on buprenorphine whose baseline dose had been preoperatively continued, tapered, or discontinued. Materials and Methods: We reviewed charts of patients on buprenorphine who had received elective surgery at Stanford Healthcare from January 1, 2013 to June 30, 2016. Our primary outcome of interest was the change in pain score, defined as mean postoperative pain score—preoperative pain score. We also collected data on patients’ tapering procedure and any postoperative nonbuprenorphine opioid requirements. Results: Out of ∼1200 patients on buprenorphine, 121 had surgery of which 50 were admitted and included in the study. Perioperative continuation of transdermal buprenorphine resulted in a significantly lower change in pain score postoperatively (0.606±0.878) than discontinuation (4.83±1.23, P=0.012). Among sublingual patients, there was no statistically significant difference in the change in pain score between those who were tapered to a nonzero dose versus discontinued (P=0.55). Continuation of sublingual buprenorphine resulted in fewer nonbuprenorphine scheduled opioid prescriptions than its taper or discontinuation (P=0.028). Finally, tapers were performed with great variability in the tapering team and rate of taper. Discussion: On the basis of our findings, we implemented a policy at our institution for the continuation of perioperative buprenorphine whenever possible. Our work reveals crucial targets for the education of perioperative healthcare providers and the importance of coordination among all perioperative services and providers.

Aim Novel minimally invasive short‐term and long‐term peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) systems have revolutionized targeted treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. We present an international survey of PNS‐implanting pain physicians to assess what factors they consider when offering permanent PNS. Methods This cross‐sectional study consisted of a survey (Qualtrics) that was distributed to PNS‐implanting physicians in a device supplier's entire email database on November 13, 2020, with 3 weeks of response time. Physicians’ contact information in the form of their email addresses had been previously collected by the supplier upon device distribution with permission to use survey responses for research. Results Of 2032 database physicians, 40 physicians representing 37 institutions responded to the survey. The most common application of PNS was mononeuropathic pain (57%). The most frequently targeted nerve was the suprascapular nerve (29%). 14% of physicians reported 81–100% of their implants were dual‐lead. The representative physicians ranged broadly in their most frequently targeted nerves. Although mononeuropathic pain was the most common indication for PNS, there was still varied response regarding other indications such as CRPS and post‐surgical chronic pain. Conclusion In context of a low response rate, identifying such factors can help update the prevailing treatment algorithm for interventional therapies, assist pain physicians in better identifying which patients are the best candidates for PNS, and inform future clinical trial design on PNS efficacy.

Peripheral nerve stimulation is an established treatment modality for chronic neuropathic pain. Over the last decade, with the advent of innovative devices and delivery platforms, peripheral nerve stimulation has evolved from invasive open surgeries to image-guided, minimally invasive percutaneous procedures. The authors hereby present a novel device, the Nalu™ Neurostimulation System (Nalu Medical, CA, USA), which has established its advantages in providing predictable and reliable peripheral nerve stimulation therapy for chronic neuropathic pain management. This novel device is effective in treating chronic pain conditions such as post-herniorrhaphy pain syndrome, intercostal neuralgia, post-laminectomy syndrome, and complex regional pain syndrome and holds great promise for the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain.

Interventional pain management (IPM) options for refractory neuropathic pain (NP) have recently increased with availability of peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) equipment and expertise. Given a lack of high-quality evidence and guidelines on this topic, we sought to understand the perception of physicians with expertise in treating NP regarding IPM and the role of PNS. We emailed a survey in March 2022 to international NP experts including pain medicine physicians, researchers, and leaders of 11 professional pain societies. No representatives from vendors of PNS systems were included in the design of the survey nor as respondents. Among 24 respondents (67% of those contacted), the distal common peroneal, tibial, and sural nerves were most frequently targeted (60%) with PNS. Persistent postsurgical pain of more than 3 months was the most common indication for PNS (84%). The aggregate NP treatment algorithm in order of median rank was non-opioid medications as first line, IPM including epidural/perineural steroid injections tied with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation as second line, pulsed radiofrequency (RF) tied with RF ablation/denervation as third line, temporary then permanent PNS as fourth line, followed by spinal cord stimulation, opioids, cryoablation, botulinum, peripheral nerve field stimulation, intrathecal targeted drug delivery, and others. Before offering PNS, 12 respondents (50%) indicated their preference for trialing non-neuromodulation treatments for 1–3 months. Twenty-two respondents (92%) agreed PNS should be offered early in the treatment of neuropathic pain. The most common barriers to PNS use were cost, lack of high-quality evidence in support of its use, lack of exposure to PNS in training programs, and lack of familiarity with the use of ultrasound guidance. PNS appears to have an increasing role in the treatment of NP but more research is needed on the outcomes of PNS to elucidate its role.