Evaluating any patient with a complaint of abdominal pain is challenging. Abdominal pain can be benign and self-limited or a harbinger of a serious life-threatening disease (see Chapter 11 ). Chronic abdominal pain poses a particularly challenging clinical problem. Not only is the management of chronic abdominal pain a frequently daunting task, but the clinician must also remain vigilant to avoid overlooking an otherwise specifically treatable structural (“organic”) disorder. Many disorders discussed in this chapter and elsewhere in this textbook can produce chronic or recurrent abdominal pain ( Box 12.1 ). Many of these diagnoses require careful consideration and clinical interrogation in addition to appropriate diagnostic testing to discern whether the entity is indeed the cause of the patient’s pain. Diagnosis of a functional GI disorder (FGID) is generally considered once potential causes of organic chronic abdominal pain have been confidently excluded. Although the causes of chronic abdominal pain are varied, the pathophysiologic pathways that produce chronic pain are common to many of them. This chapter focuses on the neuromuscular causes of chronic abdominal pain, centrally mediated abdominal pain syndrome (CAPS), and narcotic bowel syndrome (NBS). CAPS serves as a prototypical disorder that illustrates many of the complex and interrelated issues involved in caring for patients with chronic abdominal pain.

BOX 12.1
Differential Diagnosis of Chronic or Recurrent Abdominal Pain

Structural (or Organic) Disorders

Inflammatory

Vascular

Metabolic

  • Diabetic neuropathy

  • Lead poisoning

  • Porphyria ( Chapter 77 )

Neuromuscular

  • Anterior cutaneous nerve entrapment syndrome

  • Myofascial pain syndrome

  • Slipping rib syndrome

  • Thoracic nerve radiculopathy

Other

Functional GI Disorders

Definition and Clinical Approach

Abdominal pain is considered chronic when it has been occurring constantly or intermittently for at least 6 months, acute when it has been occurring for no more than several days, and subacute when it has been occurring for more than several days but less than 6 months. These arbitrary definitions are often helpful when formulating a list of diagnostic considerations. The clinician initially must adopt a broad-based approach, which subsequently becomes more focused as the evaluation ensues. Importantly, although typical patterns of presentation are useful to remember, some patients, especially immunosuppressed and older persons, may present with atypical features.

As in acute abdominal pain (see Chapter 11 ), the initial step in evaluating a patient with chronic abdominal pain is to elicit a detailed history. The chronology of the pain, including its abruptness of onset and duration, its location, and possible radiation should be determined. Visceral pain emanating from the digestive tract is perceived in the midline, given the relatively symmetrical bilateral innervation of the organs, but is diffuse and poorly localized. Referred pain is ordinarily located in the cutaneous dermatomes that share the same spinal cord level as the affected visceral inputs. The patient should be questioned about the intensity and character of the pain, with the understanding that these parameters are subjective. The patient’s perception of precipitating, exacerbating, or mitigating factors may be useful when diagnostic possibilities are considered.

When initially attempting to determine whether the patient’s pain is due to an organic or functional process, the clinician should search for clues in the history and physical examination that support or refute the diagnosis of a progressive, chronic underlying illness. Features in the history that suggest an organic process include fever, night sweats, appetite change, weight loss, and nocturnal awakening.

A complete physical examination is indicated to search for evidence of a systemic disease. The abdominal examination should employ a combination of inspection, auscultation, percussion, and palpation. In a patient with an acute exacerbation of chronic abdominal pain, the most critical step is to ascertain whether a process mandating immediate surgical intervention is present (see Chapter 11 ). Although most causes of chronic abdominal pain do not require immediate surgical treatment, a complication related to a disease process ordinarily associated with chronic abdominal pain may present acutely (e.g., intestinal perforation in a patient with IBD). Furthermore, a patient who has experienced chronic abdominal pain may present with acute pain related to another disease process (e.g., acute mesenteric ischemia in a patient with underlying IBS). The abdomen should be auscultated to detect an abdominal bruit, which may suggest chronic mesenteric ischemia. Abdominal palpation for the presence of organomegaly, masses, and ascites and examination for hernias are particularly pertinent. Other physical findings that suggest an underlying organic illness include signs of malnutrition (e.g., sarcopenia, edema), vitamin deficiencies, or extraintestinal processes (e.g., arthropathy, cutaneous changes). Although not entirely specific, the “closed eyes” sign is often seen in patients with CAPS (see later). Similarly, Carnett’s sign and the hover sign (described later) may be seen in persons with pain emanating from the abdominal wall.

Laboratory studies can be helpful, but the clinician must first distill pertinent facets of the history and physical examination to focus the laboratory assessment. Injudicious use of laboratory testing is costly, can confuse the clinical picture, and may even lead to complications. It is worth emphasizing that an abnormal laboratory test result does not necessarily prove causality in relation to a patient’s pain syndrome. The clinician must exercise the utmost discretion when ordering and interpreting laboratory test results.

