Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Low-dose intravenous immunoglobulin was not effective in relieving pain in longstanding complex regional pain syndrome.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index < metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Andreas Goebel 1,*, Jatinder Bisla 2, Roy Carganillo 3, Claire Cole 1, Bernhard Frank 4, Rima Gupta 5, Mairi James 6, Joanna Kelly 2, Candy McCabe 7,8, Holly Milligan 1, Caroline Murphy 2, Nick Padfield 3, Ceri Phillips 9, Helen Poole 10, Mark Saunders 11, Mick Serpell 6, Nick Shenker 12, Karim Shoukrey 13, Lynne Wyatt 4, Gareth Ambler 14

1 Pain Research Institute, Clinical Sciences Centre, Liverpool, UK
2 King’s Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, UK
3 Pain Management and Neuromodulation Centre, Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK
4 The Walton Centre NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
5 Modepharma Ltd, Beckenham, UK
6 University Department of Anaesthesia, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow Clinical Research Facility, Glasgow, UK
7 Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, Bath, UK
8 University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
9 College of Human and Health Sciences, Swansea University, Swansea, UK
10 Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK
11 Norfolk and Norwich University NHS Trust, Norwich, UK
12 Department of Rheumatology, Cambridge University Hospitals, Cambridge, UK
13 University Hospital of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK
14 Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK
* Corresponding author Email: andreasgoebel@rocketmail.com/andreas.goebel@liv.ac.uk

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation: {{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al.' : ''}} . {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

 

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions