I read a piece regarding some interesting CRPS research today. It is a very small scale piece of multi-centre research and I've not read the published version so I have no idea of the quality of the research or methodology. The observation made by neuroscientists is that the choroid plexus was nearly one-fifth larger in patients than in healthy control subjects, when a comparison was made between brain MRIs of people with CPRS and those without. The choroid plexus is located in the walls of the brain ventricles and is best known for producing cerebrospinal fluid, which forms a protective mechanical cushion and immunological buffer for the brain. It also controls the passage of many substances from the blood into the cerebrospinal fluid, brain and spinal cord.

For some reason I can't get the link to embed but this is the web address for the article and there are details in there for the relevant journal:

http://horizon2020projects.com/sc-he...c-pain-linked/

I am absolutely amazed by this disease. It is so holistically invasive-- Brain, Spinal Cord, nerves running through the body. Thank you for posting this. I really appreciate it!

-Spike-

Who knows on the methodology, but I have a hard time extrapolating a trend from only 16 actual CRPS patients (16 controls) and applying it to the rest of us... Oh how I love a large sample size.
I'm glad somebody is doing research out there though.

Its typical of CRPS research that very small sample sizes are used, especially for initial research studies - its cheaper, saves you wasting a lot of time and effort on a hypothesis that turns out to be pointless and (cynically) it lets researchers do a second, larger study which then counts as two research projects and two published journal articles.

Usually if there is any value in the initial research a larger study is done with an attempt to correct any methodological flaws or inadequacies. That said, many times in the history of CRPS, policies about treatment options have often been made on the back of very small studies. It is always going to be an issue with CRPS that sample sizes will be small for much of the research work - even with international multi-centre trials its exceptionally difficult to recruit enough consistent, definitively diagnosed patients so that comparisons and conclusions are valid. The alternative is that you recruit over 5 or 10 years to get the numbers and by then your research will be out of date!!

Just pointing it out Neuro. I know this and I get it. I have statistics! Pilot studies are necessary. It Doesn't mean I have to feel confident in small sample sizes though...I take them lightly until the numbers are more persuasive.

Scrambler therapy is a case in point. I want to have faith in it, believe me I do, but there isn't really data there yet.

I do appreciate you posting the info.

I know that you understand it but there are lots of people who don't know about how clinical trials work so my reply was really aimed at a general audience.

As for that Calmare business, don't get me started on the lack of evidence base. Not to mention the basis of the FDA filing for the medical device. It always causes a huge outcry if anyone criticises it so I am saying no more.

hi neurochic. thanks for all the great info you provided. it is very interesting and will hopefully help drs to find a cure for rsd. thanks again.

Interesting article. Thanks! ~mac