Guide to Pudendal Neuralgia and PNE from Ava


The Core Group would like to extend its gratitude to Ava for writing this in-depth analysis which covers a broad spectrum of topics related to Pudenal Neuralgia and PNE.  Our membership will find this document to be a great asset as they attempt to sort out many of the nuances of this baffling medical problem.

We would like to point out that all of the posts on this forum are for informational purposes only and the information contained in this “Guide to Pudendal Neuralgia and PNE from Ava” has come directly from Ava and not from The Core Group.

As always, we advise our members to rely on the advice of their doctors before making any decisions regarding information they have gleaned from any website.

Once again, we would like to express our deepest thanks to Ava for the time and the solid research that she has put into preparing this document and for sharing all of her ideas with us, both on the forum and in this document.

The Core Group

 

 

Table of Contents

 

I.          On the TIPNA forum

                        A. The application of logic to PNE issues

                        B. On opinions given on the forum

                        C. Assisting others by sharing information

II.         On PNE

                        A. Mechanisms of nerve injury

                        B. Path of the pudendal nerve and sites of possible entrapment

III.       On  pudendal neuralgia following vaginal or abdominal hysterectomy

IV.       On reasons for failed pudendal decompression surgery

V.        On diagnostic testing

                        A. Practical guide

                        B. PNMLT

                                    1. neurophysiology

                                    2. analogy

                                    3. sensitivity and specificity

                                    4. validity of intra-operative and post-operative PNMLT

                                    5. reasons for PNMLT despite concerns over validity

                                    5. Botox and the PNMLT

                                    6. nerve testing of the penis

                        C. MR neurography

                        D. Nerve blocks

                        E. Botox (diagnostic)

VI.       On the processes involved in pain

                        A. The mechanism of central sensitization

                        B. Activation of opiate receptors following surgical event

                        C. Nociceptive versus neuropathic pain

                        D. The four horsemen of pain

VII.      On pharmaceuticals

                        A. Valium and other benzodiazepams

                        B. Indocid suppositories and NSAIDs

                        C. Narcotic analgesics

                        D. Neurontin

                        E.  Cymbalta

                        F.  AV411

                        G.   PARP-1

                        H.  minocin

                        I.   Quinamm

                        J.   Tylenol

                        K.  Effectiveness of current medications for neuropathic pain

                        L.  On the pharmaceutical industry

                       

VIII.     On the use of medications in combination to address neuropathic pain

IX.       On acupuncture

X.        On spinal cord stimulators

XI.       On lumbar disc herniation

XII.      On MRI, CT and discography for lumbar disc diagnosis

XIII.     On alternative medicine

XIV.    On prolotherapy and SIJD

XV.      On a proposal to evaluate responses to neuropathic analgesics

 

 

I. On the TIPNA forum

 

          A. The application of logic to PNE issues

 

Several have written that it is difficult for the non-science trained individual to understand the basis for some of these arguments. Yet in order for us to apply logic to PNE, it is important that the process begins. Otherwise it is like the Japanese film Rashomon, where the same event is viewed from diametrically different positions, thus the interpretations from the varying position is wildly disparate. So I would like for those who want not only to understand but to participate to begin with the anatomy of the nerve. Take your hand and palpate your sacrum. Imagine the sacral plexus originating from the cord, forming on the other side of the bone you are touching. Imagine the nerve as it courses along the inside of the gluteus maximum muscle...feel the muscle, imagine the course of the nerve. Trace the course of the nerve a little further each day, rehearsing three or four times what you know. There are many books and drawings to guide you, but none more powerful than your own imagination of the nerve in your own body. In 30 days or less you will know the nerve and all adjacent anatomical structures, and you will find confidence in this knowledge. Not only that, you will have begun to penetrate the layers and layers of mundane that science requires in order to begin a pursuit of the profound. While the value of this forum is already immeasurable, suppose we were to link in series the processing capabilities of all 780 or so minds, these being all well informed, and then perhaps produce the single original thought that would turn the tide. Yes, we have talked about the paucity of diagnostic modalities and their limitations, and the doubts that arise because such modalities are used in a way that conflicts with science, but I believe we can do better than that. It is important to realize that the law of diminishing returns applies to doubts as well.

We have talked about the frailties of the PNMLT, the neuropathological basis for those frailties, and the fact that a post op or intra-operative PNMLT cannot be valid. But what would be the solution... those are the questions we should be debating. Since the degeneration regeneration process compromises velocity and latency in post release testing, what means, theoretical or otherwise, might be devised. In terms of nerve testing, the one which gave the most desirable clinical information would be that test which measured what the dendrite was saying to the cord. Is the cord being told that pain is present or not? We can now measure the quantity, osmolality, osmolarity, and particulate size of a liquid passing through a tube without actually sampling the tube. Is it possible to do the same in terms of measuring impulse propagation along the axon? Or perhaps we can find greater reliability in measuring velocity and latency
in unmyelinated axons in the pudendal nerve. This has not been discussed for obvious reasons, but the pudendal nerve, like all peripheral nerves, has axons that are mylenated to different degrees as well as axons that have not been myelinated at all. Again, since the thicker, heavier myelinated axons are what transmit the impulse quickest, they are the axons carrying the impulse that is measured in the PNMLT. When damaged, they transmit slower. Neuropathy shows us why, and that these changes persist. But suppose we were able to subject the pudendal nerve to a test of unmyelinated axons only, or if we devise an impulse that would not transmit in the myelin sheath but instead be transmitted in the same manner that unmyelinated axons transmit.

If we look at the mechanics of entrapment, then apply the same physics to the cellular level, one sees why injury occurs initially to the sheath of myelinated axons within the nerve. A force applied to a structure of many consistencies will first affect those parts of the structure that provide the least resistance, unless the architecture of the structure is designed to diffuse such as force. It was never necessary for such an architectural modification in peripheral nerves...protection came from location and outside structures... the nerve never had to evolve a mechanism to protect itself from compression.

This gives rise to the possibility of another means of testing for PNE, one that would give correct data (excluding the uncertainty principle) either pre-op or post-op as to persistent entrapment.... peripheral nerve impedance testing. In the time before telephones were owned by customers, but were instead rented from the phone company, electrical tests were developed to monitor if phones had been added illegally to your service. The phone company would dial your number and measure impedance on your line. One phone ringing gave a certain impedance, 2 phones another level, 3 phones more, and so on. If you were paying for 2 phones, but impedance testing revealed three, then your bill would be adjusted. Customers could defeat impedance testing by clipping the wires to the ringer, but most did not have that savvy. If equipment of exquisite sensitivity could be developed, we would not have to apply a stimulus to the rectum. Instead we would measure the response of the nerve to a carefully measured stimulus applied proximally. If the nerve was firing above baseline (there would always be some level of activity, but this could be quantified and standardized in animal and human models), this would suggest entrapment. It is possible that if the sensitivity of the readings was great, the degree of impedance could correlate in a linear or sigmoid fashion, again carefully quantified, with degree of entrapment. Impedance would not be a measure of velocity or latency and therefore unaffected by the state of the myelin sheath. A person still symptomatic but with baseline impedance would not have persistent PNE, but rather the pain would have to come from either the cord or cortex level. A post release but still symptomatic patient whose impedance was elevated into the levels associated with entrapment could have persistent PNE, but then again, other sources of stimuli to the nerve (other pathological processes) would have to be ruled out.

But we should never be satisfied with nerve testing alone, even if we reach the point where velocity, latency and impedance could be measured with a high degree of sensitivity and specificity, and that correlation to entrapment was impeachable. We need to be able to see the nerve in much the same manner that a cardiologist can visualize the coronary anatomy via catheterization. We are not far from the point that magnetic resonance imaging could measure the configuration of the pudendal nerve at each millimeter along its path. Then in most cases of true PNE the exact anatomical location of entrapment could be pinpointed. At present this is more a software problem than a hardware one. In my opinion Bill and Melinda Gates are an extraordinary couple, and I certainly do not wish PNE upon them. But I am willing to bet my husband's every last nickel that if one or the other of them had developed PNE a year or so ago, reliable nerve testing would now be available to us, and software would have been developed that allowed precise visualization of the pudendal and other nerves. Such diagnostic modalities might seem far-fetched to our doubters , but these modalities are far more realistic than an MRI scan or lithotripsy was two decades ago.

But while we can look to the future, we live in the present, and many patients with PNE still have pain. Again, I contend that if one can be cured, something has to be responsible for dismal results in those still suffering. Do we simply accept these treatment failures as a part of doing business, or do we figure out why they happened and what can be done, both to prevent future failures and to give relief to those who live with that failure every day. To do so we have to look at what we are doing and the basis for doing it. Take diagnostic blocks for instance. When your phone goes out of service and a repairman is summoned, he does not check the cable closest to the central office first. He goes to the protector outside your home, and checks to see if there is a dial tone. If not, he goes to the pedestal where the drop to your house connects to the residential cable, and then works his way back to the switching equipment.


If there is a dial tone at the pedestal, then the problem is in the wire overhead or buried underground to your individual dwelling. You may be tempted to argue that when an electrician comes to your house to check out a faulty outlet, he first goes to the electrical panel. There are both therapeutic and diagnostic implications for this exception. First, the electrician does not wish to be electrocuted, so he turns off power to the outlet before repair. Second, he does not trace the pathway of power in a logical sense, at least not initially, because he does not have to go back to his truck, drive three miles, climb a pole and sort through hundreds of cable pairs to find yours in order to do so. To the telephone repairman it is much more efficient, time and energy wise, to apply logic to the problem presented than it is to do so to the electrician's problem. One will generally find logic applied to those activities where substantial resources can be saved through its application, but will not necessarily find logic applied where its application will make no difference. With nerve testing, it seems logical to test at every point possible. A positive block at Colles' fascia says that a decompression procedure only to Alcock's canal will not help that patient. The more information that is available prior to surgery, especially given the pitfalls of current testing, and very especially given that re-operation entails difficulties of its own, is the only responsible manner in which to approach PNE.