Endoscopic and imaging studies have important roles in diagnosing and excluding many causes of chronic abdominal pain. Upper endoscopy, colonoscopy, capsule endoscopy, and EUS may be indicated in selected cases. Available imaging investigations include barium and radionuclide studies, US, CT, MRI, PET, and angiography (CT, MR, and conventional). The indications for each of these radiologic investigations differ, as do their potentials for clarifying an individual clinical situation. Endoscopic and radiologic testing in specific disorders is discussed in detail elsewhere in this textbook.

Abdominal Wall Pain

Anterior Cutaneous Nerve Entrapment and Myofascial Pain Syndromes

An estimated 10% to 30% of patients presenting to a gastroenterologist with a complaint of chronic abdominal pain have chronic abdominal wall pain (CAWP) as a cause of their symptoms. Anterior cutaneous nerve entrapment syndrome (ACNES) and myofascial pain syndrome (MFPS) are common causes of CAWP. These syndromes share clinical, diagnostic, and treatment characteristics; the importance of recognizing them rests in providing the patient with an accurate diagnosis and effective treatment, as well as avoiding further expensive investigation and unnecessary surgical intervention. The abdominal wall should be suspected as the cause of symptoms when there is a complaint of chronic and unremitting abdominal pain that is unrelated to eating or bowel function but clearly related to movement. Patients with CAWP are often overweight, and the disorder is more common in women than men.

Although ACNES was initially described in the 1970s, it remains a frequently underrecognized, overlooked, and misdiagnosed cause of chronic abdominal pain. In ACNES, the pain is believed to occur when there is entrapment of a cutaneous branch of a sensory nerve that is derived from a neurovascular bundle emanating from spinal levels T7 to T12. The nerve entrapment may be related to pressure from an intra- or extra-abdominal lesion or to another localized process such as fat, fibrosis, or edema. Pain emanating from the abdominal wall is discrete and localized, in contrast to pain originating from an intra-abdominal source, which is diffuse and poorly localized. Anatomic considerations and mechanisms of nerve entrapment have been detailed elsewhere. Patients usually point to the location of their pain with one finger, and the examiner can often localize the area of maximal tenderness to a region less than 2 cm in diameter. During physical examination, the patient often guards the affected area from the examiner’s hands ( hover sign ). Patients often note that activities associated with tightening of the abdominal musculature result in an exacerbation of pain, and during physical examination, the clinician will note increased localized tenderness to palpation when the patient tenses the abdominal muscles ( Carnett sign ).

In MFPS, pain emanates from myofascial trigger points in skeletal muscle. Causative factors include musculoskeletal trauma, vertebral column disease, intervertebral disk disease, osteoarthritis, overuse, psychological distress, and relative immobility. The exact pathophysiology of pain in MFPS remains unclear. CAWP may occur in patients with MFPS. Pain may be referred from another site, and identification of trigger points is a useful physical finding. When attempting to identify a trigger point, the examiner uses a single finger to palpate a tender area. This is most often located in the central portion of a muscle belly, which may feel indurated or taut to palpation, and elicits a jump sign . This finding refers to a patient’s response by wincing, jerking away, or crying out as the myofascial trigger point is detected. Less commonly, trigger points may be located at sites like the xiphoid process, costochondral junctions, or ligamentous and tendinous insertions.

Successful treatment of ACNES and MFPS not only improves symptoms, but also confirms the diagnosis. Treatment strategy depends on the symptom severity. With mild and intermittent symptoms that are reproducibly precipitated by certain movements, simple reassurance and a recommendation to avoid such movements may suffice. Non-narcotic analgesics, NSAIDs, and heat applications can be used during exacerbations. Physical therapy may be beneficial, although no randomized studies have supported this approach. For severe and persistent symptoms, injection therapy with a local anesthetic, with or without a glucocorticoid, is recommended. Various techniques of injection have been described. A retrospective survey-based study with follow-up of 6 to 12 months revealed that ultrasound-guided trigger-point injection with an anesthetic plus a glucocorticoid resulted in significant symptom improvement in over one third of patients. Not unexpectedly, somatization was inversely related to treatment success. In a study of 136 patients in whom the history and physical examination suggested abdominal wall pain, and in whom benefit was noted with injection therapy, the diagnosis remained unchanged in 97% of cases after a mean follow-up of 4 years. In carefully selected patients with symptoms refractory to injection therapy, a prospective nonrandomized investigation suggested that diagnostic laparoscopy with open exploration of abdominal trigger points may be beneficial. In this study, after intra-abdominal adhesions in close proximity to a trigger point were lysed, subcutaneous nerve resection was performed. After a median postoperative follow-up of 37 months, an impressive 23 of 24 patients (96%) believed that this approach was beneficial in managing their previously intractable pain. A retrospective observational study and a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial from the same investigators also showed long-term benefit from anterior neurectomy in patients with symptoms refractory to more conservative therapy.

You're Reading a Preview

Become a Clinical Tree membership for Full access and enjoy Unlimited articles

Become membership

If you are a member. Log in here