Next Article in Journal
Relationship between Macrophages and Tissue Microenvironments in Diabetic Kidneys
Next Article in Special Issue
Endometriosis-Related Chronic Pelvic Pain
Previous Article in Journal
δ-Opioid Receptor as a Molecular Target for Increasing Cardiac Resistance to Reperfusion in Drug Development
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Potential of Glucose Treatment to Reduce Reactive Oxygen Species Production and Apoptosis of Inflamed Neural Cells In Vitro
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Pain Modulation in Chronic Musculoskeletal Disorders: Botulinum Toxin, a Descriptive Analysis

by
Daniela Poenaru
1,*,
Miruna Ioana Sandulescu
2 and
Delia Cinteza
1
1
Rehabilitation Department 1, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 4192910 Bucharest, Romania
2
Doctoral School, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 4192910 Bucharest, Romania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Biomedicines 2023, 11(7), 1888; https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11071888
Submission received: 2 June 2023 / Revised: 25 June 2023 / Accepted: 1 July 2023 / Published: 3 July 2023

Abstract

:
Botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT), a product of Clostridium botulinum, reversibly inhibits the presynaptic release of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine at the neuromuscular junction. In addition, BoNT blocks the transmission of other substances involved in pain perception and, together with a soft-tissue anti-inflammatory effect, may play a role in analgesia. When first-line treatment fails, second-line therapies might include BoNT. Studies on chronic and recurrent pain using different mechanisms offer heterogenous results that must be validated and standardized. Plantar fasciitis, severe knee osteoarthritis, painful knee and hip arthroplasty, antalgic muscular contractures, and neuropathic and myofascial pain syndromes may benefit from the administration of BoNT. Research on this topic has revealed the main musculoskeletal conditions that can benefit from BoNT, stressing the effects, modalities of administration, doses, and schedule.

1. Introduction

Botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) is a product of Clostridium botulinum. BoNT acts on specific proteins, SNARE (soluble N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor attachment protein receptors), which mediate neuronal exocytosis and reversibly inhibit the presynaptic release of neurotransmitters at the neuromuscular junction, with acetylcholine and substance P (a neuropeptide acting as a neurotransmitter and a modulator of pain perception) being primarily affected. Acetylcholine reduction causes muscular weakness and substance P reduction is responsible for analgesia [1].
There are seven BoNT serotypes, termed A to G. Each serotype cleaves one of the SNARE proteins (soluble N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor attachment protein receptors). BoNT serotypes A and B have been approved for pharmacological use. BoNT/A has three formulations: onabotulinumtoxin A (Botox, Allergan), abobotulinumtoxin A (Dysport, Medicis), and incobotulinumtoxin A (Xeomin, Merz). Serotype B is available under the name rimabotulinumtoxin B (Myobloc, Neurobloc) [2]. The equivalence between BoNT/A and BoNT/B ranges from 1:40 to 1:67 UI.
Generally, the main indications of BoNT are focal dystonia, spasticity (upper motor neuron lesion), non-dystonic disorders of involuntary muscle activity, strabismus, smooth muscle hyperactive disorders, sweating and salivary disorders, and cosmetic use.
Chronic pain syndromes with recurrent or refractory courses are difficult to manage and are the subjects of extensive research. BoNT may have a place in the treatment of some diseases, mainly when more conventional therapies fail (See Table 1, Figure 1).

2. Relevant Literature

The aim of the study was to underline some of the painful musculoskeletal conditions, which, in the relapsing or refractory course, may be treated using different regimens of BoNT.
We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for articles published since 2000 using the MeSH terms: botulinum toxin, pain, and musculoskeletal, and excluded all records containing the terms spasticity and dystonia. We collected 52 articles matching the selection criteria (See Table 2). We grouped the articles based on the topics below:

2.1. Plantar Fasciitis

Plantar fasciitis often has a chronic evolution, with recurrences or treatment refractoriness. The last therapeutic resort is surgery, with debridement and release of fascia. Trying to avoid the shortcomings of surgery has raised interest in new therapeutic agents such as BoNT [55].
Heel pain is usually caused by plantar fasciitis, although this may not always be the case. Neuropathic conditions such as entrapment of the posterior tibialis nerve, inferior calcaneal nerve, medial plantar nerve, and lateral plantar nerve may mimic or be associated with plantar fasciitis. Quadratus plantae and abductor hallucis brevis muscles exert pressure on and entrap the above-mentioned nerves [56].
Studies in the literature used different pathways for botulinum toxin injections: directly into the fascia, into the short plantar muscles, or in the gastrocnemius-soleus complex.
Intrafascial injection techniques vary based on different studies. Babcock used two doses of intrafascial injection of 70 UI BoNT/A (Botox; Allergan, Irvine, CA, USA) under palpatory guidance: 40 UI in the tender region of the heel medial to the insertion of fascia and 30 UI in the tender point of the arch of the foot (one inch distal to the talar insertion of fascia) [8]. Using this technique, two articles reported significant improvement in pain and function, both in the short-term (3 and 8 weeks) and the long-term (6 and 12 months) [3,8]. Plantar fascia thickness decreased on ultrasound examination at 1 and 3 weeks and was correlated with clinical improvement [6]. Comparing this regimen with local corticosteroids and anaesthetics showed that both treatments reduced pain at one month; however, botulinum toxin was superior at 6 and 12 months, with a remanent effect long after termination of direct pharmacological action [4]. Another injection technique used a dose of 200 UI BoNT/A (Dysport, Ipsen Pharma, Ettlingen, Germany), equivalent to 30–40 UI Botox), administered into the most tender point via plantar approach and into the subfascial area in four different directions, producing pain relief and pressure pain threshold reduction at 2 weeks that was maintained for up to 52 weeks. However, researchers found no significant difference when it was compared with the placebo [4,7]. Ultrasound-guided injection of 50 UI botulinum toxin A into the fascia with a posterior approach below the calcaneus reduced pain at three months. Additionally, the ultrasound also validated a reduction in fascia thickness [9].
Intramuscular injections were administered into the flexor digitorum brevis, abductor hallucis, quadratus plantae, and medial gastrocnemius muscles.
Intramuscular injection of 100 UI incobotulinumtoxin A (Xeomin, Merz) into the flexor digitorum brevis muscle in the proximity of plantar fascia with electromyographic validation produced significant pain and reduced dysfunction [10]. Intramuscular injection (abductor hallucis brevis, 50 UI; quadratus plantae, 50 UI Dysport) under EMG guidance with subsequent paralysis of these muscles and decompression of nervous branches relieved pain and improved function during daily activities. Supplementary analgesia may result from the toxin’s diffusion to the plantar medial heel, with direct neuron-analgesic and musculoskeletal anti-inflammatory effects [11].
Recent studies suggest that gastrocnemius muscle tightness (medial head) and ankle dorsiflexion restriction play an important role in chronic plantar fasciitis [57]. Based on this assumption, researchers injected 70 UI botulinum toxin A into the medial head of the gastrocnemius. Afterward, patients attempted a therapeutic program with conservative modalities (physiotherapy). There was a significant functional and subjective improvement compared with the placebo at 6 and 12 months [12].
Some researchers combined the two paradigms—intrafascial and intramuscular administration—to treat refractory or relapse cases [8].
None of the studies mentioned above reported adverse reactions.
BoNT may be considered an alternative for recurrent or refractory plantar fasciitis, with local, intrafascial administration of small doses or intramuscular injection in the small plantar flexor muscles or calf muscles.