 

            B. On opinions given on the forum

 

In a recent edition of the Bay City Journal, a Biloxi, Mississippi newspaper, two avid hunters were pictured along with their kill, a 200 pound Russian boar. The caption, however, read “bore”, leading one to suppose that a generation of Biloxi youth would now associate such misspelling with this elegant animal. What I do not want to happen here, on this forum, is for a patient with pudendal distribution or pelvic pain to accept as fact the verbosities of some of our contributors. There are those here who simply give their experiences, diagnostic and therapeutic, as a means of informing others. There are those, like Karen and Les, whose writings reflect some academic experiences as well as a thorough review of the available knowledge on the subject of neuropathic pain and pudendal entrapment. There are physicians, like Chuck and Marianne, who are seeking answers, and contribute to our understanding by asking relevant questions and posing certain theories, which are then labeled as such. There are those who comfort with kind words and sharing hope. And then there are those whose views are proposed as fact while the truth to these propositions is nowhere to be found.

Because one sits in the bleachers and catches the home run ball does not automatically make that individual a professional batting coach. Because one has been so fortunate as to recover completely following pudendal decompression does not qualify that person to teach neurosurgery. Such behavior in and of itself does not concern me. What does concern me is that the innocent, truly searching human who, in the midst of the misery of pudendal neuropathy, will grasp at anything, perhaps even suppositions found here but grounded in neither reason nor fact. This site seeks to do much, but what it does not seek to do is mislead. Those who contribute have a duty to qualify remarks, especially when remarks are submitted in quantity.

Let's look at two examples of misleading information. The first is rather harmless, the second potentially less so. In the same post in which she calls me “patronizing”, one member writes: “You also say that vaginal birth injures tissues and the only issue is to what degree. I know plenty of women who had no tearing, no pain afterwards, and no dysfunction. So I further disagree that injury always happens.”

While we should appreciate disagreement, such dispute should be substantive. Granted the member may not have immediate access to an obstetrical textbook, but the internet lists more than 54,000 sites in which pelvic floor dysfunction and pelvic injury following normal labor is discussed. One such site is: http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/166/3/337.

That injury occurs during normal uncomplicated labor is not a subject of debate among obstetricians, so one wonders why it should be debated here. Yes, we all know women who show no flagrant signs of postpartum injury. I was one, and fortunately so are most women. But this does not diminish the credibility of the science, nor does it require the imposition of reverse logic. Instead, it is most logical to propose that woman cannot go through all the tremendous physiological changes that occur during pregnancy and delivery without some injury to supporting structures, mucous membranes, pelvic muscles, or the cervix. That one might recover quickly and without noticeable residual effect is not only a testament to God’s creation of woman, but it is also the result of a process of healing that has evolved a maturity and serenity over time.

When we tell our men folk of the terrible pain that accompanies labor and delivery, and when we laugh in comparing this pain to everyday agonies that accompany the exercise of manhood, are we honest with them? Is the pain of labor and delivery that severe? If so, as we often say it is, what do you think our axons were telling us with all that afferent sensory stimulation.... does this pain come to celebrate the expectant birth? Doesn't it seem much more logical that our sensory apparatus throughout the pelvis is screaming "injury" to the cord?

The other example is this. A member wrote: “Scans such as MRI don't show nerves, so it is not surprising that you had the experience that you did.” I found this quote particularly interesting since today I was examining a L4/5 nerve root on an MRI scan. The neurosurgical resident standing beside me remarked: "Interesting the displacement...more posterior than lateral. Should be easier to get at". "Nonsense", I rebutted. "That nerve is only in your imagination. It can't be seen on scan." I had learned this medical fact on the forum.

What if a guest had read her statement of fact, decided against an MRI on the basis of that post, and died 8 months later from an osteoblastic malignancy that would have been picked up by scan? The same with our new mother. What if her pelvic pain was from a deep perineal abcess that resulted from fecal contamination of the deep wound that occurred during delivery. At 5 weeks an undiagnosed abcess is low on the index of suspicion, but it still ranks far above PNE. Every bout of short term perineal and pelvic pain is not going to be PNE, nor is it going to be readily amendable to PT. Given the brief interval between delivery and pain, it is the obstetrician who should determine the merits of a PT evaluation.

More importantly, this young lady's doctor has had 10 - 11 months to get to know his patient well, maybe even longer. We have 2 or 3 paragraphs. What makes better sense... to let the doctor give guidance, or some far away internet user.

 

            C. Assisting others by sharing information

 

Karen's last post is not just thoughtful and sincere, but it is filled with the elegance of wisdom and experience. One must do exactly as she suggests if they are to expect even a small measure of satisfaction from a visit to their physician. For if the symptom complex is outside of that physician's level of expertise and knowledge, even if the symptoms appear to be due to a process within that physician's specialty, it is highly doubtful that physician will take the time that evening to search for answers. Karen knows as well as I that this is not the way it should be, and I would wage large sums that it is not the manner in which she confronts puzzling issues in her own patients. But we all know, that for the most part, this is the way it is when most patients go to doctors. The posts I am honored to add to this forum are done with the intent of teaching, but also to explore the many sides of pudendal neuropathy. The more energy and effort each of us puts into thought brings us closer to answers that make sense. These answers then provide patients with information with which to make choices about diagnostic modalities and treatments in the search for relief from a terrible pain. Those who use this forum for information are lucky to have insightful members like Karen and Les and Celeste and Greg and Callie and Marianne and all the other ones (who also deserve individual mention) who are constantly monitoring and offering helpful comments. They are lucky as well to have the occasional antagonist, like L.G., whose experiences are invaluable in relating the not-so-good sides of current care. If anything, this forum is fair, giving credibility to all sides. As for me, it led me to Houston and my current state of relief. I owe far more than I can give.

 

II. On PNE

 

            A. Mechanism of nerve injury

 

Nerves can be damaged in any number of scenarios, by compression, entrapment, or disruption of their usual anatomic pathway. Also by toxins, by viruses (herpes zoster), by trauma, by surgery, by autoimmune disease, by diabetes (diabetic peripheral neuropathy), even by vitamin deficiency (B-12). But while the number of disease processes that can affect the nervous system in some way is large, the types of pathology that can affect an individual nerve alone is limited. This not only narrows the probabilities with respect to injury in PNE, but it is extremely helpful in understanding the cellular mechanisms involved. By doing so, one can make appropriate decisions regarding the efficacy of different treatment strategies, and thereby one's willingness to undertake them. If a strategy makes sense on a biochemical and cellular physiology level, then it is far more likely to be successful. Conversely, if such strategy fails to meet that criteria, while it may be advocated strongly by some, and there may be isolated cases of success (which may or may not have anything to do with the applied treatment), it is doubtful such strategies will measure up when compared to placebo. Just like football, the basics of tackling and blocking, while hardly glamorous, are usually what eventually determine outcome. As one who, like others, suffered for years, it is outcome and outcome and outcome that interests me most. When one considers the possible etiologies of individual or paired neuropathy, they may at the outset eliminate severance, which elicits an entirely different response at the cellular level than one will find in PNE. Yet in numerous places in the forum axonal re-growth is discussed and projected as a mechanism to explain delayed response. Again, severance is not the injury in PNE and axonal re-growth not the cellular response. In severance, the partially or completely interrupted axon has to first seal its interrupted cell membrane, but this occurs in the first hours following injury. Then the repair process is initiated and supervised from the nucleus residing in the cell body. The problem with the now linearly expanding axon is that while the DNA can direct every tiny facet of axonal restructuring within the cell, it has almost no information on how to proceed outside the cell, so that usually in the case of total severance the nerve really does not know where to go or what structures, synapses or receptors to innervate. The re-growth of axons of a non completely severed nerve have the luxury of following the course of those not severed, so the chance of re-innervation is far greater. But the forum addressed notion of measured millimeters per week of axonal re-growth has little applicability to the neuropathology involved in PNE. Besides severance, individual or paired neuropathy can result from blunt trauma, or from structural abnormalities, usually acquired. It is this we will focus on.....

 

            B. Path of Pudendal Nerve and sites of possible entrapment

 

When the pudendal nerve leaves the sacral plexus, it travels posterior to the coccygeus muscle and sacrospinus ligament, and anterior to the gluteus maximus muscle and the sacrotuberous ligament. It then continues inferior-medially, remaining posterior-lateral to the levator ani muscle, but generally before entering Alcock's canal gives off the inferior rectal nerve. The clinical implications here have importance. Since my surgery involved division of the sacrotuberous ligaments bilaterally, and much of my pain was rectal in the beginning, careful dissection prior to Alcock's canal would play a role in recovery. Alcock's canal is basically composed of an extension of the obturator internus fascia, again clinically important. Fascia, like other collagen vasular tissues, can undergo pathologic change, and in doing so, adhere, entrap, compress or otherwise compromise the transiting nerve. Shortly after exiting Alcock's canal the pudendal nerve gives off the perineal nerve which must pass through the superficial perineal fascia (except for a single rectal branch) before reaching its area of responsibility. Whereas the transit through Alcock's canal is parallel to fascia, the transit of the perineal nerve through Colles' fascia is perpendicular, giving rise to an additional consideration of restriction. The pudendal nerve itself must also pass through Colles' fascia, enter the urogenital diaphragm and become renamed (dorsal nerve of the penis in the male, labial nerve in the female). Even as the pudendal nerve becomes another there is ample opportunity for restriction. While I do not know the step by step moves of the surgical procedures involved in PNE surgery, I am aware of those descriptions, and especially the fact that visual exposure is very limited. I am unsure of dissection to the level of Colles' fascia, but I do intend to review operative notes to study the extent of dissection. If one were to compare this to a hundred pair telephone cable, with each set of wires leading off to homes of Family A, the Family B, then Family C, and so on and so on until the last pair of ten or so wires went to the homes of Families Y and Z.


