Observational studyMedicine2019
Comparison of the efficacy of continuous epidural block with epidural electrical stimulation and conventional continuous epidural block for management of zoster-associated pain beyond the acute phase: A retrospective study.
Observational study in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transforaminal Epidural Block and Erector Spinae Plane Block to Manage Acute Zoster-Associated Pain: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Analysis of Risk Factors and Construction of a Prediction Model of Motor Dysfunction Caused by Limb Herpes Zoster.Journal of pain research · 2022Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Continuous epidural block (CEB) is a popular clinical method for controlling postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). However, the long-term effects of CEB on PHN have not yet been established. This study aimed to confirm the clinical efficacy of epidural electrical stimulation catheters in CEB to manage PHN.Patients were classified into 2 groups: those with subacute PHN, between 30 and 180 days after the onset of the rash; and those with chronic PHN, over 180 days after the onset of the rash. On the basis of the type of catheter used, the patients were further divided into the following 2 groups: the esopocan group, in which the site of herpes zoster infection was confirmed using a contrast medium alone; and the epistim group, in which an additional method of electrical stimulation through a guide-wire in the catheter was used for detecting the site affected by herpes. Clinical efficacy was assessed with a numerical rating scale immediately 1, 3, and 6 months after the procedure. We also investigated whether additional interventional treatment was necessitated because of insufficient pain control during the 6-month follow-up.We examined 88 patients. In the subacute PHN period, the numerical rating scale score was significantly lower in the epistim group than in the esopocan group until 6 months. In the chronic PHN period, no significant differences in the numerical rating scale scores were observed between the 2 groups until 6 months. In the subacute PHN period, the adjusted odds ratio for other interventional procedures within 6 months in the esopocan group versus the epistim group was 2.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83-8.09, P = .10), and in the chronic PHN period, it was 1.31 (95% CI 0.11-5.46, P = .79).Epidural drug administration to specific segments using electrical stimulation catheters may be more useful in mitigating zoster-associated pain in subacute PHN.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.