2.2. Knee Osteoarthritis

There is currently no cure or ability to reverse the degenerative process; the main objective of any treatment should be alleviating pain, decreasing inflammation, restoring function, and decelerating the progression of the disease. Pain modulation for maintaining function when intra-articular corticosteroids and other first- and second-line therapies have failed or are not indicated may benefit from BoNT administration. Its analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties are due to the inhibition of the release of some neurotransmitters from nerve terminals, including substance P, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), and neurokinin A [58].
The first attempts to treat knee osteoarthritis using intra-articular botulinum toxin were made in 2010 when Boon et al. reported that 100 UI BoNT/A together with corticosteroids significantly improved knee pain and function. Since then, research has continued to generate evidence to support the use of botulinum toxin [13].
Research on treating different grades of knee osteoarthritis (II, III, and IV Kelgren-Lawrence stage [58]) with intraarticular injections of 100 UI BoNT/A (Botox) or 250 UI BoNT/A (Dysport) reported pain and functional improvement lasting from one week to six months. A second identical injection administered after three months may act as a booster, leading to the assumption that the therapeutic result is transient rather than long-term [14,15,16].
The results for moderate chronic knee osteoarthritis are heterogeneous. Comparing intra-articular doses of 100 UI BoNT/A and 200 UI BoNT/A combined with corticosteroids decreased pain in every group at 8 weeks, with even low-dose BoNT/A reaching statistical significance [59]. In another study, 100 UI BoNT/A had no effect on pain and function, either in the short-term or the medium-term [17].
Intra-articular botulinum toxin was safe, with no adverse effects. In intramuscular administration, adverse reactions were rare and, when they occurred, were mild and transient, including local pain and clinical signs of toxin diffusion into the adjacent tissue (dysphagia following neck muscle injection; diplopia or ptosis following orbicularis oculi injection; skin rash, dizziness, generalized fatigue, dry mouth, reduced sweating, and constipation). Studies on intra-articular administration revealed none of the above-mentioned reactions [14,15,60].
BoNT/A and hyaluronic acid were both efficient at reducing pain and disability and improving activities of daily living when followed by therapeutic exercise, with better scores for BoNT/A in the short-term (4 weeks) and medium-term (8 weeks) [18].
Pain and dysfunction due to chronic knee osteoarthritis may improve after one or two intra-articular injections of BoNT/A, although the literature on this is scarce. It is important to note that there are a multitude of intra-articular preparations and choosing between them is challenging.

2.3. Painful Knee Arthroplasty

Painful knee arthroplasty is a challenge, since after the exclusion of infection, loosening, and instability, medical or surgical alternatives are scarce. In this situation, intra-articular administration of 100 UI BoNT/A (Botox) reduced pain and improved function after 2 months, strengthening its short-term analgesic effect. With an average of 39 days of pain relief, there was a need for a second injection or a higher dose to sustain the analgesic effect for a longer duration [19]. The researchers administered a second and third dose of botulinum toxin (100–300 UI) in cases where pain recurred or responses failed.
The results encouraged the use of botulinum toxin for refractory, chronically painful total joint arthroplasty not amenable to medical and surgical treatment [19].

2.4. Joint Contractures

Postoperative knee flexion contracture occurs in 15–20% of patients and has important biomechanical consequences. Most studies recommend botulinum toxin for muscle spasticity, i.e., upper motor neuron lesions. In the case of knee arthroplasty, hamstring tightness is secondary to local causes. After palpation of the most tender point of the medial and lateral hamstring muscle bellies, 50 UI botulinum toxin was injected into each point and the patient was assigned a program of physical therapy. One month later, the knee’s range of motion improved and results were maintained for one year. The injection reduced muscular tightness and allowed the patient to attempt rehabilitation to achieve the correct range of motion [20].
Moderate-to-severe flexion contractures (greater than 15°) require surgical intervention—one of the many therapeutic procedures conducted under anaesthesia. Peroneal nerve decompression, posterior soft tissue release (capsule and tendons), and botulinum toxin injection (150–200 UI) into the gastrocnemius and hamstrings can be efficacious treatments with complete correction of the deformity. Botulinum toxin has been proven to be a valuable tool for improving the alignment and consequent disability [21].
Knee flexion contracture is a frequent complication in children and young adult haemophilic patients. Acute joint distension and pain block quadriceps function and create a muscular imbalance in favour of knee flexors. Muscle haematoma and advanced knee arthropathy are associated with flexor contracture due to limited mobility or severe internal joint damage [23]. When a 6-month rehabilitation program fails to restore knee extension, intramuscular botulinum toxin administration may be considered, especially for knee contractures between 10° and 30°, usually secondary to hemarthrosis with inadequate replacement therapy. For knee contractures ranging from 31° to 45° and with muscle imbalance, intramuscular toxin administration may precede hamstring release. There were no benefits for flexion contractures above 45°. A total dose of 100 UI BoNT/A was injected into the hamstrings, fascia lata, and calf muscles under factor replacement protection [23].
In the same manner, a small proportion of patients with total hip arthroplasty develop hip contractures, limiting the range of motion and, ultimately, the gait and quality of life. The most frequently involved muscles are adductors, tensor fascia lata, and rectus femoris [61]. Various attempts have been made to limit these contractures—including surgical techniques associated with rehabilitation programs—with the rate of success varying between 0 and 60% [62]. Researchers proposed intramuscular administration of 100 UI into the adductor magnus and brevis, rectus femoris, and tensor fascia lata, based on clinical examination. After this procedure, the patients started a rehabilitation regimen. At the one-year follow-up visit, gain of hip mobility was on average 23° for those with restricted movement, with full extension to standing [24].
Thus, muscular contractures may benefit from locally administered BoNT/A once a thorough clinical examination has determined the specific muscle to inject.

2.5. Chronic Lateral Epicondylitis

Chronic lateral epicondylitis, a degenerative inflammatory disorder, may follow a chronic or recurrent course. The rationale behind recommending botulinum toxin is supported by two mechanisms: a paralysing effect on extensor muscles that reduces tension in their tendons (protection) and an analgesic effect due to inhibition of the neurotransmitters involved in pain transmission [1].
BoNT/A, tested in doses varying from 40 to 60 UI via unique injections, provided significant improvement in visual analogue scale (VAS) pain assessment at week 4 that persisted to week 12 and led to no or minimal alteration in grip strength. The administration site varied across studies (intratendinous or intramuscular). Intratendinous administration site was 1 cm distal to the lateral epicondyle toward the tender spot [25]. Intramuscular administration varied between studies: 3 to 4 cm distal to the lateral epicondyle with infiltration of the muscle at two locations [26], 5 cm distal to the area of maximal tenderness at the lateral epicondyle, in line with the middle of the wrist [27], or at the site where the motor nerve branch (posterior interosseous nerve) enters the extensor digitorum and extensor carpi ulnaris muscles. This point is at a distance of 33% of the forearm length from the lateral epicondyle to the posterior midpoint of the wrist [28]. This last technique led to the largest reduction in pain at rest and of pain at maximum pinch, with the appearance of a transitory extensor lag that interfered with work activities and disappeared at week 16. Thus, it might be useful for patients for whom the development of extensor lag does not affect their ability to work.
Intramuscular administration of low doses of botulinum toxin into the extensor carpi radialis brevis muscle under electromyographic guidance was confirmed to have an analgesic effect at 30 and 90 days and spared the extensor digitorum muscle, avoiding the extensor lag with no interference to daily and work activities. Thus, it seems that targeting the right muscle using a low dose may induce short-term pain reduction and functional improvement [29]. Long-term evaluation found that 40% of patients asked for a second injection at 6 or 9 months. At one year follow-up, patients receiving one or two doses of botulinum toxin reported successful and sustained pain relief, with no need for another therapeutic intervention [30].
The role of botulinum toxin in the therapeutic armamentarium of lateral epicondylitis has to be defined, as researchers have documented an equivalent effect, in terms of pain relief, using corticosteroids. It is worth mentioning that corticosteroids provide analgesia in the early stages while the analgesic effect of botulinum toxin could last for 16 weeks. Recurrence rate and risks of corticosteroid injections are important issues to consider [31]. On the other hand, adverse effects of botulinum toxin, including local paresthesia, ecchymosis, and skin irritation, need to be mentioned. The high costs of this product should also be considered [63].
In the case of chronic refractory lateral epicondylitis, the decision between local corticosteroids and BoNT/A may be inclined towards the latter, considering the resolution of pain and dysfunction and the low incidence of adverse effects.