If the main cable is disrupted somewhere between the switching equipment in the central office but before the first wires are given off to Family A, then all the wires will be affected and no family would have phone service. But if the cable is disrupted after giving off service to Families A-J, but before service to Families K and after, then only Families K through Z will be out of service. Given the many variations in human bodies, the different courses an artery or vein might take, even the fact that the appendix can generally be found in one of four positions, or especially the different but complex relationships of the cystic artery, the right hepatic artery and the cystic duct in different individuals, one can reasonably suppose that branches from the pudendal nerve come off in different places in different individuals, and while these branches usually innervate the same structures, the courses to those structures is also variable. More than supposition, anatomical dissection shows this to be true in the case of every nerve. Also, it is not reasonable to suppose that every true case of PNE is due to compression, entrapment, stretching, or irritation at the same location along the pudendal nerve's course. All of this has strong clinical implications in answering such questions as to relief of some symptoms and not others, partial relief of all symptoms but not complete relief, as well as the one we pray for, relief of all symptoms. Nor is it necessarily reasonable to assume that restriction and damage, if caused by displacement, hypertrophy, inflammation or otherwise, cannot be the result of two sites or more, especially given that the processes involved may be regional, involving an area the size of a tennis ball, rather than an area the size of a marble. If the nerve is then freed at one point but not the other, especially if the freed point is the proximal one, then one would expect relief in the posterior perineum but not the anterior one.

 

 

III. On pudendal neuralgia following vaginal or abdominal           hysterectomy

 

1.

 

Vaginal hysterectomy involves the cutting and ligature of the uterosacral and cardinal ligaments, as well as freeing the uterus from its close attachment to the levator ani muscle, but the surgical field should never reach as far as the sacrotuberous ligaments. These should remain unharmed by surgery, with exceptions. Those being the development of scarring and adhesions, or post-operative infection moving laterally to involve these structures. With hysterectomy, by whatever approach, there is some residual weakening of the pelvic floor musculature, but usually this can be minimized by careful operative technique and post op strengthening therapies. Pelvic pain can come from so many sources, and the symptoms might seem to be pudendal in distribution. Because there is a great deal of nerve overlap, and because sympathetic fibers also play a role in sensory innervation to this area, and because of the radiating nature of pain along sensory dermatomes, it is imperative that consideration be given to the myriad pelvic pain pathologies that are not PNE. For those interested in a more technical description, or at the least, a partial listing of the possibilities, try this link: http://www.foamix.co.il/eMedicine.htm

 

2.

 

Here I've quoted, and wonder which of the three procedures you had:

"The 3 common vaginal procedures to suspend the prolapsed vaginal apex are sacrospinous ligament fixation, modified McCall culdoplasty, and iliococcygeus fascia suspension. As originally described by Amreich and modified by Richter and Nichols, sacrospinous ligament fixation is usually performed on the patient's right side to avoid the rectosigmoid (Nichols, 1982). The vaginal apex is attached, using permanent sutures, to the sacrospinous ligament. A thorough knowledge of pelvic anatomy is critical in order to avoid complications. [b][u]Take care to place the sutures 1-2 cm medial to the ischial spine to avoid injury to the pudendal bundle and the inferior gluteal vessels. [/u][/b]Place the suture through—rather than around—the ligament. Excellent results have been reported for correcting vaginal vault prolapse using fixation to the sacrospinous ligament. However, in 1992, Shull and colleagues reported a predisposition for recurrence of anterior vaginal wall relaxation after sacrospinous ligament fixation.

The McCall culdoplasty may be used to correct apical descent or as prophylaxis against future prolapse (McCall, 1957). This procedure uses the uterosacral ligaments, which, if strong, are shortened and reattached to the vaginal cuff after completion of the vaginal hysterectomy. In the authors' opinion, attaching the prolapsed vagina to stretched prolapsed uterosacral ligaments is of little value. The surgeon must be bold enough to grasp the uterosacrals near the sacrum, where they are usually strong and undetached, but careful enough to respect and avoid the neighboring ureters. Intraoperative cystourethroscopy is therefore essential to be sure the ureters have not been ligated or kinked.

The iliococcygeus fascia suspension provides effective cuff suspension, since it attaches the apex to the obturator internus fascia and iliococcygeus fascia with less risk of neurovascular damage than does the sacrospinous ligament fixation (Shull et al, 1993). Alternatively, the authors have described placing the suture through the iliococcygeus and the periosteum at the ischial spine, where it is attached (Scotti et al, 1998)."

How did Nates determine that you had axonal loss and demyelination in all branches of the pudendal? Without cadaver dissection and study, that would be a remarkable feat. And such is not done in other peripheral neuropathies.

Here you go under the knife without past history of pudendal pain, only to waken with symptoms. Either the dorsal lithotomy position of your body during surgery caused pudendal damage, which is possible but would hardly persist, or a branch of your pudendal caught a suture during the procedure. As eloquently as you write and as well as your posts indicate you think you must realize nerve entrapment from an ill-placed suture to be by far the most likely explanation for your neuropathy. Nerve tissue has almost no structure, with less resistance to pressure than does jello. It is extremely fragile, and for that reason as we were created it was done in such a fashion so as to afford nerves and the nervous system the finest protections available to a body. Even the endings of axons that branch up to the skin surfaces do not run along the surface where they could suffer insult. Instead they course deep, then turn towards the surface they innervate. Larger nerves are hidden behind bone and cartilage at every site possible, or tucked deep behind muscle. A nerve has absolutely no defense against a suture.The PNMLT does not measure conduction through individual branches. The peroneal branch could not be accessed through the rectum, nor the dorsal nerve of the clitorus. The inferior rectal branch, which comes off the pudendal prior to its passage through Alcock's canal, is the tract along which the electrical impulses from PNMLT tranverse. If you were told that the PNMLT measured individual branches, and that a determination could be made based on PNMLT that each of these branches were diseased in some way, then you were misled.

Then you were told that the pudendal nerve, on its exploration, "the fibers appeared in shreds". Unless the surgeon opened the epineurium of the nerve, which I greatly doubt he did, because it would serve no utility and increase the possibility of both trauma to the nerve as well as vascular injury, then he could not see the nerve bundles. Since axons are microscopic, he could not have legitimately referred to those. And since nerve bundles of axons are then lumped together and covered with epineurium, he could not see those either.

The wonderful vibes from the tribal group are fine, Amanada. I would join with the Cherokee every night for ritualistic dance if it would work. Your best interests may be paramount, but knowledge and skill must accompany. Ketamine put you at risk with zero possibility of lasting difference. Intrathecal drugs the same. If the purpose was to aid in diagnosis then such modalities can be justified. But when the theory says "no" in fifteen different ways, its not going to work. Just like it didn't. Bedside manners are much appreciated by patients, as well as the caring and concern from staff. But neither of these factor into outcomes when the pathology is real.

No one looked at your pudendal and saw a nerve in shreds. No one tested each individual branch of the pudendal. Your entrapment neuropathy is most likely far distal to Alcock's, has not been seen, and has not been helped.

 

3.

 

Not the pudendal, but some of its tributaries are very close to the wound margins. That's the point with Amanda. Most likely her entrapment is far distal to Alcock's canal. That is why surgery failed her, but also why nerve blocks and other modalities proximal to the entrapment have achieved some short term results. I have previously noted four sites of possible entrapment along the course of the pudendal and its branches, and the arrangement of the entrapment structure in relation to nerve. So while the PT is right... we do not always follow Gray's anatomy... neuropathic pain from distal pudendal nerve branch injury is quite possible with vaginal hysterectomies, and in fact, probably occurs more frequently than thought.

 

IV. On reasons for failed pudendal decompression surgery

1.

 

Like others who have commented, I am sympathetic to your continuing symptoms and pray you can find relief. I am fairly confident based on your aggressive approach (early diagnosis and prompt decision to travel for surgery) that you are still searching for help. The information I am providing is based on common sense and after thorough review of other neuropathic conditions and the results of procedures to remedy those maladies. In addition, I have recently had PNE surgery in Houston (April 17, 2006), and have the additional advantage of an MD son who has done hundreds of median nerve, ilioinguinal, and other nerve decompression procedures. The failure to respond to a technically appropriate nerve decompression procedure has to be the result of one of three factors, or a combination of these three. The first, of course, is that the diagnosis is incorrect. Nerve decompression for an arthalgia or myalgia will effect no relief. As you are certainly aware, the diagnostic triad for PNE (history, PNMLT, and CT guided nerve blocks) lacks the specificity of other testing, ie, a CT scan for cholelithiasis, or a nerve conduction velocity study for carpal tunnel. In fact, a pudendal block, in theory, would give relief from non-neuropathic conditions if the nerve provided sensory innervation to the structure or tissue responsible. An additional aid to the diagnosis of true PNE would be the patient's response to medications that affect only truely neuropathic pain, such as carbamazepine (Tegretol). The second factor would be a technically incorrect procedure. Although we like to think otherwise, surgeons are prone to the same human conditions that affect us all, and it is possible that the pudendal nerve exploration was not as complete or thorough on your day of surgery as it had been the day before or the day after. My son tells me of numerous experiences where a patient was referred to him after failed median nerve surgery, only to find persistent compression and he was then able to effect immediate cure with re-operation. In most cases the initial decompression did not extend sufficiently proximally or distally. The third factor is basically theory at present and has to do with central processing of pain. It is currently felt that in some patients central pain pathways are established and persist despite the elimination of the painful stimuli. This may have something to do with the fact that many post PNE surgery patients take months before symptomatic improvement. As you are aware, many PNE patients suffer for years before the diagnosis of PNE is considered, and it is likely that these central pathways, mediated by the neurotransmitter GABA, become relatively fixed and are slow to inactivate. In your case this should not apply, although research has yet to tell us how long it takes for this process to set up. It is interesting to note that in several hundred median nerve compression procedures not a single patient experienced a recurrence of their neuropathic pain and that after the expected resolution of incisional pain were symptom free. Granted in most patients the diagnosis did not take years and surgery was performed soon after diagnosis, but some patients had delayed seeking care, and surgery was not immediate. These results would run counter to the argument of established central pathways. As for myself, I am now 15 days post-op, and I am doing very well. I had extensive bruising from the procedure, and a small hematoma, but all of the perineal and rectal pain is gone. Being pain free after years of suffering has made this 75 year old feel like 30. I hope you can find an answer to your suffering.

