{"title":"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。","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":"{\"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}","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}
Enhancing chronic back pain management: A comparative study of ultrasound-MRI fusion guidance for paravertebral nerve block.
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.
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.