2.6. Neuropathic Pain

Focal postherpetic and post-traumatic pain, diabetic neuropathy, complex regional pain syndrome, and trigeminal neuralgia are subjects of scientific research.
Focal postherpetic and post-traumatic pain with mapping of the precise area of allodynia and intradermal injection of 200 UI BoNT/A (Botox) following the hyperhidrosis scheme were followed by a reduction in the intensity and the area of pain, as well as a decrease in cold and pain thresholds, although perception thresholds remained constant [64]. First-line trigeminal neuralgia treatment is represented by carbamezepine and oxcarbazepine, with good efficacy; their clinical benefit may diminish over time and side effects may be severe. Adding another therapeutic line may increase the rate of success. BoNT/A was found to be effective in reducing pain intensity and attack frequency in a number of heterogeneous studies. Modalities of administration in trigeminal neuralgia were either intradermal and submucous or around the trigeminal branches. Intradermal administration of 100 UI was performed at the site of pain and the trigger point, 5 UI/point, at a distance of 15 mm between points. If the pain involved the oral mucosa, submucous injections were administered, 2,5 UI/point, in the same manner. After one week, there was complete or adequate pain relief (87%). The main side effect was mild facial asymmetry at the injection site in a small proportion of cases, which resolved spontaneously [32,33].
One injection provided a significant analgesic effect. For patients unresponsive to one injection, repeating the procedure after 2 weeks led to better control of pain, with no increase in the number of side reactions. Regarding the total dose per area, research suggests that low doses (25–40 UI) and high doses (75–100 UI) have similar effects in the short term, whereas high doses have a better effect in the long term, with no additional adverse reactions [34,35].
Injecting the maxillary and mandibular roots with 50 UI botulinum toxin (Botox) offered statistical and clinical improvement in pain intensity and attack frequency, beginning in the first week and persisting for six months. However, about half of the 27 patients experienced recurrence and asked for a second injection [36].
Intradermal injections may be painful, thus local anaesthesia with topical lidocaine or prilocaine was provided; some researchers added inhalatory nitrous oxide 5 min before and throughout the procedure [36].
First-line postherpetic neuralgia treatment includes topical lidocaine, anticonvulsants, and antidepressants. Botulinum toxin has been suggested as a second-line treatment. The tactile allodynia area was mapped and the toxin was injected subcutaneously at sites 10–20 mm apart for a total maximum dose of 100 UI. Pain relief was significant at 7 days and persisted for 4 months [37,38].
Botulinum toxin certainly has a place in postherpetic and trigeminal neuralgia, with some researchers raising the question of whether it should remain a second-line treatment or become a first-line treatment, given its efficacy and tolerability [65].
Peripheral diabetic neuropathy is a symmetrical distal sensory and motor polyneuropathy with a wide spectrum of therapeutic agents, such as antidepressants, anticonvulsants, and opioids. They are reported to lack long-lasting pain relief, and to carry poor tolerability and disturbing side effects. Topical lidocaine and capsaicine (high dose) or botulinum toxin have been studied as alternatives [66].
A total of 100 UI BoNT/A injected intradermally into the dorsal foot in a grid distribution pattern provided analgesia beginning on the first week and maintained for up to three months with no side effects [39,40]. Based on the small number of studies on peripheral diabetic neuropathy with particular localization to the dorsum of the foot, botulinum toxin may act as an adjunctive treatment to first-line modalities.
In allodynia from type I complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), intradermal and subcutaneous administration of botulinum toxin offered less satisfactory results: a significant percentage of patients reported the procedure to be intolerable and had no pain relief at 3 and 8 weeks [41].
In one case report [42], shoulder CRPS type I secondary to acromioclavicular subluxation with failure of conventional pharmacological and rehabilitative strategies was successfully treated with 100 UI botulinum toxin A administered within the glenohumeral joint. Further research is needed to confirm the results, as studies on this topic are scarce.
Complex regional pain syndrome of the upper limb associated with consecutive dystonia was treated with intramuscular injection of botulinum toxin with electromyographic guidance. The muscles were selected based on patient complaints, hypertrophy, spasm, and tenderness at palpation. Doses varied between 10 and 20 UI per muscle. Results showed analgesic effects and muscle relaxation [43].
Sympathetic blockade has been used for a long time in the treatment of CRPS type I; however, the relief is transitory. Since the pre-ganglionic sympathetic nerve terminals are cholinergic, botulinum toxin was proposed to enhance the blockade. For lower limb CRPS, researchers administered botulinum toxin A (75–100 UI), added as an anaesthetic blockade, to the sympathetic lumbar ganglia to obtain a higher and more durable effect [44]. Some successful attempts were made in the use of botulinum toxin type B in addition to anaesthesia for lumbar sympathetic blockade, with complete resolution of lower limb CRPS. The rationale behind botulinum toxin B use was the possibility of using it in cases of resistance to botulinum toxin A, with a longer blocking effect. There were more adverse effects following BoNT/B administration, including dry mouth and dysphagia; however, these were of low or moderate intensity and disappeared with repeated administration [45,46,47].
Neuropathic pain may benefit from BoNT/A as a second or third line of therapy in cases of recurrent or persistent pain. The main challenge is making the administration tolerable, for example by adding some sort of anaesthesia (either local or general).

2.7. Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Cases of mild and moderate severity were treated with 30 UI botulinum toxin A under sonographic intracanal guidance to obtain a reduction in paraesthesia and nocturnal pain [67].
Another study used intramuscular administration of botulinum toxin into the motor points of flexor digitorum profundis (10 UI), flexor digitorum superficialis (10 UI), and flexor pollicis longus (5 UI) to reduce tension in the tendons travelling to the carpal tunnel and, consequently, the pressure on the median nerve. Results showed significant clinical improvement as well as distal motor latencies and sensor nerve conduction velocity improvements after 12 weeks [48].
Intracanal or intramuscular (flexor muscles) administration of BoNT/A may reduce pressure on the median nerve through the tunnel and improve clinical outcomes.

