Hi all
Technically, the term CRPS (Type1) has replaced RSD, and CRPS Type 11 has replaced Causalgia. So a search with "Causalgia" in it gets you further, as does searching for "CRPS Type 2" - dunno why the "2" makes the difference, but it does, almost nothing comes up with that 11!
Putting "Causalgia" into the google *image* search engine will get you some pics (horrid!).
And here's what I got with an ordinary google search:
http://www.google.com.hk/search?num=...a=lr%3Dlang_en
I would really, really recommend all of you with plain old RSD (CRPS Type 1) to read the most recent Dutch guidelines (the most exhaustive and recent research in the world). (I know, here I go again with the Dutch..
) - I've posted the links in the sticky and also at the bottom of my post here.
In the Guidelines for Physicians, it makes it very clear that there are 3 temperature types - hot, hot and cold, and cold. Treatment can be different for the temperature types/phases, in that their research has shown differing responses with things like DMSO cream.
Relevant bits:
From the Patients PDF:
"A distinction is drawn between 'warm CRPS-I' and cold CRPS-I. Warm CRPS-I affects 95% of patients. In this form the skin is red and feels hot. Only 5% of patients experience 'cold CRPS-I' from the onset of the condition: the arm/leg feels cold, the skin is blue in colour and circulation is impaired."
From the Physicians PDF:
"Perez et al. conducted a double-blind randomised study on a large group of CRPS-I patients (n = 146) and found that DMSO cream had a beneficial effect on the symptoms of CRPS-I. This was the first study to also analyse the effect of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) at a dose of 600 mg three times a day. NAC was found to have a significantly better effect on primary cold CRPS-I than DMSO cream."
"In general, DMSO generates lower (direct and indirect) costs than N-acetylcysteine. However, sub-group analysis indicates that N-acetylcysteine generates lower costs and is more effective for patients with a cold form of CRPS-I. DMSO generates lower costs and is more effective for hot forms of CRPS-I."
BTW, N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) is a supplement, an anti-oxidant molecule that can absorb free radicals within the body.
Everything in these guidelines are backed up with research papers and cited (of course).
You can download the PDF for Patients and the PDF for Physicians.
Rogue420, if you can't find anything else, read these anyway, I don't think (?) the actual experience of the condition is very different between the two types of CRPS.
So: the direct link is:
http://pdver.atcomputing.nl/english.html
And just to explain why I think it's so important for us to read these, I'm going to quote a bit from my "links sticky" post below,
all the best
"I urge everybody to download both PDFs from the
http://pdver.atcomputing.nl/english.html site, listed again at the bottom of this post, and take them along to your doctor.
The Dutch are streets ahead when it comes to dedicated research into RSD/CRPS and associated neuropathies, they have just published "The Evidence Based Guidelines Development (EBGD) Guidelines on Complex Regional Pain Syndrome type I (CRPS-I) dealing with the diagnosis and treatment of CRPS-I" published in 2006, which I cite below.
To read more about the developments in Holland, here's a good rundown provided by the Canadian PARC site. The research list starts with the oldest, and although you may be inclined to skip the older publications, reading it all from the top gives you a very good insight into how their thinking has emerged. Lots of cutting edge stuff on DMSO and oxygenation here." etc...etc...
http://neurotalk.psychcentral.com/sh...6&postcount=21