 

2.

 

My words are not intended to supply "sweet comfort", but rather to apply analytical logic to the question of PNE, and to do so in such a way that others can make informed choices. Where there are pitfalls I have made an effort to note them... such as the sensitivity and specificity of the PNMLT. Yes, in theory it should supply accurate data each and every time, but the fact that it does not does not relegate it to worthlessness. When this series of posts began I noted that I also have an MD son who has done hundreds of nerve decompression procedures. I am somewhat surprised that no one has latched onto this. But the role that it played in my decision to undergo surgery was large, and that reason is solely about outcome. During a multi-year period of time in the 1980s he performed 365 carpal tunnel release procedures, and then staff carefully studied the short and long term results. As many of you know, CTS supposedly involves entrapment of the median nerve at the wrist from hyperplasia of the flexor retinaculum, which is due to numerous etiologies, from thyroid disease to occupational ones. The median nerve is much like the pudendal, and like the sciatic... the same things I wrote about before... arrangement of axons, sensory and motor components, etc. In fact, the median is a tad larger, and while they have not been actually counted, there are probably more sensory receptors in the distal digits than in the perineum (which doesn't seem true but makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint). At 1, 4, and 8 years not a single patient had recurrence of symptoms. At 2 weeks following each of 365 releases not a single patient had pain. How can such results be explained? First, apply logic to the neuropathologies involved in true entrapment, and one can see that if a single patient can be cured, then (if the diagnosis is correct) it follows that all patients can be cured. The rate limiting factor is simply the extent and fastidiousness of the dissection. In this, I must boast, there was probably none better... in religious and sometimes extreme preparation, in focused dissection far more proximal and distal (even to the mid-metacarpals) than was customary. The approach was clear... initial exploration provides clear planes of dissection (virgin tissue), and most likely it is this one single occasion in which cure will be the outcome...so make the very most of it. Granted this was in a decade when there was little issue with such things as compensation neurosis and the long term use of narcotics to address chronic pain. Such iatrogenic addictions take from many patients the ability to determine for themselves if pain is still real. My decision to travel to Houston was based on the fact that nerve entrapment surgery can be uniformly successful.
When it is not, I refer back to past comments. I would like to say that in a previous description of the course of the pudendal nerve I wrote of its perpendicular penetration of Colles's fascia, another site of possible entrapment. The body's response to dissection at this point would be much like the response of the tympanic membrance to myringotomy, it would attempt to rapidly seal (over 4-5 weeks). That is why all children undergoing myringotomies also get tubes. Tubes are nothing fancy, just cm long tubes of plastic perhaps 3 to 4 mm in diameter. They are quickly placed in the surgical laceration in the tympanic membrane in order to keep the TM from healing itself and sealing. A very similar tube could be used to protect the pudendal nerve at Colles' fascia... the only adjustment would have to be for size and perhaps length, and to also make a slit down the length of the tube so that it could be easily fitted around the nerve. I also see in the next 5 years the development of much more minute endoscopic equipment that could be used for more distal dissection in PNE and other entrapment syndromes such as the anterior cutaneous nerve entrapment syndrome. It would probably be preferable to combine an open procedure with an endoscopic one which would allow dissection to be carried into places now perhaps unreachable.

Pierre asks about pain at 1 year and worsening at 2. Let's apply what we do know to a situation such as this: First we must assume that he was correctly diagnosed. We know that the axons of his pudendal nerve have undergone degeneration and then regeneration but that the level of regeneration did not match the level of degeneration, and thus the axons are thinner. This occurred prior to surgery, and if the entrapment was released, most likely has stabilized. Nonetheless, velocity and latency will be unchanged, so the value of the PNMLT is compromised, except where the compression has worsened and more axons then become involved (the PNMLT numbers would be higher). <Note: we are talking about a theorical perfect test>. I have given the reasons for persistent symptoms. Worsening symptoms mean that either the entrapment is more severe, additional entrapment at another location (close but separate) has occurred in addition to the initial one, or that some other pathological process has superimposed itself into a area innervated by the pudendal nerve. For example, in someone my age, if at 6 months I do develop a recurrence of sitting pain it would be unwise to assume the pain was pudendal neuropathy when if fact it could be colorectal cancer.

Pierre asks about the implications of a thinner axonal sheath with respect to activities. There are none.... at least none in the real world. If Pierre's pudendal nerve had been completely decompressed and he was now symptom free, he would still carry about the scars of prior entrapment... those being the residual of this process of axonal sheath degeneration and regeneration. In terms of how it would make him feel... it would mean that a sensory response originating in the area innervated by the affected axons would transit to the spinal cord in 4 nanoseconds rather than 2. But this response would be pain only if the sensory receptor was trying to tell such to the cord... it would not be because the receptor was inactive but the cord was fooled into thinking the receptor was transmitting pain, which is the case in PNE.

 

V. On diagnostic testing

 

          A. Practical guide

 

1.

Yesterday I suggested that millimeter by millimeter visualization of the pudendal nerve, and thereby the likely probability of pinpointing entrapment, might be possible in the near future with enhanced MRI software. This morning I discovered (by way of the forum), that in three places in the USA magnetic resonance neurography was being performed. I then attempted to review studies on sensitivity and specificity as well as
the specific anatomical slicing presented by imaging. I read the latest article prepared by those who promote the current technology, and you may find this at:
http://www.neurography.com/images/NeurolClinics-Neurography.pdf.
I also reviewed the 2005 American Medical Association's medical policy and technology assessment committee on Magnetic Resonance Neurography, which says: "MR neurography refers to modifications of MRI using special software and hardware upgrades, which have been proposed for the diagnosis of peripheral nerve disorders. The development of MR neurography enables direct high resolution longitudinal and cross-sectional images of peripheral nerves such that the morphology of the nerve can be visualized. Published literature regarding MR neurography primarily consists of small case series of heterogeneous patients. There is inadequate data regarding the diagnostic performance of MR neurography, in terms of defining the normal range of morphologies, the sensitivity and specificity of identification of abnormalities in comparison to other diagnostic tests, and the impact on the management of the patient." As this modality becomes more refined and tested it will become an important tool in both the diagnosis and pre and post surgical management of the PNE patient.

But for many considering surgery, and for those post surgical patients who have not found freedom from pain as the outcome, modalities that are down the road have little importance on May 8, 2006. There seems no clear cut guide of how to proceed for the symptomatic but undiagnosed. And the post surgical patient with pain is faced with an even more vexing puzzle.

Here I would like to present a modest guideline for the patient with suspected PNE to follow before surgery is entertained, leaving it for each of you to agree, disagree or add, all of which should contribute to our understanding.

1. You must first rule out those conditions, local, regional or systemic, which would mimic PNE but which would not be remedied by a decompression procedure:


a. the following labs:
            CBC, sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, Thyroid Stimulating
            Hormone assay (TSH), Prostatic Specific Antigen assay (if male),
            Anti-Nuclear Antibody Assay (ANA), CMP (complete metabolic
            panel) Rheumatoid factor, Fasting blood sugars for three successive days,
            Urinalysis, CEA


b. the following imaging studies:
            X-rays of the pelvis and lumboscaral spine
            CT scan of the pelvis
            MRI of the lumbosacral spine


c. a complete physical exam, including a detailed neurological exam

2. If this testing is all normal, then consider each of the modalities which are useful in varying degrees to diagnose entrapment of the pudendal nerve:


a. The PNMLT has a low level of specificity but a moderate level of sensitivity in the diagnosis of entrapment. The test measures a function of nerve velocity called latency. Entrapped nerves conduct an nerve impulse slower than a normal nerve. The purpose of the test is to measure impulse conduction along the nerve in order to compare latency to standard. In balance, there is considerable controversy concerning the reliability of this test, but it is this member's opinion that testing is worthwhile.


b. Magnetic resonance neurography is considered "investigational/not medically necessary" by the American Medical Association, but the literature suggests that improvements in both imaging and interpretation are being made on a regular basis. Information for patients can be viewed at www.neurography.com. It is this member's opinion that current testing is valuable in that there is a greater than 50-50 probability results might provide significant information to the neurosurgeon. In addition, since it is doubtful diagnostic modalities will be developed because of concern over PNE alone, participation in developing technologies will increase both the credibility of PNE as a syndrome as well as expand the knowledge base upon which future PNE patients might rely.


c. CT guided injections are diagnostic blocks of the pudendal nerve at specific locations which help determine the location of pathology. They are not specific for PNE, but their sensitivity for pathology is high. It is possible to be even more selective and block at each anatomically conceivable area of entrapment. The development of this capability would be straight-forward and highly recommended. Also recommended is a practice of careful sensory testing following diagnostic blocks. Far more information could be obtained from vibratory testing and two point discrimination, then carefully documented, than the current practice of checking results by phone. The applicability of such information in determining other sites of possible entrapment after failed procedures could be significant.