2.8. Morton Neuroma

Patients with Morton’s neuroma who experienced long-lasting pain and failure of conservative therapies, including corticosteroid injections, received 50 UI botulinum toxin A in the area of the neuroma (identified on MRI exam), with 70% of patients reporting pain relief and foot function improvement at one-month and three-month follow-ups. Researchers noticed that the results at 3 months were better than at 1 month, in contrast to the evolution of the antispastic effect, which peaked at 1–3 weeks, was followed by a plateau for 1–2 months, and needed re-injection every 3 months [49].
Refractory cases may require BoNT/A administration, with a possibility of a second administration for resolution of the symptoms.

2.9. Myofascial Pain Syndrome

The pathophysiology of myofascial pain syndrome is unclear, as it plays the role of muscular contracture in pain generation. Many therapeutic approaches have been suggested, including local injections with anaesthetics, saline, corticosteroids, or dry-needling—with varying results. Adjunctive physiotherapy is critical for maximizing the pharmacological strategy [50].
For upper back and shoulder myofascial pain syndrome occurring over a long duration (at least 6 months), palpatory identification and injection of botulinum toxin to accessible trigger points (with doses of 10–20–40 UI per point) produced significant analgesic effect and reduced fatigue and work disability at 4 weeks. Smaller doses of 5 UI per trigger point, with a total number of 3–7 trigger points per patient, offered no advantage compared with simple saline injections. Other researchers found equal analgesic effects of botulinum toxin and local anaesthetics injected directly into the trigger points. Thus, treatment should be reserved for patients who fail to respond to other injectable therapies, mainly due to the higher cost of this pharmaceutical [51,52,53,54].
For profound muscles involved in myofascial pain syndrome (i.e., iliopsoas and quadratus lumborum), a single injection under fluoroscopic guidance was found to produce pain relief similar to simple saline or local anaesthetic [68].
When chronic myofascial pain was accompanied by chronic muscle spasm, intramuscular injection of botulinum toxin together with local anaesthetic followed by physiotherapy offered significantly better pain relief and a longer duration of analgesia compared with corticosteroids, which lasted up to three months. Doses varied according to the dimensions of the muscle, for instance, the piriformis muscle received 150 UI, the iliopsoas muscle received 100 UI, and the scalenus anterior received 80 UI [69].
The lack of consensus between studies on the use of botulinum toxin for myofascial pain might be explained by the complex and partially unknown pathophysiologic mechanism, incorrect dosage, or lack of therapeutic effect. Further research is required.

