TY - JOUR
T1 - Commentary on techniques to relieve pain associated with botulinum injections for palmar and plantar hyperhidrosis
AU - Aria, Alexander B.
AU - Council, Martha Laurin
N1 - Funding Information:
Supported in part by an unrestricted educational grant from the MECTA Corporation. The MECTA Corporation also provided custom-modified MECTA spECTrum 5000Q devices for the delivery of FEAST. The MECTA was not involved in study design, data analysis, or data interpretation. N.A.Y. received research support from Department of Veteran Affairs, Augusta Biomedical Research Corporation, MECTA Corporation, and Merck (but not salary support). N.A.Y. also received Speaker CME honoraria from the Georgia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities and Psychiatric Annals for unrelated CME topics. W.V.M. receives research support from MECTA, Vistagen, and Merck. W.V.M. receives royalties from Wolters Kluwer and is a scientific adviser for Jazz, Sage, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. H.A.S. is the inventor on a patent for FEAST (US8712532 B2), titration in the current domain in electroconvulsive therapy (US9789310), and the adjustment of current in electroconvulsive therapy devices (US10583288), each held by the MECTA Corporation. H.A.S. is also the originator of magnetic seizure therapy and serves as a consultant to the MECTA Corporation, Neuronetics, Inc, and LivaNova LPC. The other authors have no conflicts of interest or financial disclosures to report.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/12/1
Y1 - 2021/12/1
N2 - In this issue of Dermatologic Surgery, Nasser and colleagues1 provide a comprehensive overview of the modalities available to diminish pain associated with botulinum toxin (BTX) injections for treatment of palmoplantar hyperhidrosis (HH). Limited by cost and tolerability, BTX injections are used for HH once patients have failed other modalities such as topical therapies and/or iontophoresis. As discussed in the article, one major limitation of injection therapy, particularly in heavily innervated areas such as the palms and soles, is the significant associated pain experienced by patients during the procedure. When treating palmoplantar hyperhidrosis, sub-dermal injections are placed in a grid-like fashion on the palms and soles, requiring between 20 and 40 injections per hand or foot. And although a variety of efforts have been used to reduce pain during injection, there is a lack of consensus and quality of evidence for these methods. Most publications in the medical literature are expert opinions and studies with severe limitations, as opposed to prospective, randomized, controlled trials. In this article, the authors highlight the pros and cons of each pain control method including the degree of invasiveness, duration of postprocedure impairment, local adverse side effects, time necessary to achieve anesthesia, and requirement of prior training. A reasonable approach for a practitioner is to first implement a less invasive method such as cooling and/or topical anesthesia. If this does not result in adequate pain control for a patient, a more invasive method may be pursued such as a nerve block or Bier's block (which would require significant prior training).
AB - In this issue of Dermatologic Surgery, Nasser and colleagues1 provide a comprehensive overview of the modalities available to diminish pain associated with botulinum toxin (BTX) injections for treatment of palmoplantar hyperhidrosis (HH). Limited by cost and tolerability, BTX injections are used for HH once patients have failed other modalities such as topical therapies and/or iontophoresis. As discussed in the article, one major limitation of injection therapy, particularly in heavily innervated areas such as the palms and soles, is the significant associated pain experienced by patients during the procedure. When treating palmoplantar hyperhidrosis, sub-dermal injections are placed in a grid-like fashion on the palms and soles, requiring between 20 and 40 injections per hand or foot. And although a variety of efforts have been used to reduce pain during injection, there is a lack of consensus and quality of evidence for these methods. Most publications in the medical literature are expert opinions and studies with severe limitations, as opposed to prospective, randomized, controlled trials. In this article, the authors highlight the pros and cons of each pain control method including the degree of invasiveness, duration of postprocedure impairment, local adverse side effects, time necessary to achieve anesthesia, and requirement of prior training. A reasonable approach for a practitioner is to first implement a less invasive method such as cooling and/or topical anesthesia. If this does not result in adequate pain control for a patient, a more invasive method may be pursued such as a nerve block or Bier's block (which would require significant prior training).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85120675407&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/YCT.0000000000000776
DO - 10.1097/YCT.0000000000000776
M3 - Article
C2 - 34015791
AN - SCOPUS:85120675407
VL - 37
SP - 256
EP - 262
JO - Journal of ECT
JF - Journal of ECT
SN - 1095-0680
IS - 4
ER -