3. If such testing suggests PNE, then the decision for surgery should be well informed. Many physicians are skillful, but it is the wise physician who appreciates the partnership with their patient that knowledge will bring. You will have reached this point only because you have suffered much. To guide you out of entrapment your surgeon will need both wisdom and skill. Make your choices well informed ones. Speaking for many others in this forum, we wish you the very best.

4. If pain is totally relieved from Botox, then the pain is not neuropathic from pudendal entrapment at Alcock's. The pelvic floor muscles innervated by the pudendal can spasm and thus place compressive forces on pudendal branches feeding them. If this persisted to such a point that the nerve branch was injured, the pain would be neuropathic, but again, the site of injury would not be at Alcocks. The sole mechanism of action of Botox is at the neuromuscular junction, the site at which the nerve passes on to muscle instructions that have been received from the cord. The action of Botox at this site is quite well understood, blocking the transfer of information from the nerve to the muscle, resulting in muscle paralysis. The paralysis is flaccid, not rigid. The muscle becomes totally relaxed, unable to contract without orders from the cord. Only if the pudendal passed though a muscle that was in a state of constant or almost constant contraction, which it does not, could muscle be held liable for neuropathy (except for tiny branches, which could be liable).

If pain is relieved from Botox, then PT is not only advisable, it is necessary in order to prepare the pelvis for the time when the effects of Botox have worn off. Only when Botox affords no relief, and PT causes additional pudendal distribution symptoms, is PT inadvisable.

While Botox works at the junction between muscle and nerve, it does not affect sensory afferents coming from muscle, or from areas surrounding muscle. A pathological process affecting the pelvis in the area infiltrated with Botox would nonetheless generate transduction forces that would be interpreted and recognized as pain. A nerve block, however, defeats transmission in the area of administration, so that any nociception, whether nociceptive or neuropathic, whether from laceration, fracture, tumor, or nerve entrapment, regardless of etiology, would not reach the cord or brain.

I believe this allows us to suggest the following: do not entertain PNE decompression until you have undergone a trail of Botox therapy. If your pain is musculoskeletal, and relieved by Botox, you will not find relief from surgical decompression at Alcock's. Instead, all efforts.... PT, medication (including Botox) ... should be focused on achieving muscle relaxation on command. This needs to be added to the recommendations to the patient with PNE symptoms.

 

2.

 

This is in response to your request for information on the utility of the above specified laboratory tests in eliminating pathology that might mimic true pudendal nerve entrapment. Your question involved the context of pathology that would not otherwise be revealed by scanning modalities. In another thread you patiently explained to me the difficulties involved in deciphering medical terminology. Unfortunately, as I explained later, it is only possible to dissect this terminology but so far. Here I will attempt to do just that. But keep in mind that at 75 this mind is approaching senility, and could lapse into much too technical a discourse. If that happens, please query me on a single item or two, and I will explain more carefully.

Some of the testing recommended could reveal disease both in lab results and on imaging studies as well as on either alone. For example, carcinoma of the prostate that was metastatic both to bone as well as adjacent tissue would most likely result in an elevated PSA, an elevated alkaline phosphatase on the metabolic panel, as well as bony lesions on X-rays of the pelvis, and soft tissue masses on pelvic CT. Still, the PSA could be elevated in the absence of other findings, and while elevations do not necessarily mean cancer, they would demand thoughtful evaluation of the prostate. Since the prostate is located in an area that has sensory innervation by the pudendal, PNE would have to take second place until significant prostatic pathology was eliminated as the source of pain. Likewise, I think that it is important for all clinicians to realize, especially those who diagnose and treat PNE, that the presence of disease such as prostatic carcinoma does not totally exclude the possibility, however remote, that the patient with unresolved pain could also be suffering from a disease such as PNE.

You are aware that disease affecting peripheral nerves can be intrinsic to the nerve, extrinsic to the nerve, or both. Even more confusing, within the nerve disease can be either intrinsic or extrinsic to the axons. There are many diseases that will affect the nerve either at its origin, down its path, or within its own cellular processes, and do so in such a way that the result is pain. The acronym TITMEND, though not all-inclusive, is useful as a guide to etiologic categorization: toxic, infectious, traumatic, metabolic, endocrinologic, neoplastic, or degenerative. Within one or the other of these categories can one find the cause of most disease, and in each of these categories one can find disease processes that would affect the pudendal nerve.

But for example of the utility of lab testing for disease that would not be evidenced by scanning, let us consider the case of diabetic peripheral neuropathy. It is quite well recognized in medical communities that most folks with type two diabetes are actually diabetic for 4 to 7 years before diagnosis, and 5 million is the figure generally given for the number of undiagnosed diabetics in our population. In addition, almost 10% of these undiagnosed diabetics are felt to already have neuropathies due to their diabetes before they are diagnosed. That means that 500,000 Americans have peripheral neuropathies due to a condition yet undiagnosed. Even this does not fully portray the possibilities for non entrapment pudendal neuropathy due to diabetes. People whose fasting blood sugars run between 100 and 125 are considered pre-diabetic, and studies show this group of Americans to be at risk for neuropathy as well. The lab test... fasting blood sugars times 3...is given as a recommendation because diabetes and pre-diabetes is prevalent in our society, it is often asymptomatic, and the statistical probabilities of it producing neuropathy is far greater than entrapment. Granted that long standing sitting pain should have led to an earlier work-up to exclude such a possibility, but it is this member’s contention that all avenues should be explored and re-explored before the commitment to surgery.

Several members with recognized diabetes have written about suspected PNE. For them diagnostic testing in the form of nerve blocks and PNMLT have little promise. Blocking the pudendal would temporarily relieve the distress of almost any illness affecting it, including a neuropathy due to diabetes. Studies on the validity of PNMLT in the diabetic, to my knowledge, are unavailable if performed. And if so, they most likely represent such small numbers that little confidence can be found in their results. The known diabetic with sitting pain has to rely solely on the wisdom of the recommendation of his/her physician, but so often this is insufficient.

 

3.

 

In chess one weighs the statistical probabilities of every move in anticipation of your opponents. Yes, diabetic neuropathy usually affects the distal extremities first, and a research article I gave web directions to above partially explains why. But diabetic neuropathy affecting the extremities first is not always the case. Given the large numbers of people with undiagnosed diabetes, the fact that they may not be having the typical symptoms of fatique, urinary frequency and nocturia et al, there is still a greater likelihood that isolated pudendal area pain could be diabetic neuropathy than it could be PNE. Before this forum I knew of no patients with PNE, but I knew several with isolated diabetic pudendal neuropathy. For the cost saver a FBS can at times be free.... the health department, the knowledgeable diabetic neighbor with a glucometer, and sometimes the local pharmacy does free glucose testing.

As far as using the CEA to rule in or out an occult malignancy before entertaining PNE surgery, there are certainly no double-blind studies to support it. Yet if one were to accept the premise of ruling out all disease that has a greater statistical probability of causing pudendal pain than PNE, this test would have efficacy. Perhaps not to some, but to the clinician who is a grandmaster at clinical thought and diagnosis, this is the way they would proceed.

I have argued that it is necessary to take the disease and all its diagnostic and therapeutic remedies to the cellular and biochemical level in order to prove or disprove utility. But to do so in a discussion of proposed testing would require an investment of time for explanation that I anticipate most members would neither appreciate or understand.

 

            B. PNMLT

 

                        1. Neurophysiology  

 

There remain many unanswered questions in the field of peripheral nerve injury and nerve regeneration. Yet some assumptions can be made with a good degree of medical certainty. These assumptions rest on an understanding of latency and the current state of knowledge with respect to neuronal healing. Although this may not be new information or helpful to you, I am going to assume otherwise, and give the basis for my answer to your question. Any peripheral nerve, the pudendal nerve included, is comprised of axons of varying diameters. As you well know, the nerve cell has many structures, but is divided into three parts... the cell body, (which contains the nucleus, mitochondria, golgi apparatus and ribosomes) the dendritic process, and the axon. The axon in the pudendal nerve is part of the single nerve cell whose cell body resides in the spinal cord. Multiple axons from multiple cells form a nerve bundle, and many bundles make up the pudendal nerve. Injury to axons within the pudendal nerve results in a dropout of the total number of axons stimulated by the PNMLT and thus you have a decrease in the amplitude of the evoked electrical response, called the compound motor action potential. What nerve latency is, in essence, is a reflection of the pattern of activation of the separate axons that make up the pudendal nerve. The axons in the nerve that are myelenated the heaviest are the axons that deliver the compound action potential the fastest, thus it are these fibers that determine the nerve velocity and also the latency. Nerves transmit via their myelin sheaths, and the thicker the myelin the faster the transmission. Latencies that are prolonged have occurred because faster myelinated axons have dropped out (due to injury such as compression), and thus what is recorded are slower velocities because most of the nerves now have reduced myelin and thus slower velocities of conduction.
That is why, in general, higher numbers in the PNMLT reflect more significant disease in the nerve. Very interesting, recent work has shown that chronic nerve compression injury does not produce immediate axonal pathology but in fact is a Schwann cell mediated disease, and chronic nerve compression induces both Schwann cell proliferation and apoptosis before the onset of axonal degeneration. Since PNE is usually longstanding, it is important to evaluate what happens to the nerve after Schwann cell proliferation, and indeed, these are the changes that produce the abnormal PNMLT. Evaluation of the thickness of myelin and the diameter of axons in chronic compression indicate an alteration in the myelin structure, specifically a dramatic increase in the number of axons with thin myelin sheaths. Measurement of the myelin thickness shows not only a greater than 600% increase in the number of axons that are thin (less than 5 nm thickness) but also a proportionate decrease in the number of axons with thick myelin sheaths so characteristic of a normal pudendal nerve. This takes us to the critical point in the answer. A nerve chronically compressed has many axons that have undergone a process of demyelination and then remyelination at the site of injury, and the remyelination is not nearly as thick as prior to compression. Therefore, with respect to a followup PNMLT following initial surgery, one would expect persistent latency and abnormal numbers, even though the compression has been either relieved, partially relieved, or unrelieved.
The degree of remyelination, however, should have little to no impact on residual pain.