3. Conclusions

Chronic or recurrent pain due to a variety of musculoskeletal disorders is a complex syndrome with incompletely known mechanisms and a variety of therapeutic approaches and success rates. In many cases, first-line treatments are well-defined, whereas their failure presents the physician and patient with a large range of therapies with heterogeneous studies and results. Botulinum neurotoxin plays a role in chronic pain management based on its nociceptive neurotransmitter blockage and anti-inflammatory effect. Dosing and timing of BoNT administration in chronic or refractory cases of plantar fasciitis and other tendinopathies, knee osteoarthritis and arthroplasty, and joint contractures and neuropathic pain are subjects of thorough and promising research.
Future directions: As more relevant information on the pain-relieving capabilities of BoNT is gathered, more therapeutic protocols may include this substance as a high-grade line of therapy. Research on doses and timing will provide a scientific basis for personalized therapies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.P. and D.C.; methodology, D.P. and D.C.; investigation, D.P. and M.I.S.; resources, D.P. and D.C.; data curation, D.P., M.I.S. and D.C.; writing—original draft preparation, D.P., M.I.S. and D.C.; writing—review and editing, D.P.; visualization, D.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Publication of this paper is supported by the University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila, through the institutional program Publish not Perish.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lew, M.F. Review of the FDA-approved uses of botulinum toxins, including data suggesting efficacy in pain reduction. Clin. J. Pain 2002, 18 (Suppl. S6), S142–S146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Chen, S. Clinical uses of botulinum neurotoxins: Current indications, limitations and future developments. Toxins 2012, 4, 913–939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Babcock, M.S.; Foster, L.; Pasquina, P.; Jabbari, B. Treatment of pain attributed to plantar fasciitis with botulinum toxin A: A short-term, randomized, placebo-controlled, doubleblind study. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2005, 84, 649–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Placzek, R.; Deuretzbacher, G.; Buttgereit, F.; Meiss, A.L. Treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis with botulinum toxin A: An open case series with a 1 year follow up. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2005, 64, 1659–1661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Huang, Y.; Wei, S.; Wang, H.; Lieu, F. Ultrasonographic guided botulinum toxin type A treatment for plantar fasciitis; an outcome-based investigation for treating pain and gait changes. J. Rehabil. Med. 2010, 42, 136–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Chou, L.W.; Hong, C.Z.; Wu, E.S.; Hsueh, W.H.; Kao, M.J. Serial Ultrasonographic Findings of Plantar Fasciitis After Treatment with Botulinum Toxin A: A Case Study. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2011, 92, 316–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Peterlein, C.D.; Funk, J.F.; Hölscher, A.; Schuh, A.; Placzek, R. Is Botulinum Toxin An Effective for the Treatment of Plantar Fasciitis? Clin. J. Pain 2012, 28, 527–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Díaz-Llopis, I.V.; Gómez-Gallego, D.; Mondéjar-Gómez, F.J.; López-García, A.; Climent-Barberá, J.M.; Rodríguez-Ruiz, C.M. Botulinum toxin type A in chronic plantar fasciitis: Clinical effects one year after injection. Clin. Rehabil. 2013, 27, 681–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Elizondo-Rodríguez, J.; Simental-Mendía, M.; Peña-Martínez, V.; Vilchez-Cavazos, F.; Tamez-Mata, Y.; Acosta-Olivo, C. Comparison of Botulinum Toxin A, Corticosteroid, and Anesthetic Injection for Plantar Fasciitis. Foot Ankle Int. 2021, 42, 305–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ahmad, J.; Ahmad, S.H.; Jones, K. Treatment of Plantar Fasciitis with Botulinum Toxin. Foot Ankle Int. 2017, 38, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Radovic, P. Treatment of “Plantar Fasciitis”/Plantar Heel Pain Syndrome with Botulinum Toxin- A Novel Injection Paradigm Pilot Study. Foot 2020, 45, 101711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Abbasian, M.; Baghbani, S.; Barangi, S.; Fairhurst, P.G.; Ebrahimpour, A.; Krause, F.; Hashemi, M. Outcomes of Ultrasound-Guided Gastrocnemius Injection With Botulinum Toxin for Chronic Plantar Fasciitis. Foot Ankle Int. 2020, 41, 63–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Boon, A.J.; Smith, J.; Dahm, D.L.; Sorenson, E.J.; Larson, D.R.; Fitz-Gibbon, P.D.; Dykstra, D.D.; Singh, J.A. Efficacy of intra-articular botulinum toxin type A in painful knee osteoarthritis: A pilot study. PM R 2010, 2, 268–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Kellgren, J.; Lawrence, J. Radiological assessment of osteoarthrosis. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 1957, 16, 494–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Chou, C.L.; Lee, S.H.; Lu, S.Y.; Tsai, K.L.; Ho, C.Y.; Lai, H.C. Therapeutic effects of intra-articular botulinum neurotoxin in advanced knee osteoarthritis. J. Chin. Med. Assoc. 2010, 73, 573–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Hsieh, L.F.; Wu, C.W.; Chou, C.C.; Yang, S.W.; Wu, S.H.; Lin, Y.J.; Hsu, W.C. Effects of Botulinum Toxin Landmark-Guided Intra-articular Injection in Subjects With Knee Osteoarthritis. PM R J. Inj. Funct. Rehabil. 2016, 8, 1127–1135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Mendes, J.G.; Natour, J.; Nunes-Tamashiro, J.C.; Toffolo, S.R.; Rosenfeld, A.; Furtado, R.N.V. Comparison between intra-articular Botulinum toxin type A, corticosteroid, and saline in knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial. Clin. Rehabil. 2019, 33, 1015–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bao, X.; Tan, J.W.; Flyzik, M.; Ma, X.C.; Liu, H.; Liu, H.Y. Effect of therapeutic exercise on knee osteoarthritis after intra-articular injection of botulinum toxin type A, hyaluronate or saline: A randomized controlled trial. J. Rehabil. Med. 2018, 50, 534–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Sun, S.F.; Hsu, C.W.; Lin, H.S.; Chou, Y.J.; Chen, J.Y.; Wang, J.L. Efficacy of intraarticular botulinum toxin A and intraarticular hyaluronate plus rehabilitation exercise in patients with unilateral ankle osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial. J. Foot Ankle Res. 2014, 7, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Singh, J.A.; Mahowald, M.L.; Noorbaloochi, S. Intraarticular botulinum toxin A for refractory painful total knee arthroplasty: A randomized controlled trial. J. Rheumatol. 2010, 37, 2377–2386, Erratum in J. Rheumatol. 2011, 38, 1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Singh, J.A. Efficacy of Long-term Effect and Repeat Intraarticular Botulinum toxin in Patients with Painful Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Study. Br. J. Med. Med. Res. 2014, 4, 139–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Smith, E.B.; Shafi, K.A.; Greis, A.C.; Maltenfort, M.G.; Chen, A.F. Decreased flexion contracture after total knee arthroplasty using Botulinum toxin A: A randomized controlled trial. Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc. 2016, 24, 3229–3234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Vahedi, H.; Khlopas, A.; Szymczuk, V.L.; Peterson, M.K.; Hammouda, A.I.; Conway, J.D. Treatment with posterior capsular release, botulinum toxin injection, hamstring tenotomy, and peroneal nerve decompression improves flexion contracture after total knee arthroplasty: Minimum 2-year follow-up. Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc. 2020, 28, 2706–2714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Berend, M.E.; Smith, A.; Meding, J.B.; Ritter, M.A.; Lynch, T.; Davis, K. Long-term outcome and risk factors of proximal femoral fracture in uncemented and cemented total hip arthroplasty in 2551 hips. J. Arthroplast. 2006, 21, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Bhave, A.; Marker, D.R.; Seyler, T.M.; Ulrich, S.D.; Plate, J.F.; Mont, M.A. Functional problems and treatment solutions after total hip arthroplasty. J. Arthroplast. 