A Randomized Double-blind Trial of 5% Dextrose Versus Corticosteroid Hydrodissection for Meralgia Paresthetica.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Pain physician Pub Date : 2024-11-01
Hailin Xu, Xiaochen Shi, Jiaan Zhu, Guicheng Li, Ling Bai
{"title":"A Randomized Double-blind Trial of 5% Dextrose Versus Corticosteroid Hydrodissection for Meralgia Paresthetica.","authors":"Hailin Xu, Xiaochen Shi, Jiaan Zhu, Guicheng Li, Ling Bai","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ultrasound-guided 5% dextrose (D5W) hydrodissection provides  favorable outcomes for treating peripheral entrapment neuropathies; its safety is well recognized. However, clinical evidence regarding the use of D5W hydrodissection for meralgia paresthetica (MP) is limited. Although corticosteroids are the most common injectates, the possible adverse effects are a big concern.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided D5W hydrodissection compared to corticosteroid hydrodissection in patients with MP during a 6-month follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A prospective, randomized double-blind, controlled trial.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Outpatient clinic at a university hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 56 patients with MP were randomly allocated to either a D5W or steroid group in a 1:1 ratio. The patients received one session of ultrasound-guided perineural injection therapy of 10 mL D5W or a corticosteroid solution (1 mL compound betamethasone [1 mL: betamethasone sodium phosphate 5 mg and betamethasone dipropionate 2 mg] mixed with 5 mL 2% lidocaine and 4 mL 0.9% saline).The primary outcomes were Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for MP (pain and paresthesia) and global quality of life. The secondary outcomes included self-reported successful clinical response and injection adverse effects. Evaluations were conducted at pretreatment and at one, 3, 4 and 6 months posttreatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All patients completed the study. Compared with baseline, both groups exhibited reductions in VAS scores for MP and global quality of life at all follow-up time points, with statistical differences at 3, 4, and 6 months in the D5W group (P < 0.05), as well as those at one, 3, and 4 months in the steroid group (P < 0.05). The D5W group exhibited greater improvement than the steroid group in VAS scores for MP and global quality of life at 4 and 6 months (P < 0.05), and demostrated a more successful clinical response at 6 months (P < 0.05). No adverse effects were reported in the D5W group during the study period, while 6 patients in the steroid group reported an adverse effect.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>A longer follow-up period is necessary; the exact mechanism of D5W is not clear.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ultrasound-guided perineural injection therapy of D5W is more beneficial than corticosteroid injection for MP at 4 to 6 months posttreatment. Additionally, D5W displays a better safety profile than corticosteroid. Thus, we suggest D5W as a more suitable injectate for patients with MP.</p>","PeriodicalId":19841,"journal":{"name":"Pain physician","volume":"27 8","pages":"E835-E842"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain physician","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Ultrasound-guided 5% dextrose (D5W) hydrodissection provides  favorable outcomes for treating peripheral entrapment neuropathies; its safety is well recognized. However, clinical evidence regarding the use of D5W hydrodissection for meralgia paresthetica (MP) is limited. Although corticosteroids are the most common injectates, the possible adverse effects are a big concern.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided D5W hydrodissection compared to corticosteroid hydrodissection in patients with MP during a 6-month follow-up period.

Study design: A prospective, randomized double-blind, controlled trial.

Setting: Outpatient clinic at a university hospital.

Methods: A total of 56 patients with MP were randomly allocated to either a D5W or steroid group in a 1:1 ratio. The patients received one session of ultrasound-guided perineural injection therapy of 10 mL D5W or a corticosteroid solution (1 mL compound betamethasone [1 mL: betamethasone sodium phosphate 5 mg and betamethasone dipropionate 2 mg] mixed with 5 mL 2% lidocaine and 4 mL 0.9% saline).The primary outcomes were Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for MP (pain and paresthesia) and global quality of life. The secondary outcomes included self-reported successful clinical response and injection adverse effects. Evaluations were conducted at pretreatment and at one, 3, 4 and 6 months posttreatment.

Results: All patients completed the study. Compared with baseline, both groups exhibited reductions in VAS scores for MP and global quality of life at all follow-up time points, with statistical differences at 3, 4, and 6 months in the D5W group (P < 0.05), as well as those at one, 3, and 4 months in the steroid group (P < 0.05). The D5W group exhibited greater improvement than the steroid group in VAS scores for MP and global quality of life at 4 and 6 months (P < 0.05), and demostrated a more successful clinical response at 6 months (P < 0.05). No adverse effects were reported in the D5W group during the study period, while 6 patients in the steroid group reported an adverse effect.

Limitations: A longer follow-up period is necessary; the exact mechanism of D5W is not clear.

Conclusions: Ultrasound-guided perineural injection therapy of D5W is more beneficial than corticosteroid injection for MP at 4 to 6 months posttreatment. Additionally, D5W displays a better safety profile than corticosteroid. Thus, we suggest D5W as a more suitable injectate for patients with MP.

5%葡萄糖与皮质类固醇水解剖治疗感觉异常痛的随机双盲试验。
背景:超声引导下5%葡萄糖(D5W)水解剖治疗周围神经压迫性病变效果良好;它的安全性是公认的。然而,关于使用D5W水解剖治疗感觉异常(MP)的临床证据有限。虽然皮质类固醇是最常见的注射剂,但可能产生的不良反应是一个大问题。目的:在6个月的随访期间,比较超声引导下的D5W水解剖与皮质类固醇水解剖对MP患者的疗效和安全性。研究设计:前瞻性、随机、双盲对照试验。地点:某大学附属医院门诊。方法:56例MP患者按1:1的比例随机分为D5W组和类固醇组。患者接受1次超声引导下神经周注射治疗,D5W 10 mL或皮质类固醇溶液(复方倍他米松1 mL [1 mL:倍他米松磷酸钠5 mg和二丙酸倍他米松2 mg]与2%利多卡因5 mL和0.9%生理盐水4 mL混合)。主要结局是MP(疼痛和感觉异常)的视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分和总体生活质量。次要结果包括自我报告的成功临床反应和注射不良反应。分别于治疗前和治疗后1、3、4、6个月进行评估。结果:所有患者均完成了研究。与基线相比,两组在所有随访时间点的MP和总体生活质量VAS评分均有所下降,D5W组在3、4和6个月时(P < 0.05),类固醇组在1、3和4个月时(P < 0.05)具有统计学差异。在4个月和6个月时,D5W组在MP和总体生活质量的VAS评分上比类固醇组有更大的改善(P < 0.05),在6个月时表现出更成功的临床反应(P < 0.05)。D5W组在研究期间无不良反应报告,而类固醇组有6例患者报告了不良反应。局限性:需要较长的随访期;D5W的确切机制尚不清楚。结论:超声引导下神经周注射D5W治疗MP后4 ~ 6个月优于皮质类固醇注射治疗。此外,D5W显示出比皮质类固醇更好的安全性。因此,我们建议D5W作为一种更适合MP患者的注射剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pain physician
Pain physician CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
21.60%
发文量
234
期刊介绍: Pain Physician Journal is the official publication of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP). The open access journal is published 6 times a year. Pain Physician Journal is a peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary, open access journal written by and directed to an audience of interventional pain physicians, clinicians and basic scientists with an interest in interventional pain management and pain medicine. Pain Physician Journal presents the latest studies, research, and information vital to those in the emerging specialty of interventional pain management – and critical to the people they serve.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信