Kwon Woojin, Kim Junho, Ahn Somin, In Chi-Bum
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Konyang University Hospital, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Myunggok Medical Research Institute, Konyang University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Interv Pain Med. 2025 Apr 28;4(2):100585. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100585. eCollection 2025 Jun.
This study aims to evaluate the treatment response to thoracic paravertebral block (PVB) in thoracic herpes zoster (HZ) pain based on the contrast spreading pattern.
Patients with HZ pain who underwent thoracic PVB under fluoroscopy were retrospectively analyzed. A comparative analysis of the treatment response was conducted between patients with epidural spread (ES group) and those without epidural spread (NES group) at the first visit after PVB. The treatment response was determined by setting the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) as a reduction of more than 1 point on the pain numerical rating scale (NRS). In addition, the treatment responses were compared according to prevertebral spread, intercostal spread, and segmented medial spread (base, foraminal, and subarticular-central spread). The NRS score was assessed at baseline and 3 days, 2 weeks, 1 and month after PVB. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the treatment response over time.
In total, 48 patients were enrolled (ES, n = 21; NES, n = 27). The ES group had a higher proportion of patients with the treatment response than the NES group ( = 0.025). However, there was no significant difference in the treatment response according to prevertebral, intercostal, and segmented medial spread. In both groups, the mean NRS scores significantly decreased over time. Comparisons between groups at each time point were not significantly different. The GEE analysis showed that the duration after rash onset was the only significantly related factor in treatment response.
Patients with HZ pain who had epidural spread in PVB showed a better treatment response than those who did not at the first post-PVB assessment. Other spreading patterns did not have a significant effect on the treatment response. NRS decreased over time with no differences between groups. Only the duration after rash onset affected the longitudinal treatment response. Additional research is required to verify the efficacy of epidural spread in PVB.
本研究旨在基于对比剂扩散模式评估胸段带状疱疹(HZ)疼痛患者接受胸段椎旁阻滞(PVB)后的治疗反应。
对在透视引导下接受胸段PVB的HZ疼痛患者进行回顾性分析。在PVB后首次就诊时,对出现硬膜外扩散的患者(ES组)和未出现硬膜外扩散的患者(NES组)的治疗反应进行比较分析。治疗反应通过将疼痛数字评分量表(NRS)上降低超过1分设定为最小临床重要差异(MCID)来确定。此外,根据椎前扩散、肋间扩散和节段内侧扩散(基底、椎间孔和关节下中央扩散)比较治疗反应。在基线以及PVB后3天、2周、1个月和3个月时评估NRS评分。进行广义估计方程(GEE)分析以确定随时间变化与治疗反应相关的因素。
共纳入48例患者(ES组,n = 21;NES组,n = 27)。ES组治疗反应良好的患者比例高于NES组(P = 0.025)。然而,根据椎前、肋间和节段内侧扩散情况,治疗反应无显著差异。两组患者的平均NRS评分均随时间显著降低。各时间点组间比较无显著差异。GEE分析表明,出疹后持续时间是治疗反应中唯一显著相关的因素。
在PVB中出现硬膜外扩散的HZ疼痛患者在PVB后首次评估时的治疗反应优于未出现硬膜外扩散的患者。其他扩散模式对治疗反应无显著影响。NRS评分随时间降低,组间无差异。只有出疹后持续时间影响纵向治疗反应。需要进一步研究以验证PVB中硬膜外扩散的疗效。