2007, 22, 116–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bhave, A.; Zywiel, M.G.; Ulrich, S.D.; McGrath, M.S.; Seyler, T.M.; Marker, D.R.; Delanois, R.E.; Mont, M.A. Botulinum toxin type A injections for the management of muscle tightness following total hip arthroplasty: A case series. J. Orthop. Surg. Res. 2009, 4, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Wong, S.M.; Hui, A.C.F.; Tong, P.Y.; Poon, D.W.F.; Yu, E.; Wong, L.K.S. Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis with Botulinum Toxin. Ann. Intern. Med. 2005, 143, 793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Placzek, R.; Drescher, W.; Deuretzbacher, G.; Hempfing, A.; Meiss, A.L. Treatment of Chronic Radial Epicondylitis with Botulinum Toxin A. J. Bone Jt. Surg. 2007, 89, 255–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Hayton, M.J.; Santini, A.J.A.; Hughes, P.J.; Frostick, S.P.; Trail, I.A.; Stanley, J.K. Botulinum Toxin Injection in the Treatment of Tennis Elbow. J. Bone Jt. Surg. 2005, 87, 503–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Espandar, R.; Heidari, P.; Rasouli, M.R.; Saadat, S.; Farzan, M.; Rostami, M.; Yazdanian, S.; Mortazavi, S.M. Use of anatomic measurement to guide injection of botulinum toxin for the management of chronic lateral epicondylitis: A randomized controlled trial. CMAJ. 2010, 182, 768–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Creuzé, A.; Petit, H.; de Sèze, M. Short-Term Effect of Low-Dose, Electromyography-Guided Botulinum Toxin A Injection in the Treatment of Chronic Lateral Epicondylar Tendinopathy: A Randomized, Double-Blinded Study. J. Bone Jt. Surg. Am. 2018, 100, 818–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Song, B.; Day, D.; Jayaram, P. Efficacy of Botulinum Toxin in Treating Lateral Epicondylitis—Does Injection Location Matter? Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2020, 99, 1157–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ranoux, D.; Attal, N.; Morain, F.; Bouhassira, D. Botulinum toxin type A induces direct analgesic effects in chronic neuropathic pain. Ann. Neurol. 2008, 64, 274–283, Erratum in Ann. Neurol. 2009, 65, 359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Wu, S.; Lian, Y.; Zhang, H.; Chen, Y.; Wu, C.; Li, S.; Zheng, Y.; Wang, Y.; Cheng, W.; Huang, Z. Botulinum Toxin Type A for refractory trigeminal neuralgia in older patients: A better therapeutic effect. J. Pain Res. 2019, 12, 2177–2186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Zúñiga, C.; Piedimonte, F.; Díaz, S.; Micheli, F. Acute treatment of trigeminal neuralgia with onabotulinum toxin A. Clin. Neuropharmacol. 2013, 36, 146–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhang, H.; Lian, Y.; Ma, Y.; Chen, Y.; He, C.; Xie, N.; Wu, C. Two doses of botulinum toxin type A for the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: Observation of therapeutic effect from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. J. Headache Pain 2014, 15, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Zhang, H.; Lian, Y.; Xie, N.; Cheng, X.; Chen, C.; Xu, H.; Zheng, Y. Factors affecting the therapeutic effect of botulinum toxin A on trigeminal neuralgia: A follow-up retrospective study of 152 patients. Exp. Ther. Med. 2019, 18, 3375–3382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Türk Börü, Ü.; Duman, A.; Bölük, C.; Coşkun Duman, S.; Taşdemir, M. Botulinum toxin in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia: 6-Month follow-up. Medicine 2017, 96, e8133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Shackleton, T.; Ram, S.; Black, M.; Ryder, J.; Clark, G.T.; Enciso, R. The efficacy of botulinum toxin for the treatment of trigeminal and postherpetic neuralgia: A systematic review with meta-analyses. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. 2016, 122, 61–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Finnerup, N.B.; Sindrup, S.H.; Jensen, T.S. Recent advances in pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. F1000 Med. Rep. 2010, 2, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Ghasemi, M.; Ansari, M.; Basiri, K.; Shaigannejad, V. The effects of intradermal botulinum toxin type a injections on pain symptoms of patients with diabetic neuropathy. J. Res. Med. Sci. 2014, 19, 106–111. [Google Scholar]
  42. Yuan, R.Y.; Sheu, J.J.; Yu, J.M.; Chen, W.T.; Tseng, I.J.; Chang, H.H.; Hu, C.J. Botulinum toxin for diabetic neuropathic pain: A randomized double-blind crossover trial. Neurology 2009, 72, 1473–1478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Safarpour, D.; Salardini, A.; Richardson, D.; Jabbari, B. Botulinum Toxin A for Treatment of Allodynia of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A Pilot Study. Pain Med. 2010, 11, 1411–1414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Bellon, G.; Venturin, A.; Masiero, S.; Del Felice, A. Intra-articular botulinum toxin injection in complex regional pain syndrome: Case report and review of the literature. Toxicon 2019, 159, 41–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kharkar, S.; Ambady, P.; Venkatesh, Y.; Schwartzman, R.J. Intramuscular botulinum toxin in complex regional pain syndrome: Case series and literature review. Pain Physician 2011, 14, 419–424. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  46. Carroll, I.; Clark, J.D.; Mackey, S. Sympathetic block with botulinum toxin to treat complex regional pain syndrome. Ann. Neurol. 2009, 65, 348–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  47. Choi, E.; Cho, C.W.; Kim, H.Y.; Lee, P.B.; Nahm, F.S. Lumbar Sympathetic Block with Botulinum Toxin Type B for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A Case Study. Pain Physician 2015, 18, E911–E916. [Google Scholar]
  48. Tsai, C.P.; Liu, C.Y.; Lin, K.P.; Wang, K.C. Efficacy of botulinum toxin type a in the relief of Carpal tunnel syndrome: A preliminary experience. Clin. Drug Investig. 2006, 26, 511–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hablas, S.A.; Nada, D.W.; Alashkar, D.S.; Elsharkawy, A.A. The effect of botulinum toxin type A injection in decreasing intratunnel tendon tension in carpal tunnel syndrome: A randomized controlled trial for efficacy and safety. Egypt. Rheumatol. Rehabil. 2019, 46, 299–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Climent, J.M.; Mondéjar-Gómez, F.; Rodríguez-Ruiz, C.; Díaz-Llopis, I.; Gómez-Gallego, D.; Martín-Medina, P. Treatment of Morton Neuroma with Botulinum Toxin A: A Pilot Study. Clin. Drug Investig. 2013, 33, 497–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Ojala, T.; Arokoski, J.P.A.; Partanen, J. The Effect of Small Doses of Botulinum Toxin A on Neck-Shoulder Myofascial Pain Syndrome: A Double-Blind, Randomized, and Controlled Crossover Trial. Clin. J. Pain 2006, 22, 90–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Kamanli, A.; Kaya, A.; Ardicoglu, O.; Ozgocmen, S.; Zengin, F.O.; Bayık, Y. Comparison of lidocaine injection, botulinum toxin injection, and dry needling to trigger points in myofascial pain syndrome. Rheumatol. Int. 2004, 25, 604–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Göbel, H.; Heinze, A.; Reichel, G.; Hefter, H.; Benecke, R. Efficacy and safety of a single botulinum type A toxin complex treatment (Dysport®) for the relief of upper back myofascial pain syndrome: Results from a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled multicentre study. Pain 2006, 125, 82–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Graboski, C.L.; Gray, S.D.; Burnham, R.S. Botulinum toxin A versus bupivacaine trigger point injections for the treatment of myofascial pain syndrome: A randomised double blind crossover study. Pain 2005, 118, 170–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Wheeler, P.; Boyd, K.; Shipton, M. Surgery for patients with recalcitrant plantar fasciitis: Good results at short-, medium-, and long-term follow-up. Orthop. J. Sports Med. 2014, 2, 2325967114527901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Neufeld, S.K.; Cerrato, R. Plantar fasciitis: Evaluation and treatment. J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg. 2008, 16, 338–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Nakale, N.T.; Strydom, A.; Saragas, N.P.; Ferrao, P.N.F. Association Between Plantar Fasciitis and Isolated Gastrocnemius Tightness. Foot Ankle Int. 2017, 39, 271–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Fonfria, E.; Maignel, J.; Lezmi, S.; Martin, V.; Splevins, A.; Shubber, S.; Kalinichev, M.; Foster, K.; Picaut, P.; Krupp, J. The Expanding Therapeutic Utility of Botulinum Neurotoxins. Toxins 2018, 10, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Najafi, S.; Sanati, E.; Khademi, M.; Abdorrazaghi, F.; Mofrad, R.K.; Rezasoltani, Z. Intra-articular botulinum toxin type A for treatment of knee osteoarthritis: Clinical trial. Toxicon 2019, 165, 69–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zhai, S.; Huang, B.; Yu, K. The efficacy and safety of Botulinum Toxin Type A in painful knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Int. Med. Res. 2020, 48, 300060519895868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Knobe, K.; Berntorp, E. Haemophilia and joint disease: Pathophysiology, evaluation, and management. J. Comorb. 