 

                        2. Analogy


Like the PNMLT, in car racing the fastest time is the one that wins the prize. There are many different cars (axons) on the racetrack (the peripheral nerve). Generally speaking, some cars and drivers are more capable than others, and these are the ones that can be predicted to win.


Suppose that a substance had been invented that could coat the cars, making them less resistant to air, the result being faster times. Also suppose that only a percentage of car owners could afford this substance, so that some of the cars in the race were coated and some were not. There would be a far greater likelihood that one of these coated cars would cross the finish line first, and in fact, that coated cars would win every race. Coated nerves (myelinated ones) transmit impulses faster than unmyelinated ones, and win the race in PNMLT. It is the winning time that is recorded, not the average time from each of the contestants. The winning time is then compared to what the usual winning time should be (in a normal pudendal nerve). We know that rain affects the condition of the racetrack so that slower times can be predicted. Similarly we know that some conditions affect conduction in normal nerves, these being such things as age, temperature, even whether or not the nerve is located in the upper or lower extremity (http://jnnp.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/70/3/372).


What the PNMLT measures is the fastest time from the winning car and then compares this number to what is expected of winning times in usual and normal races on the pudendal nerve. If there has been a terrorist event (pudendal neuropathy is sort of like long standing nerve terrorism) at the race track, where an explosion or other insult caused debris to be thrown onto the track, or perhaps displaced the wall surrounding the track so that the space available for driving was limited in this area, then the race cars would have to slow down when they approached this area, and the winning time from the race affected by terrorism would be slower than a race that had not been affected (normal race).

The race cars that have been coated to make them less resistant to air and thus faster are the cars that win the race. Therefore these are the cars that determine the value of the PNMLT. But these are not the race cars that carry the pain impulse around the tract. Coated cars carry instructions to muscle. The uncoated cars are carrying pain stimuli. We assume, and probably rightfully so, that the terrorist event affects all cars on the race track, so measuring the speed of the fastest cars against what is normal allows us to suppose that uncoated cars are likewise affected. You can find far more detailed information at: http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/ortho/oj/1999/html/oj12sp99p45.html.

 

                        3. Sensitivity and specificity

Sensitivity and specificity are two critical measures in determining the utility of any diagnostic procedure. In the case of nerve electrophysiologic studies like the PNMLT, sensitivity refers the procedure’s ability to detect the presence of sensory abnormalities in a group of patients. If the patients being tested are at high risk for neuropathy, such as patients with advanced diabetes, then the sensitivity would be expected to be high. Testing a group of randomly selected diabetic children, however, would naturally include some that have not yet developed neuropathy and yield a correspondingly lower level of detection sensitivity.

A test that is “too” sensitive, however, can result in false positive measures that wrongly identify a healthy patient as having an abnormality.

Specificity is the statistic that expresses the ability of a diagnostic procedure to correctly identify healthy (control) subjects. A specificity of 100% means that there were no false positive measures in the healthy group. Diagnostic tests balance sensitivity against specificity, so that the maximum number of abnormalities are detected with the fewest number of false positives.

The following table presents sensitivity and specificity measures drawn from eight different studies. With the exception of Study #4, each study used randomly selected patients for whom a clinical finding of sensory impairment was not a selection criterion. As a consequence, the sensitivities will vary depending upon the patient population selected. Statistical analyses presented in these cited studies all revealed statistically significant differences between patients and control subjects.


Sensitivity 94% Specificity 100% n = 33 diabetic patients and 54 controls
Sensitivity 77% Specificity 100% n= 29 dialysis patients and 137 controls
Sensitivity 84% Specificity 88% n = 70 radiculopathy patients *
Sensitivity 23% Specificity 100% n = 92 diabetic children and 80 controls
Sensitivity 50% Specificity 95% n = 16 Fabry’s disease patients and 50 controls
Sensitivity 54% Specificity 95% n = 2360 diabetic patients *
Sensitivity 60% Specificity 95% n = 73 diabetic patients and 47 controls
Sensitivity 93% Specificity 100% n = 10 syringomyelia patients and 15 controls

Statistical Analyses of CPT vs NCV Sensitivity
1. Ro, L.S., Chen, S.T., Tang, L.M., Hsu, W.C., Chang, H.S., Huang, C.C. Current Perception Threshold Testing in Fabry’s Disease. Muscle & Nerve, Volume 22: 1531-1537, 1999. Appendix E., Reference 15.

A chi-square SPSS statistical analysis was conducted to compare the detection sensitivity of neuropathy by sNCT/CPT and NCV tests in this study. The CPT detected neuropathy in 50% of the patients. The NCV detected neuropathy in 0% of the patients. There was a significant superiority of the detection sensitivity of the sNCT/CPT electrodiagnostic test over the NCV test in this study (p<0.001, df=1).

2. Katims, J.J., Rouvelas, P., Sadler, B.T., Weseley, S.A. Current Perception Threshold: Reproducibility and Comparison with Nerve Conduction in Evaluation of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. Transactions of the American Society of Artificial Internal Organs, Volume 35(3):280-284, 1989. Appendix E., Reference 13.

A chi-square SPSS statistical analysis was conducted to compare the detection of neuropathy by sNCT/CPT measure and NCV measures in the median nerve and in the peroneal nerve. The tests were equally sensitive in their detection sensitivity for neuropathy (p<0.193, df =1, median nerve and p<0.707, df = 1, peroneal nerve).

3. Weseley, S.A., Sadler, B., Katims, J.J. Current Perception: Preferred Test for Evaluation of Peripheral Nerve Integrity. Transactions of the American Society of Artificial Internal Organs, Volume 34(3):188-193, 1988. Appendix E., Reference 14.

A chi-square SPSS statistical analysis was conducted to compare the detection of neuropathy by sNCT/CPT measure and NCV measures in the median nerve and in the peroneal nerve. The tests were equally sensitive in their detection sensitivity for neuropathy (p<0.119, median nerve and p<0.701, peroneal nerve).

4. Kurozawa, Y., Nasu, Y. Current Perception Thresholds in Vibration-Induced Neuropathy. Archives of Environmental Health, Volume 56(3):254-256, 2001.

A. A chi-square SPSS statistical analysis was conducted to compare the detection of stage 3 vibration neuropathy by sNCT/CPT measure and NCV measures. The tests were equally sensitive in their detection sensitivity for this stage of vibration neuropathy (p<0.308, df = 1).

B. A chi-square SPSS statistical analysis was conducted to compare the detection of stage 2 vibration neuropathy by sNCT/CPT measure and NCV measures. There was a significant superiority of the detection sensitivity of the sNCT/CPT electrodiagnostic test over the NCV test in the detection of this stage of neuropathy(p<0.000, df=1).

5. Rendell, M.S., Katims, J.J., Richter, R., Rowland, F. A comparison of nerve conduction velocities and current perception thresholds as correlates of clinical severity of diabetic sensory neuropathy. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, Volume 52:502-511, 1989. Appendix E., Reference 5.

A. Among the diabetic subjects in this study classified by both Physical Score and Symptom Score as normal, the 5 Hz CPT measures were the most “effective discriminator” of these “normal” patients in comparison with the NCV and other measures in the study (p<0.05, Tables 6 and 7). This finding is a indication of the specificity of the CPT evaluation based on clinical findings.

B. Lower extremity sensory NCV measures were unable to discriminate between the normal and abnormal subjects as classified by both Physical Score and Symptom Score. All three frequency CPT measures were able to discriminate between these same two groups of subjects. The significance of these observations ranged from p<0.01 (5 Hz and 250 Hz) to p<0.05 (2 kHz). This finding demonstrates that the CPT evaluation is a more effective discriminator than the sensory NCV. See Table 7.

C. A strong correlation is defined as a correlation coefficient > 0.5. Correlations of the upper and lower extremity Physical and Symptom Scores with the CPT and sensory NCV measures were significant, with p values ranging from 0.001 to 0.05. The strongest correlation was observed with physical evaluation and the 250 Hz CPT from the lower extremity (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.57, p<0.001). The sensory NCV from the same extremity showed a very weak
correlation (Spearman correlation coef. = 0.15, p<0.05). See Tables 4 and 5.

D. When the electrodiagnostic measures were further divided into “Relatively Abnormal” and “Very Abnormal Groups”, the sensory NCV was unable to discriminate between the normal and relatively abnormal groups Physical or Symptom scores in either the upper or the lower extremity. In contrast, the CPT measures were able to discriminate between the normal and relatively abnormal groups Physical or Symptom scores in either extremity (p<0.01). These findings indicate that the sensory NCV is not effective for discriminating moderate neuropathy, but is effective for discriminating severe neuropathy. In contrast the CPT measures are effective for discriminating both moderate neuropathy, and severe neuropathy.

6. Masson, E.A., Veves, A., Fernando, D., Boulton, A.J.M. Current perception thresholds: a new, quick, and reproducible method for the assessment of peripheral neuropathy in diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia, Volume 32:724-728, 1989.Appendix E., Reference 7.

