Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Temporary Spinal Cord Stimulation versus Pulsed Radiofrequency for Postherpetic Neuralgia: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.
Xiaohong Li, Pan Chen, Jian He, Xiang Huang, Dacheng Tang, Lumiao Chen, Xiaoping Wang
{"title":"Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Temporary Spinal Cord Stimulation versus Pulsed Radiofrequency for Postherpetic Neuralgia: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Xiaohong Li, Pan Chen, Jian He, Xiang Huang, Dacheng Tang, Lumiao Chen, Xiaoping Wang","doi":"10.1155/2022/3880424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this study is to compare the safety and effectiveness of the temporary spinal cord stimulation (SCS) versus pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) in treating postherpetic neuralgia (PHN).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From September 1, 2019, to May 30, 2020, 44 PHN patients admitted to the Pain Department of the Foshan First People's Hospital, China were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomly assigned to SCS and PRF groups in a ratio of 1 : 1 and were given respective therapy for 8 days. Rash, in all patients, was located in the trunk and extremities of the spinal nerve (C4-L5), and the pain intensity was greater than or equal to 7 points on the VAS scale. Subsequently, we evaluated the visual analogue scale (VAS), efficiency rate (ER), complete remission rate (CRR), daily sleep interference score (SIS), patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9), generalized anxiety disorder assessment (GAD-7), bodily pain (BP), and physical function (PF) sections of the 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) at the following time points: presurgery, as well as 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months postsurgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final analysis was performed on 40 patients (<i>n</i> = 20 SCS cohort, and <i>n</i> = 20 PRF cohort). Both cohorts exhibited comparable baseline values (<i>P</i> > 0 : 05). Particularly, they were similar in age, sex, pain duration, involved dermatome, and comorbidity. Among the variables that demonstrated marked improvements from presurgical data to 1 week postsurgery were VAS, ER, CRR, SIS, PHQ-9, GAD-7, as well as BP and PF of the SF-36 in both cohorts. In addition, this improvement persisted for 6 months. There was no complication related to surgery in any of our patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on our analysis, SCS exhibited better efficacy and safety than PRF. This study was prospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100050647).</p>","PeriodicalId":19913,"journal":{"name":"Pain Research & Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9578922/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Research & Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3880424","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study is to compare the safety and effectiveness of the temporary spinal cord stimulation (SCS) versus pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) in treating postherpetic neuralgia (PHN).
Methods: From September 1, 2019, to May 30, 2020, 44 PHN patients admitted to the Pain Department of the Foshan First People's Hospital, China were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomly assigned to SCS and PRF groups in a ratio of 1 : 1 and were given respective therapy for 8 days. Rash, in all patients, was located in the trunk and extremities of the spinal nerve (C4-L5), and the pain intensity was greater than or equal to 7 points on the VAS scale. Subsequently, we evaluated the visual analogue scale (VAS), efficiency rate (ER), complete remission rate (CRR), daily sleep interference score (SIS), patient health questionnaire (PHQ-9), generalized anxiety disorder assessment (GAD-7), bodily pain (BP), and physical function (PF) sections of the 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) at the following time points: presurgery, as well as 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months postsurgery.
Results: The final analysis was performed on 40 patients (n = 20 SCS cohort, and n = 20 PRF cohort). Both cohorts exhibited comparable baseline values (P > 0 : 05). Particularly, they were similar in age, sex, pain duration, involved dermatome, and comorbidity. Among the variables that demonstrated marked improvements from presurgical data to 1 week postsurgery were VAS, ER, CRR, SIS, PHQ-9, GAD-7, as well as BP and PF of the SF-36 in both cohorts. In addition, this improvement persisted for 6 months. There was no complication related to surgery in any of our patients.
Conclusion: Based on our analysis, SCS exhibited better efficacy and safety than PRF. This study was prospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100050647).
期刊介绍：
Pain Research and Management is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies in all areas of pain management.
The most recent Impact Factor for Pain Research and Management is 1.685 according to the 2015 Journal Citation Reports released by Thomson Reuters in 2016.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