2011, 1, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  62. Daffunchio, C.; Caviglia, H.; Nassif, J.; Morettil, N.; Galatro, G. Knee flexion contracture treated with botulinum toxin type A in patients with haemophilia (PWH). Haemophilia 2015, 22, 134–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Cogné, M.; Creuzé, A.; Petit, H.; Delleci, C.; Dehail, P.; de Seze, M. Number of botulinum toxin injections needed to stop requests for treatment for chronic lateral epicondylar tendinopathy. A 1-year follow-up study. Ann. Phys. Rehabil. Med. 2019, 62, 336–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Lin, Y.C.; Wu, W.T.; Hsu, Y.C.; Han, D.S.; Chang, K.V. Comparative effectiveness of botulinum toxin versus non-surgical treatments for treating lateral epicondylitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Rehabil. 2017, 32, 131–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Xiao, L.; Mackey, S.; Hui, H.; Xong, D.; Zhang, Q.; Zhang, D. Subcutaneous injection of botulinum toxin a is beneficial in postherpetic neuralgia. Pain Med. 2010, 11, 1827–1833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Apalla, Z.; Sotiriou, E.; Lallas, A.; Lazaridou, E.; Ioannides, D. Botulinum Toxin A in Postherpetic Neuralgia. Clin. J. Pain 2013, 29, 857–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Lee, Y.; Lee, C.J.; Choi, E.; Lee, P.B.; Lee, H.J.; Nahm, F.S. Lumbar Sympathetic Block with Botulinum Toxin Type A and Type B for the Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. Toxins 2018, 10, 164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. De Andrés, J.; Adsuara, V.M.; Palmisani, S.; Villanueva, V.; López-Alarcón, M.D. A double-blind, controlled, randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of botulinum toxin for the treatment of lumbar myofascial pain in humans. Reg. Anesth. Pain Med. 2010, 35, 255–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Porta, M. A comparative trial of botulinum toxin type A and methylprednisolone for the treatment of myofascial pain syndrome and pain from chronic muscle spasm. Pain 2000, 85, 101–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Proposed BoNT mechanisms.
Figure 1. Proposed BoNT mechanisms.
Biomedicines 11 01888 g001
Table 1. Main BoNT indications of analgesia—(table generated by the author).
Table 1. Main BoNT indications of analgesia—(table generated by the author).
Disease Administration Number of Studies
Plantar fasciitisIntrafascial
Intramuscular (short plantar muscles)
Intramuscular (medial head gastrocnemius)
10
Knee osteoarthritisIntra-articular 6
Painful knee arthroplastyIntra-articular
Intramuscular (for contractures)
3
Painful muscular contracturesIntramuscular 3
Chronic lateral epicondylitisIntratendinous
Intramuscular
6
Neuropathic painIntradermal, subcutaneous/submucosal
Perinervous
Sympathetic block
16
Carpal tunnel syndromeIntracannalar
Intramuscular
1
Morton neuromaPerineural 1
Myofascial pain syndromeTrigger point injection6
Table 2. Studies on BoNT and musculoskeletal pain syndromes.
Table 2. Studies on BoNT and musculoskeletal pain syndromes.
Author Type of StudyDiseaseMethodology of InjectionTiming Outcomes Results
Babcock, 2005 [3]Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled,
43 pts
Plantar fasciitis, refractory,Intrafascial
Babcock method (Botox)
3 weeks,
8 weeks
Pain
Function (Maryland Foot Score)
Significant improvement versus placebo
Placzek, 2006 [4]Open case series,
9 pts
Plantar fasciitis, refractoryIntrafascial
200 UI BoNT/A (Dysport)
2, 6, 10, 14 weeksPain Significant improvement
Huang, 2010 [5]Randomized, double-blind, 50 ptsPlantar fasciitis, refractoryIntrafascial
50 UI BoNT/A (Botox)
Ultrasound guidance
3 weeks, 3 monthsPain,
Thickness of the plantar fascia,
Walking
Reduced pain,
Reduced fascia thickness,
Walking parameters improved
Significantly.
Chou, 2011 [6]Case reportPlantar fasciitis, refractoryIntrafascial
Babcock method
1, 3, 5, and 7 weeksPain,
Thickness of the plantar fascia (ultrasound)
Pain decreased,
Thickness of the fascia decreased significantly.
Peterlein, 2012 [7]Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled,
40 pts
Plantar fasciitis, refractoryIntrafascial
200 UI BoNT/A (Dysport)
2, 6, 10, 14, 18 weeksPain Pain decreased but not significantly compared with placebo
Diaz-Llopis, 2013 [8]Prospective, observational, 24 ptsPlantar fasciitisIntrafascial
Babcock method
6 months, 12 monthsPain
Function (FHSQ)
Significant improvement
Elizondo-Rodriguez (2021) [9]Randomized, controlled, double-blind, 78 ptsPlantar fasciitis, refractory (BoNT/A, anesthetic, corticosteroid) Intrafascial
200 UI (Dysport)/anesthetic (5 mL ropivacaine)/1 mL betamethasone
2 weeks, 1, 3, and 6 monthsPain
Function
Plantar fascia thickness
All groups improved significantly, but no difference between them
Ahmad, 2017 [10]Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, 89 ptsPlantar fasciitis, refractoryIntramuscular Flexor digitorum brevis
100 UI inobotulinum (Xeomin)
6, 12 weeks, and 6, 12 monthsPain,
Function (FAAM)
Pain reduction and
Functional improvement
Significant
Radovic, 2020 [11]Case series, 4 ptsPlantar fasciitis, refractoryIntramuscular Abductor hallucis 50 UI
Quadratus plantae 50 UI
(Dysport)
1, 3, 6, 12, 26 weeksPain
Function (FAAM)
Pain reduction,
Functional improvement
Abbasian, 2019 [12]Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 32 ptsPlantar fasciitis, refractoryIntramuscular
Medial gastrocnemius 70 UI
1, 3, 6, and 12 monthsPain
Function
Pain reduction,
Functional improvement
Significant
Boon, 2010 [13]Prospective, randomized, double-blind, 60 ptsKnee osteoarthritis grade II, III, (CS, low dose BoNT/A, high-dose BoNT/A)Intraarticular
Low-dose 100 UI
High-dose 200 UI
8 weeks,
6 months
Pain
Function (WOMAC)
Pain improved significantly with low dose and CS
Chou, 2010 [14]Prospective, observational, 24 ptsKnee osteoarthritis grade III, IVIntraarticular
100 UI BoNT/A (Botox), 2 injections 3 months apart
3, 6 monthsPain
Function (WOMAC)
Pain relief,
Functional improvement
Hsieh, 2016 [15]Prospective, randomized, controlled, 46 ptsKnee osteoarthritis grade II, IIIIntraarticular 100 UI BoNT/AOne week, 6 monthsPain
Function (WOMAC)
Pain relief,
Functional improvement in BoNT/A group versus control
Najafi, 2019 [16]Prospective, single group, 46 ptsKnee osteoarthritis, grade III, IVIntraarticular 250 UI BoNT/A (Dysport)4 weeksPain
Function (KOOS)
Pain relief,
Functional improvement
Mendes, 2019 [17]Prospective, randomized, controlled, 105 ptsKnee osteoarthritis, grade II, III, 3 groups (BoNT/A 100 UI, 200 UI or CS)Intraarticular
100 UI BoNT/A (Botox), 40 mg triamcinolone, saline
4 weeks, 12 weeksPain Function (WOMAC) No benefits in the BoNT/A group,
CS group improved pain and function
Bao, 2018 [18]Prospective, single-blinded, randomized, controlled, 60 ptsKnee osteoarthritis, grade II, III, IV
3 groups (HA, BoNT/A, saline) + exercise
Intraarticular 100 UI BoNT/A (Botox)8 weeksPain
Function (WOMAC)
Quality of life
HA and BoNT/A followed by exercise effective in reducing pain and disability.
BoNT/A more effective
Singh, 2010 [19]Randomized, placebo-controlled, 54 ptsPainful knee arthroplastyIntraarticular 100 UI BoNT/A (Botox)2 monthsPain
Function (WOMAC)
Pain reduction,
Functional improvement
significant
Singh, 2014 [20]Retrospective, 11 ptsPainful knee arthroplastyIntraarticular 100 UI BoNT/A (Botox)28 monthsPain
