Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, ON.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Queen's University, Kingston, ON.
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2022 Aug;44(8):877-885. doi: 10.1016/j.jogc.2022.02.129. Epub 2022 Mar 24.
To determine if a novel, magnesium-based trigger point infiltration formulation is more effective in treating chronic myofascial pelvic pain than lidocaine-only infiltration.
This was a single-centre, double-blind, randomized controlled trial of women diagnosed with chronic pelvic myofascial pain associated with trigger points. We compared a novel magnesium-based infiltration formulation with lidocaine infiltration of trigger points and with a control group of participants who were waitlisted for a chronic pain clinic. Treatment groups completed a 12-week program that included 8 trigger point injection treatments and 9 visits during which pain scores were recorded and questionnaires administered. The primary outcome measure was change in mean pain score between baseline and the final visit. Secondary outcomes included pain with function scores, scores on the World Health Organization Quality of Life questionnaire, procedural pain, concomitant medication use, and complications.
We assigned 44 women diagnosed with chronic myofascial pelvic pain associated with trigger points to either the magnesium-based infiltrate (n = 15), lidocaine infiltrate (n = 17), or waitlist (n = 12) group. In the intent-to-treat analysis, a clinically relevant decrease in mean pain score out of 10 was observed in the magnesium-based (-2.6 ± 3.2) and lidocaine (-2.9 ± 3.1) infiltration groups, but not in the waitlist group (-0.5 ± 2.3). The per protocol analysis post-hoc tests, adjusted for multiple comparisons, found a significant difference in the average change in pain score between the magnesium-based infiltrate and the waitlist groups (P = 0.045), while differences between the lidocaine infiltrate and waitlist groups approached statistical significance (P = 0.052). Both treatment groups saw improvements in pain with function and quality of life scores.
While this study is underpowered, it does not support the use of a magnesium-based trigger point infiltrate in the treatment of chronic myofascial pelvic pain over lidocaine-only infiltration. Nonetheless, these results are consistent with current management recommendations and suggest improvements in pain, pain with function, and quality of life scores with either magnesium-based or lidocaine-only infiltration. We outline an approach to assessment and treatment that can be adopted by general gynaecologists.
确定一种新型的、基于镁的触发点渗透配方是否比仅利多卡因渗透更能有效治疗慢性肌筋膜骨盆疼痛。
这是一项针对诊断为慢性骨盆肌筋膜疼痛伴触发点的女性的单中心、双盲、随机对照试验。我们比较了一种新型的基于镁的渗透配方与利多卡因渗透触发点以及等待慢性疼痛诊所的对照组。治疗组完成了一个 12 周的计划,包括 8 次触发点注射治疗和 9 次就诊,在此期间记录疼痛评分并进行问卷调查。主要结局测量指标是从基线到最后一次就诊时平均疼痛评分的变化。次要结局包括疼痛与功能评分、世界卫生组织生活质量问卷评分、程序疼痛、伴随药物使用和并发症。
我们将 44 名诊断为慢性肌筋膜骨盆疼痛伴触发点的女性分配到基于镁的渗透组(n=15)、利多卡因渗透组(n=17)或候补组(n=12)。在意向治疗分析中,基于镁的渗透组(-2.6±3.2)和利多卡因渗透组(-2.9±3.1)的平均疼痛评分明显下降(-2.6±3.2),但候补组(-0.5±2.3)没有。事后检验的方案分析,经多次比较调整,发现基于镁的渗透组与候补组之间疼痛评分平均变化的显著差异(P=0.045),而利多卡因渗透组与候补组之间的差异接近统计学意义(P=0.052)。两组治疗均改善了疼痛与功能和生活质量评分。
尽管本研究的效力不足,但它不支持在治疗慢性肌筋膜骨盆疼痛方面使用基于镁的触发点渗透剂,而不是仅利多卡因渗透。尽管如此,这些结果与当前的管理建议一致,并表明基于镁或仅利多卡因渗透均可改善疼痛、疼痛与功能以及生活质量评分。我们概述了一种可以被普通妇科医生采用的评估和治疗方法。