ArticleInterventional pain medicine2025
Effectiveness of paravertebral block in patients with herpes zoster according to the contrast spreading pattern: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Interventional pain medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the treatment response to thoracic paravertebral block (PVB) in thoracic herpes zoster (HZ) pain based on the contrast spreading pattern. Methods: Patients with HZ pain who underwent thoracic PVB under fluoroscopy were retrospectively analyzed. A comparative analysis of the treatment response was conducted between patients with epidural spread (ES group) and those without epidural spread (NES group) at the first visit after PVB. The treatment response was determined by setting the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) as a reduction of more than 1 point on the pain numerical rating scale (NRS). In addition, the treatment responses were compared according to prevertebral spread, intercostal spread, and segmented medial spread (base, foraminal, and subarticular-central spread). The NRS score was assessed at baseline and 3 days, 2 weeks, 1 and month after PVB. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the treatment response over time. Results: In total, 48 patients were enrolled (ES, n = 21; NES, n = 27). The ES group had a higher proportion of patients with the treatment response than the NES group ( Conclusions: Patients with HZ pain who had epidural spread in PVB showed a better treatment response than those who did not at the first post-PVB assessment. Other spreading patterns did not have a significant effect on the treatment response. NRS decreased over time with no differences between groups. Only the duration after rash onset affected the longitudinal treatment response. Additional research is required to verify the efficacy of epidural spread in PVB.
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.