A. This publication does not permit a direct comparison of the detection
sensitivities of the sNCT/CPT and the NCV measures.

B. A significant correlation between the 2000 Hz CPT measures and the NCVmeasures (Spearman correlation coefficient -0.66, p<0.005) was reported inTable 2.

C. A significant correlation between the 5 Hz CPT measures and the thermalmeasures (Spearman correlation coef .34, p<0.005) was reported in Table 2.

D. No significant correlation was observed between the NCV and the thermal endorgan sensory threshold test as reported in Table 2. This was expected as the NCV is a large fiber test and thermal end-organ stimulation is conducted by the small fibers. As neuropathies can selectively effect the large or small diameter nerve fibers the ability of the sNCT evaluation to test the function of both sub-populations of nerve fibers makes this test a more effective tool for the evaluation of neuropathy than the NCV test.

Based on the above publications the sensitivity of the sensory nerve conduction velocity testing for the detection of polyneuropathy is between 0% and 79%.

One must also take into account these studies were undertaken in world class electrophysiologic laboratories and performed by highly skilled technicians under strict quality assurance standards and supervision.

This data confirms conclusions drawn in posts previously presented. The PNMLT is a modality we have, and gives information which must be viewed in light of results from the remaining arms of the diagnostic triad. Alone it has little value. Intra-operatively and post-operatively it has no value. To answer the question of a patient with a normal PNMLT yet with severe pain having a greater likelihood of poor outcome from surgical decompression versus a patient with an abnormal PNMLT, this type of conclusion cannot be reached. It cannot be reached based upon theoretical approach, and there are no controlled studies which would allow one to dispute such theory. In fact, such a statement is contrary to theory. Let me explain. High numbers on the PNMLT should reflect disease involvement of an increasing number of heavily myelinated axons, while normal numbers reflect such axons are as yet uninvolved in the compression neuropathy (or there is no neuropathy). Differentiation of pain into categories like severe does not reflect on transduction forces nor on transmission, but instead is a very poor indication of disease severity because it involves some modulation but is mostly a matter of perception. Several considerations must be made in the patient with a normal PNMLT and in severe pudendal distribution pain. If the CT guided (where we can reasonably assume the analgesic has reached the pudendal) nerve block gives the patient immediate relief of pain, and the duration of such analgesia is consistent with the labeled duration of effect of the analgesic, then it can be concluded with a reasonable degree of certainty that the pudendal nerve is indeed responsible for delivering nociceptive input to the spinal cord. This conclusion can be made whether the PNMLT is normal or not.

A second CT guided block (and indeed, a third or fourth) should achieve the same results as the first. If not, one of the following must apply: (1) for whatever reason, the analgesic did not reach the pudendal nerve, (2) the analgesic was mislabeled, thus no analgesic reached the nerve, (3) the response to the first injection was a placebo one, (4) the neuropathy has extended proximally to involve the nerve between the site of the first injection and the spinal cord, (5) since the time of the first injection another disease process has involved the pudendal nerve proximal to the site of the initial injection.

It has been alleged that degree of PNMLT abnormality correlates with prognosis and well as severity of compression. There are no controlled studies to support this view. Moreover, carefully designed, placebo controlled studies of commonplace compression neuropathies generally find no correlation between degree of entrapment as visualized on MRI with severity of symptoms, probability of analgesia following decompression, or degree of abnormality on electrophysiologic testing. Given the limitations of PNML testing, it is not reasonable to offer the results of this test as a prognostic indicator of surgical decompression.

 

                        4. Validity of intra- operative and post operative PNMLT

 

The axons injured by compression or some other structural reason do not form new axons. The ones you have at birth are with you all through life, and the very same axons that formed the pudendal nerve when you were seventeen and seemingly indestructible are still there... in bundles that form the pudendal nerve. The myelin sheath that coats each axon degenerates and then regenerates once injured. There may be several episodes of degeneration and regeneration, but in almost all cases the regenerated myelin sheath is thin, unlike the sheath of a healthy nerve. Since thickness of the sheath determines velocity of conduction of the nerve impulse, a thin sheath conducts slower than a thick one. It is likely, and appears to be so both in research and cadaver dissections, that the axon will never regain its original myelin thickness. Therefore, yes, Greg, you are right. Dr. Ansell's belief is more than that. It is correct based upon fairly extensive neurophysiologic studies. Latency will not change during surgical decompression, and I'm certain that it is easy for you to see this given the nature of latency as previously described and the cellular changes that are responsible for delayed conduction. The severity of pain during my illness made it clear that hyperbole and subjectivity is not the way to approach PNE. Providers and patients need to make decisions based on the most current evidence-based, non-biased science, and such science is generally repetitive, for researchers as well as those who depend on research find comfort when results are reproducible. It is important to realize, as I wrote before... demyelination with insufficient remyelination does not account for persistent symptoms in supposedly decompressed patients. Once again I allege the only reasonable probabilities for this: incorrect diagnosis, insufficient decompression, or established central pathways at the cord or cortex level that take time to resolve despite the absence of stimuli. The latter would explain progressive improvement in a subset of post-operative patients, and I am aware of several medications that would speed this along.

 

                        5. Reasons for PNMLT despite concerns over validity

 

As I have written before, the sensitivity of the diagnostic triad leaves much to be desired. The same is true of its specificity. But suppose we were to dismiss the PNMLT altogether. This would be much like dismissing the upper GI series, which misses 65% of endoscopically proven gastric ulcers, or even the CXR, which misses most bronchogenic carcinoma until the tumor has had 5 years to double and spread to regional nodes. Or we could dismiss the PSA, since levels of 4 to 8 are gray and may or may not suggest disease, or could be the result of tobacco dependence. No, what we do is take the modalities that are available to us and constantly refine them, improving technical skills as well as technology, until new modalities become available. Just like baking a cake, sometimes it is easier and more efficient to adjust a recipe than to start from scratch. What is known to each of us is that resources for PNE are few and far between. We have no lobby of Hollywood stars pleading with Congress for research monies, as did the sufferers of AIDS. Our numbers are relatively few and hardly spark the interests of a pharmaceutical industry whose focus is the bottom line. Although my state has huge, reputable medical centers, I, like others, have had to travel out of state to see a physician who has even heard of PNE. So while PNMLT is not a panacea, it is a modality we have. The future may bring new technologies that are far more reliable, but these will be only as good as their operators. Colonoscopy misses 5% of colorectal tumors, but in the hand of others, and on a good day, the miss rate is zero. If a technology and its results can be correlated with gross and microscopic pathology, then it is much more likely to be successful in diagnosis, as well as in monitoring improvement. Nerve conduction technology should improve dramatically in the next decade.

Intervertebral disc herniation should be ruled out before PNE surgery is contemplated, and an MRI is the most reliable method to do so. In addition, pelvic pathology that could produce a pudendal neuralgia, either from compression or invasion of the nerve, should also be ruled out, and a pelvic CT scan should suffice. I had both before making the first trip to Houston. At 75, most of my discs were bulging (discs dehydrate with age and uniformly bulge), but there was no encroachment on the neural canal.
In fact, we could pull 100 asymptomatic folks out of the isles of Walmart, do MRIs of their lumbosacral spine, and more than 30% would have significant disc disease. Like PNMLT, MRIs are not a panacea for diagnosis.

But I promised to write about nerve injury, those "damaged" and those compressed. For the sake of an intellectual exercise I will write about the sciatic nerve rather than the pudendal. Both are peripheral nerves, with the same configurations, same arrangement of axons, same location of cell bodies within the cord, same type of synapses both dendritic and axonal. Except for size, location, areas innervated, and location of cord synapses, they are the same. We do ourselves and others disservice by thinking somehow the pudendal nerve is subject to a disease process that affects that nerve alone. All peripheral nerves can suffer compression and are subject to disease. While the structure or lesion precipitating compression may be different, the changes that take place in the nerve are the same. The same is true of systemic diseases affecting peripheral nerves. But since polyneuropathy is essentially ruled out in most of our cases, especially given the duration of symptoms, I will avoid a discussion of those injuries and the neuropatholgies involved. Rather I will focus, or attempt to do so, on disease and how it affects a single sciatic nerve. In essence, that is what has happened to us.

 

                        6. Botox and the PNMLT

 

Botox should not affect the PNMLT. Botox affects the neuromuscular junction at the efferent nerve ending, working to block any impulse from the brain from reaching the muscle. In theory this blocks all the impulses flowing from the cord to muscle while the cord is in a hyper-excitable state from chronic pain.

The PNMLT measures impulse conduction along afferent axons. The neuromuscular junction is not involved in this measurement, nor any synapse.... therefore Botox will not affect it.

 

                        7. Nerve testing of penis

 

Electrophysiologic testing of the penis, with either positive or negative results, have about as much efficacy in ruling in or out pudendal neuropathy (of whatever cause) as does measuring the growth of one's eyebrows.

This test (see: http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Innervation_of_the_Human_Glans_Penis.pdf#search='nerve%20conduction%20studies%20in%20penis' )
measures conduction through a very short length of nerve (dorsal nerve of the penis). Pudendal neuropathy does not arise from entrapment along the dorsal nerve of the penis. PNE could be present while such a test was positive or negative. PNE could be absent while such a test was positive or negative. There is no validity of such a test to PNE. Surely your doctor did not intend to rule out PNE with nerve testing of the penis ???

 

            C. MR Neurography

 

Does MR neurography have application to PNE, either for pre-operative determination of location and degree of entrapment, or for post-operative determination of successful decompression? In another post I have written:

"Magnetic resonance neurography is considered "investigational/not medically necessary" by the American Medical Association, but the literature suggests that improvements in both imaging and interpretation are being made on a regular basis. Information for patients can be viewed at www.neurography.com. It is this member's opinion that current testing is valuable in that there is a greater than 50-50 probability results might provide significant information to the neurosurgeon. In addition, since it is doubtful diagnostic modalities will be developed because of concern over PNE alone, participation in developing technologies will increase both the credibility of PNE as a syndrome as well as expand the knowledge base upon which future PNE patients might rely."

