ArticlePain and therapy2024
Effect of CT-Guided Repeated Pulsed Radiofrequency on Controlling Acute/Subacute Zoster-Associated Pain: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Pain and therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Efficacy of Short-Term Spinal Cord Stimulation for Subacute Zoster-Associated Pain: A Three-Group Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.Pain and therapy · 2026Article
- Effects of Esketamine Infusion by Patient-Controlled Intravenous Analgesia in Patients With Zoster-Associated Pain: A Retrospective Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Design of Immersive Virtual Reality Systems and Their Application in Zoster-Associated Pain Following Pulsed Radiofrequency Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
- Comparative efficacy and safety of pulsed radiofrequency versus spinal cord stimulation in thoracic herpes zoster pain: a retrospective study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The efficacy and prognosis analysis of short-term spinal cord stimulation in the treatment of zoster-associated pain: a retrospective study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Pulsed Radiofrequency Relieves Neuropathic Pain by Repairing the Ultrastructural Damage of Chronically Compressed Dorsal Root Ganglion.Neuroscience insights · 2025Article
- Outcomes of Twice Repeated High-Voltage Long-Duration Pulsed Radiofrequency Treatment in Subacute Postherpetic Neuralgia: a Retrospective Single-Center Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2024Article
- Ultrasound combined with DSA-guided pulsed radiofrequency for perineal herpes zoster pain management: clinical outcomes and complications.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionZoster-associated pain (ZAP) treatment and management is still inadequate. Repeated intervention protocol is often applied to manage ZAP. This study aimed to retrospectively investigate the effect of repeated applications of pulsed radiofrequency therapy on controlling acute/subacute ZAP.
methodsFrom March 2019 to December 2021, 150 patients with acute/subacute ZAP who underwent repeated application of pulsed radiofrequency treatment (R-PRF) and pulsed radiofrequency combined paravertebral block interventions (PRF + PVB) in the Pain Department of the affiliated Hospital of Jiaxing University were enrolled. Patients were grouped by intervention protocol and received at least 12 months of follow-up assessments using the Numerical Rating Scale score (NRSs), Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Simple McGill Pain Questionnaire-2 score (SF-MPQ-2s), and follow-up interventions.
resultsBoth groups experienced a reduction in the incidence of clinically meaningful ZAP after the intervention therapy. In the R-PRF group, there were 36 cases of clinically meaningful ZAP within the first month post-treatment, while the PRF + PVB group had 38 cases. The incidence of clinically meaningful ZAP, as determined by multivariable generalized estimating equations, was 42.86% in the R-PRF group and 57.58% in the PRF + PVB group during the first month of follow-up. There was a significant difference in the incidence of clinically meaningful ZAP between the two groups after 1 month of treatment (adjusted odds ratio: 0.40; 95% confidence interval: 0.18-0.91; p = 0.03).
conclusionsBoth R-PRF and PRF + PVB treatments effectively relieve pain in patients with acute/subacute ZAP. However, R-PRF may have superior efficacy compared to PRF + PVB in reducing the incidence of clinically meaningful ZAP 1 month after treatment.
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.