Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Anesth Analg. 2011 Jun;112(6):1487-93. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31820d9787. Epub 2011 Mar 3.
Nerve blocks with local anesthetics have been used in the diagnosis and treatment of neuralgias. Usually these blocks were administered in combination with corticosteroids and other drugs that can be effective by themselves. Although lasting benefits from nerve blocks in neuralgias have long been described, definitive evidence is lacking. We had the following objectives in this systematic review: to analyze the evidence behind the practice of peripheral nerve blockade with local anesthetics in patients with neuralgias and radicular pain syndromes; to assess the duration of pain relief after conduction block resolution; and to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment of these syndromes with a series of blocks.
We searched Medline, Embase, narrative reviews, and book chapters. Only articles published in English were collected. The list of 3347 identified articles was reduced to 39 articles that were read entirely, 12 of which met inclusion criteria.
Twelve included articles were analyzed. Each can be classified as a single case report or case series; there were no controlled studies among them. Nine reports assessed a single block outcome; all recorded pain relief beyond the duration of conduction blockade. Those 9 reports represented a total of 69 patients, 30 of whom had complete pain relief and 10 had relief ≥50%. Seven reports with the assessment of continuous pain ≥1 week after a single block reported complete or profound pain relief in 11 of 17 patients. All 3 reports with the assessment of a series of blocks in a large number of patients (total of 270) reported overall positive results.
Because all reviewed articles were only single case reports or case series, no reliable conclusion could be drawn concerning the effectiveness of nerve blocks with local anesthetics in neuralgia. However, 2 features of the analyzed reports-the large magnitude of the effect and the high consistency of the reported outcome-indicate that future research efforts are warranted.
神经阻滞术已被用于神经痛和神经根痛综合征的诊断和治疗。通常这些阻滞术与皮质类固醇和其他可能有自身疗效的药物联合使用。尽管神经阻滞术在神经痛中具有持久的益处已被长期描述,但缺乏确凿的证据。我们在这项系统评价中有以下目标:分析在神经痛和神经根痛综合征患者中使用局部麻醉剂进行周围神经阻滞术的实践背后的证据;评估传导阻滞解除后疼痛缓解的持续时间;评估一系列阻滞术治疗这些综合征的效果。
我们检索了 Medline、Embase、叙述性综述和章节书籍。只收集了以英文发表的文章。从最初确定的 3347 篇文章中,筛选出 39 篇全文阅读,其中 12 篇符合纳入标准。
纳入了 12 篇文章进行分析。每一篇都可以归类为单一病例报告或病例系列;其中没有对照研究。9 篇报告评估了单次阻滞的结果;所有报告均记录了传导阻滞持续时间以外的疼痛缓解。这 9 篇报告共代表 69 例患者,其中 30 例完全缓解,10 例缓解率≥50%。7 篇报告评估单次阻滞后持续疼痛≥1 周的结果,17 例患者中有 11 例完全或明显缓解。3 篇报告评估了大量患者(共 270 例)的一系列阻滞术,均报告了总体积极的结果。
由于所有纳入的文章均为单一病例报告或病例系列,因此无法就局部麻醉剂神经阻滞术治疗神经痛的效果得出可靠的结论。然而,分析报告中的两个特征——效应的幅度大且报告结果的一致性高——表明未来需要进行研究。