Enhancing chronic back pain management: A comparative study of ultrasound-MRI fusion guidance for paravertebral nerve block.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Open Medicine Pub Date : 2025-08-19 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1515/med-2025-1147
Shuyao He, Yaona Xu, Bo Li, Ying Shi
{"title":"Enhancing chronic back pain management: A comparative study of ultrasound-MRI fusion guidance for paravertebral nerve block.","authors":"Shuyao He, Yaona Xu, Bo Li, Ying Shi","doi":"10.1515/med-2025-1147","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study examines the efficacy of ultrasound (US)-guided paravertebral nerve block (PVB) with and without MRI fusion for chronic back pain management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis of 20 patients, split into US-MRI fusion-guided (IF group, <i>n</i> = 10) and traditional US-guided (U group, <i>n</i> = 10) PVB, was conducted. Pain intensity, gabapentin dosage, procedure duration, and treatment efficacy were compared using numerical rating scale (NRS) scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An hour after receiving treatment, the IF group showed a marked reduction in NRS scores (2.2 ± 0.9), significantly lower than those observed in the U group (2.5 ± 1.0; <i>p</i> < 0.05). Nonetheless, the difference in average NRS scores between the groups was not statistically significant 7 days post-treatment (IF group, 3.5 ± 0.8; U group, 3.4 ± 1.3; <i>p</i> > 0.05). The U group reported four instances of transient dizziness and diminished limb muscle strength, lasting between 30 and 90 min, which naturally resolved without intervention. No significant adverse effects were noted in the IF group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Integrating US with MRI for PVB guidance emerges as a groundbreaking and efficacious strategy in chronic back pain treatment, showcasing significant improvements in safety and initial pain alleviation compared to the conventional use of US guidance alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":19715,"journal":{"name":"Open Medicine","volume":"20 1","pages":"20251147"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12413793/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/med-2025-1147","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study examines the efficacy of ultrasound (US)-guided paravertebral nerve block (PVB) with and without MRI fusion for chronic back pain management.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of 20 patients, split into US-MRI fusion-guided (IF group, n = 10) and traditional US-guided (U group, n = 10) PVB, was conducted. Pain intensity, gabapentin dosage, procedure duration, and treatment efficacy were compared using numerical rating scale (NRS) scores.

Results: An hour after receiving treatment, the IF group showed a marked reduction in NRS scores (2.2 ± 0.9), significantly lower than those observed in the U group (2.5 ± 1.0; p < 0.05). Nonetheless, the difference in average NRS scores between the groups was not statistically significant 7 days post-treatment (IF group, 3.5 ± 0.8; U group, 3.4 ± 1.3; p > 0.05). The U group reported four instances of transient dizziness and diminished limb muscle strength, lasting between 30 and 90 min, which naturally resolved without intervention. No significant adverse effects were noted in the IF group.

Conclusions: Integrating US with MRI for PVB guidance emerges as a groundbreaking and efficacious strategy in chronic back pain treatment, showcasing significant improvements in safety and initial pain alleviation compared to the conventional use of US guidance alone.

加强慢性背痛管理:超声- mri融合引导椎旁神经阻滞的比较研究。
目的:本研究探讨超声(US)引导下椎旁神经阻滞(PVB)合并和不合并MRI融合治疗慢性背痛的疗效。方法:回顾性分析20例患者,分为US-MRI融合引导(IF组,n = 10)和传统US-MRI引导(U组,n = 10) PVB。采用数值评定量表(NRS)对疼痛强度、加巴喷丁剂量、手术持续时间和治疗效果进行比较。结果:治疗1 h后,IF组NRS评分明显降低(2.2±0.9)分,显著低于U组(2.5±1.0,p < 0.05)。治疗后7 d,两组间NRS平均评分差异无统计学意义(IF组,3.5±0.8;U组,3.4±1.3;p < 0.05)。U组报告了四例短暂头晕和肢体肌肉力量减弱的情况,持续30至90分钟,无需干预即可自然消退。干扰素组未见明显不良反应。结论:将超声与MRI相结合用于PVB引导是治疗慢性背痛的一种开创性和有效的策略,与传统的单独使用超声引导相比,在安全性和初始疼痛缓解方面有显著改善。
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
Open Medicine
Open Medicine Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
153
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Open Medicine is an open access journal that provides users with free, instant, and continued access to all content worldwide. The primary goal of the journal has always been a focus on maintaining the high quality of its published content. Its mission is to facilitate the exchange of ideas between medical science researchers from different countries. Papers connected to all fields of medicine and public health are welcomed. Open Medicine accepts submissions of research articles, reviews, case reports, letters to editor and book reviews.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信