Background Scant evidence is available on the use of intravenous pain treatment in acute exacerbations of trigeminal neuralgia. The aim of this descriptive study was to evaluate the effectiveness and security of intravenous lacosamide and phenytoin in the treatment of acute trigeminal neuralgia pain. Methods We reviewed patients who attended the emergency department of a tertiary hospital between 2012 and 2020 for exacerbations of trigeminal neuralgia pain and were treated with either intravenous phenytoin or lacosamide for the first time. Primary endpoints were pain relief and adverse effects during the hospital stay. A comparative analysis between both treatment groups was performed. Results We studied 144 episodes in 121 patients (median age 61 years, 66.1% women). Trigeminal neuralgia etiology was secondary in 9.9%. Pain relief was observed in 77.8% of 63 patients receiving lacosamide infusions, and adverse effects in 1.6%. Pain relief was observed in 72.8% of 81 phenytoin infusions and adverse effects in 12.3%, all mild. No difference was observed in pain relief between groups, but the proportion of adverse effects was significantly different (p = 0.023). Statistically significant differences were also detected in readmissions within six months, time to readmission, and pain relief status at first follow-up visit. Conclusion Intravenous lacosamide and phenytoin can be effective and safe treatments for acute pain in trigeminal neuralgia. According to our series, lacosamide might be better tolerated than phenytoin and lead to lower readmissions and sustained pain relief.

Background and Objectives: First-line treatment for trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is limited to carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine, and in refractory cases, alternatives are scarce.Lacosamide has been suggested as a valid option. In this study, we describe a series of patients who received oral lacosamide as treatment for TN after first-line drug failure. Methods:In this retrospective descriptive cohort study, we included patients with refractory TN who attended a tertiary center between 2015 and 2021 and were prescribed oral lacosamide after first-line treatment failure. The primary endpoints were pain relief and adverse effects. We secondarily analyzed clinical outcomes and compared responders versus nonresponders in the search for potential predictors of response.Results: Eighty-six patients were included (mean age: 62 [SD 15.6] years; 54/86 [63%] female). The TN etiology was secondary in 16/86 (19%) patients. Concomitant continuous pain was present in 29/86 (34%) patients. The mean number of previous treatments was 2.7 [SD 1.5]. Pain relief was achieved in 57/86 (66%) cases, with 28/86 (33%) patients presenting adverse effects, all of which were mild. No statistically significant differences were observed between responders and nonresponders, but subtle clinical differences suggested potential predictors of response. Conclusion:Lacosamide may be an effective and relatively safe treatment for refractory pain in TN patients after first-line treatment failure.