Yet this dismisses other considerations, each of which suggests less reliability, but which in fairness must also be presented.

1. If the CAUSATIVE MECHANISMS involved in PNE are consistent with those of nearly all other cases of nerve entrapment syndromes in the human body, and are also consistent with the vision of injury expressed to me by Dr. Renney during my original visit to Houston, then the mechanism and thus the injury will most likely not be seen on MR neurography. I have previously written that the causative mechanism is most likely as follows: "at least one side of the compressive surface is mobile, so that chronic injury to the pudendal involves either a repetitive slapping insult, or a sliding-rubbing-against-sharp-or-tight-edges type of insult"., neither of which would likely be demonstrated with current MR neurography technology. This is not to say that as software is further refined, so that the nerve could be actually visualized during movement, and thus a more reliable indication of pathology would result.

2. Visualization of pudendal nerve injury might be solely positional (POSITIONAL ENTRAPMENT), in which case the above described software modifications might help. And also answer for us the question of whether or not the constant pain that is the hallmark of long standing and unresolved pudendal neuropathy represents central sensitization with continuing but intermittent injury or rather a progression to continuous injury. In such case where injury is solely positional, then only a procedure performed with the patient in that position would demonstrate an abnormality in the nerve.

3. While those who have reason to seek neurography for failed lumbar spine surgery number in the hundreds of thousands, the number of patients seeking MR neurography for pudendal neuropathy would be few. As such, the repetition of study that gives boost to improvement in clinical skills in both analysis and interpretation of results is not going to be present at any of the three centers where this software is available in the US. Moreover, the length of nerve that must be examined in failed lumbar procedure is short. In contrast, the pudendal courses over a wide area, and as I have written before, there are four possible sites of entrapment.

4. Finally, the demonstration of a compressed segment of pudendal nerve on MR neurography might be meaningless unless studies had shown in a statistically significant number of patients that such a lesion corresponded to anatomical findings at the time of surgery and surgical decompression of this MR neurography demonstrated segment resulted in relief of pain. Given the usual duration of symptoms in PNE and the role of central sensitization in perpetuating pain long after the injury to the nerve has been removed, it is doubtful that such rigorous scrutiny could ever be applied to PNE and MR neurography.

 

            D. Nerve blocks

 

1.

 

Karen is correct in that the duration of analgesia from a nerve block should be equal to the expected duration of effect of the analgesic, but no longer. If the analgesic is marcaine, the analgesia may last several days. If the analgesic is xylocaine, the concentration of drug selected can be varied, but the effect should last no longer than 12 hours at the extreme.


Several studies have demonstrated that the prolonged and very occasional permanent effect of a nerve block to the median nerve was not due to the anti-inflammatory nature of the attendant corticosteroid but was rather due to a reduction in constriction of the nerve.
Apparently steroids injected locally help break down adipose tissue (fat). In these studies it was shown that a reduction in the amount of fat beneath the transverse carpal ligament (which was entrapping the median nerve) relieved the entrapment to such an extent that neuropathy resolved. Generally speaking, steroids have no effect on scar or fibrotic tissue, unless that fibrous tissue is acutely inflamed, such as an acute tendonitis, or a active collagen vascular disease process. Since there is very little fat, if at all, in Alcock's, combinations of local anesthetics with corticosteroids injected into this area will have no consequence other than the transient analgesia expected of the anesthetic.

If pain is totally relieved from Botox, then the pain is not neuropathic from pudendal entrapment at Alcock's. The pelvic floor muscles innervated by the pudendal can spasm and thus place compressive forces on pudendal branches feeding them. If this persisted to such a point that the nerve branch was injured, the pain would be neuropathic, but again, the site of injury would not be at Alcocks. The sole mechanism of action of Botox is at the neuromuscular junction, the site at which the nerve passes on to muscle instructions that have been received from the cord. The action of Botox at this site is quite well understood, blocking the transfer of information from the nerve to the muscle, resulting in muscle paralysis. The paralysis is flaccid, not rigid. The muscle becomes totally relaxed, unable to contract without orders from the cord. Only if the pudendal passed though a muscle that was in a state of constant or almost constant contraction, which it does not, could muscle be held liable for neuropathy (except for tiny branches, which could be liable).

If pain is relieved from Botox, then PT is not only advisable, it is necessary in order to prepare the pelvis for the time when the effects of Botox have worn off. Only when Botox affords no relief, and PT causes additional pudendal distribution symptoms, is PT inadvisable.

While Botox works at the junction between muscle and nerve, it does not affect sensory afferents coming from muscle, or from areas surrounding muscle. A pathological process affecting the pelvis in the area infiltrated with Botox would nonetheless generate transduction forces that would be interpreted and recognized as pain. A nerve block, however, defeats transmission in the area of administration, so that any nociception, whether nociceptive or neuropathic, whether from laceration, fracture, tumor, or nerve entrapment, regardless of etiology, would not reach the cord or brain.

I believe this allows us to suggest the following: do not entertain PNE decompression until you have undergone a trial of Botox therapy. If your pain is musculoskeletal, and relieved by Botox, you will not find relief from surgical decompression at Alcock's. Instead, all efforts.... PT, medication (including Botox) ... should be focused on achieving muscle relaxation on command. This needs to be added to the recommendations to the patient with PNE symptoms.

 

2.

 

I want to run some things by you. Since your son has had both an MRI and a CT, and I presume were normal, I would also like to presume that work up included blood tests to rule out systemic disease.

You've seen a urologist, so testicular malignancy, the most common cancer in a male that age, has been ruled out. To me that is a critical determination. You write that you were given a diagnosis of prostatitis. Since antibiotics were prescribed, I presume the diagnosis was bacterial prostatitis. I also presume that the urinalysis showed leukocytes, and a positive result was received on urine culture. These are essential for such a diagnosis. The urine specimen should have included premassage and postmassage of the prostate. This test is known as the 2-glass test. If the 2 glass test was positive, the culture of prostatic fluid positive, then the diagnosis of prostatitis was not false. If these tests were negative, or worse... not done... then the diagnosis is suspect, and could certainly be false.

Then the visit to the neurologist, and on to Dr. Antolak. You are certainly putting in the effort, and I admire that. You were told to be patient "that the effects of the injection may not be noticable for 5-6 weeks". First, the failure to obtain immediate and complete though temporary analgesia after the injection of 6 cc of marcaine is a major red flag, and lowers the index of suspicion with respect to PNE. Second, much of what Dr. Antolak told you is suspect. The literature does not support his contention that the effects of steroid injection may not be noticable for 5-6 weeks, nor does clinical practice in other areas of nerve entrapment. Placebo has a response rate of 47%, so a response rate as given by Dr. Antolak (15-70%) could easily be placebo. In fact, symptomatic improvement as measured in 5 or 10 minute intervals of sitting is no reasonable measure of treatment efficacy. You were told your son "has damaged a nerve that will require many months to heal". Just the simple fact that there was no immediate analgesia with a potent nerve block should give pause to such a remark. You have a normal PNMLT, a negative response to nerve block, and yet the doctor is telling you the problem is neuropathy. "pain under his stomach" is a little difficult for me to locate, but from reading your posts in total it is not apparent the distribution of symptoms is predominantly pudendal. And you were told there is a cumulative effect over time, but there is nothing in the literature, clinical studies or pathology models, to support such a statement.

You've heard the saying: two heads are better than one. The most effective way to address a chronic pain state is with an interdisciplinary team approach. A psychiatric evaluation should be a part of any such team effort. Chronic pain is both influenced by emotions and precipitates emotions, some of them destructive. Someone needs to explore work history, social history, drug history, school history, for all of these histories might give important clues. The team approach needs to be guided by what movements the physical therapist says he can and cannot make. It needs to be guided by response to medication that target specific generators of pain, whether nociceptive or neuropathic, for that response, or lack of response, also gives clues. It might be helpful to bring in an occupational therapist as well. You need a physician to head such a team that is willing to listen, to search the literature, and to make sense. When a physician tells a patient that they need look no further (but offers no results that would stand up to scruity) and advises that you bide your time (although his treatments to date have resulted in essentially zero response), that patient needs to take a hard look at what is going on.

 

3. 

 

Across many topics on the forum the issue of nerve blocks is raised. Some members wonder about side effects, others the probability of cure. Questions abound, and responses usually reflect what physicians have said to patients or family members. It is apparent that there is a lot of false information out there, giving false hope, which, when deflated, then causes suspicion of other modalities which might be effective.

Karen has made it clear, and I totally agree, that the nerve block should be considered a diagnostic tool only. Patients should not go into the test expecting anything other. If the nerve block gives permanent analgesia from pudendal pain, then you can bless the heavens, for you did not have PNE in the first place.

But answering this question about nerve blocks generates many others. Greg writes that he knows people who have improved following nerve block. Pierre has written that PT should not be restarted for 6 weeks following nerve block to keep from "washing away" the steroid. So why do some people improve only to have symptoms recur months later?
What is the length of action of steroids, and are they washed away by increasing the blood flow during physical therapy? These are just two of a myriad of questions surrounding a pudendal block.

In my opinion the two most important questions are these: Aside from the use of a local anesthetic to determine if the persisting pain is carried to the cord via the pudendal nerve, thereby possibly indicating the pudendal itself as the instigator (although again, any structure or tissue innervated by the pudendal past the point of block could also be giving rise to these pain messages), what does the added steroid tell us? Could the ste