Function (WOMAC)
Pain reduction,
Functional improvement
Smith, 2016 [21]Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 14 ptsFlexion contracture knee arthroplastyIntramuscular (hamstrings) 100 UI BoNT/A (Botox)1, 6, 12 monthsExtension ROMExtension improved significantly in the BoNT/A group
Vahedi, 2020 [22]Retrospective, 19 ptsFlexion contracture knee arthroplastyIntramuscular (hamstrings, gastrocnemius)31 monthsKnee extensionExtension improved
Daffunchio, 2016 [23]Prospective, 17 ptsFlexion contracture, hemophiliaIntramuscular (calf and hamstrings muscles, fascia lata) 100 UI BoNT/A 1, 3, 6, and 12 monthsKnee ROMROM increased significantly
Bhave, 2009 [24]Case series, 10 ptsHip flexion contracture, arthroplastyIntramuscular (adductor magnus, brevis, tensor fascia lata, rectus femoris) 100 UI BoNT/A12 monthsHip ROM
Function (Harris hip scores)
ROM increased
Functional improvement
Wong, 2005 [25]Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 60 ptsChronic lateral epicondylitisIntramuscular 60 UI BoNT/A (Dysport)4, 12 weeksPain
Function (grip strength)
Pain relief significant
Placzel, 2007 [26]Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 130 ptsChronic lateral epicondylitisIntramuscular 60 UI BoNT/A (Dysport) 2, 6, 12, 18 weeksPain
Function (grip strength)
Pain relief,
Functional improvement significant
Hayton, 2005 [27]Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 40 ptsChronic lateral epicondylitisIntramuscular 50 UI BoNT/A (Botox)3 monthsPain
Function (grip strength)
No significant difference between groups
Espandar, 2010 [28]Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 48 ptsChronic lateral epicondylitisIntramuscular 60 UI BoNT/A4, 8, 16 weeksPain
Function (grip strength)
Pain relief,
Functional improvement significant
Creuze, 2018, [29]Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 67 ptsChronic lateral epicondylitisIntramuscular (ECRB) 40 UI BoNT/A (Dysport) 1, 3 monthsPain Pain reduction significant
Cogne, 2018, [30]Open study, prospective, 50 ptsChronic lateral epicondylitisIntramuscular (ECRB) 40 UI BoNT/A (Dysport) 3, 6, 9, 12 monthsPain After 2 injections, 90% pts reported significant pain reduction
Ranoux, 2008 [31]Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 29 ptsPostherpetic and posttraumatic neuralgiaIntradermally 100 UI BoNT/A (Botox)4, 12, 24 weeksPain
Allodynia
Long-lasting and significant reduction in pain
Wu, 2019 [32]Retrospective cohort, 104 ptsTrigeminal neuralgiaIntradermally, 100 UI BoNT/AEvery 2 months, up to 12 monthsPain Pain reduction significant
Zuniga, 2008 [33]Case series, 12 ptsTrigeminal neuralgiaSubcutaneous, 20–50 UI BoNT/A (Botox)8 weeksPain Pain reduction significant
Zhang, 2014 [34]Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 84 ptsTrigeminal neuralgiaIntradermally, 25 or 75 UI BoNT/A8 weeksPain Pain reduction significant,
Both doses have similar efficacies
Zhang, 2019, [35]Retrospective, 152 ptsTrigeminal neuralgiaIntradermally, 50, 70, and over 70 UI BoNT/AUp to 28 monthsPain Pain reduction at 2 weeks, persistent at 28 months
Turk Boru, 2017 [36]Prospective, observational, 27 ptsTrigeminal neuralgiaPerineural
50 UI BoNT/A per root (Botox)
2, 6 monthsPain Pain and attack frequency reduction significant
Xiao, 2010 [37]Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 60 pts Postherpetic neuralgia Subcutaneous 100 UI BoNT/A versus lidocaine versus saline3 monthsPain, allodyniaSignificant pain reduction at 7 days, persistent at 3 months
Apalla, 2013 [38]Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 30 pts Postherpetic neuralgia Subcutaneous 100 UI BoNT/A2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 weeksPain,
Sleep quality
Pain reduction,
Sleep improvement significant
Ghasemi, 2014 [39]Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 40 pts Diabetic neuropathy in lower limbsIntradermal 100 UI BoNT/A (Botox)3 weeksNeuropathy pain scaleImprovement of all sensations except cold
Yuan, 2009 [40]Prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 18 pts Diabetic neuropathy in lower limbsIntradermal 100 UI BoNT/A (Botox)4, 8, 12 weeksPain Significant pain reduction at all time points
Safarpour, 2010 [41]Pilot study, 14 ptsComplex regional pain syndromeIndermal and subcutaneous, 40–200 UI BoNT/A3 weeks, 2 monthsPain Failure of pain reduction
Bellon, 2019 [42]Case reportComplex regional pain syndrome, upper armIntraarticular 100 UI BoNT/A (Xeomin)1 and 4 monthsPain Pain reduction
Kharkar, 2011 [43]Case series, 37 ptsComplex regional pain syndrome upper girdleIntramuscular 100 UI BoNT/A4 weeksPain Pain reduction
Carroll, 2009 [44]Prospective, randomized, double-blind, pilot, 9 ptsComplex regional pain syndrome, lower limbLumbar sympathetic block 75 UI BoNT/A1 monthPain Pain reduction
Choi, 2015 [45]Case report, 2 ptsComplex regional pain syndrome, lower limbLumbar sympathetic block 5000 UI BoNT/B1 monthPain,
Skin color
Pain reduction, skin color normal
Lee, 2018 [46]Retrospective, comparative, 18 ptsComplex regional pain syndrome, lower limbsLumbar sympathetic block, 100 UI BoNT/A versus 5000 UI BoNT/B1 weekPain Both groups had pain relief
Tsai, 2006 [47]Prospective, open-label, pilot study, 5 ptsCarpal tunnel syndromeIntracannalar
60 UI BoNT/A
3 monthsPain, electrophysiological studiesPain relief, electrophysiological parameters improvement
Climent, 2013 [48]Prospective, pilot study, 17 ptsUnresponsive Morton neuromaPerineural, 50 UI BoNT/A3 monthsPain
Function (FHSQ)
Pain relief at rest and walking, at all time points
Ojala, 2006 [49]Prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 31 ptsMyofascial syndromeTrigger point injection, a total of 15–50 UI BoNT/A/session, 2 sessions 4 weeks apart4, 8 weeksPain No difference between groups
Kamanli, 2005 [50]Prospective, single-blind, 87 ptsMyofascial syndromeTrigger point injection, 10–20 UI versus lidocaine versus dry needling1 monthPain
Subjective complaints
No statistical difference between groups
Gobel, 2006 [51]Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 145 ptsMyofascial syndromeTrigger point injection, a total of 40 UI BoNT/A (Dysport)12 weeksPain Pain relief significant
Graboski, 2005 [52]Randomized, double-blind, 18 ptsMyofascial syndromeTrigger point injection, 25 UI BoNT/A per point, maximum 8 points/pt versus bupivacaine10 weeksPain Both groups improved significantly, without a difference
De Andres, 2010 [53]Prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled, 27 ptsMyofascial syndrome iliopsoas and/or quadratus lumborumIntramuscular 50 UI BoNT/A/muscle versus bupivacaina15, 30, 90 daysPain Both groups improved significantly, without a difference
Porta, 2000 [54]Randomized, comparative, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 40 ptsMyofascial syndromeIntramuscular 80–150 UI/muscle BoNT/A versus CS30, 60 daysPain
Spasms
BoNT group improved pain and spasms significantly
FHSQ, Foot Health Status Questionnaire; FAAM, Foot and Ankle Ability Measures; WOMAC, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index; CS, corticosteroid; KOOS, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; HA, hyaluronic acid; ROM, range of motion; ECRB, extensor carpi radialis brevis.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Poenaru, D.; Sandulescu, M.I.; Cinteza, D. Pain Modulation in Chronic Musculoskeletal Disorders: Botulinum Toxin, a Descriptive Analysis. Biomedicines 2023, 11, 1888. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11071888

AMA Style

Poenaru D, Sandulescu MI, Cinteza D. Pain Modulation in Chronic Musculoskeletal Disorders: Botulinum Toxin, a Descriptive Analysis. Biomedicines. 2023; 11(7):1888. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11071888

Chicago/Turabian Style

Poenaru, Daniela, Miruna Ioana Sandulescu, and Delia Cinteza. 2023. "Pain Modulation in Chronic Musculoskeletal Disorders: Botulinum Toxin, a Descriptive Analysis" Biomedicines 11, no. 7: 1888. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11071888

APA Style

Poenaru, D., Sandulescu, M. I., & Cinteza, D. (2023). Pain Modulation in Chronic Musculoskeletal Disorders: Botulinum Toxin, a Descriptive Analysis. Biomedicines, 11(7), 1888. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11071888

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop