Peripheral nerve field stimulation successfully manages axial pain after posterior cervical spine surgery: case report

Efficacy of Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation for the Management of Chronic Low Back Pain and Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome: A Narrative Review

OBJECTIVES

Various approaches have been developed with a view to treating the back pain component in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS). Emerging evidence shows that peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) may be an efficacious therapeutic modality against axial low back pain. Hence, the aim of the review was to evaluate the analgesic efficacy and safety of PNFS, when used alone or as an adjunct to spinal cord stimulation (SCS), for managing CLBP and PSPS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search for clinical studies on PNFS and PNFS + SCS used for the management of CLBP and/or PSPS was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE via Proquest, and Web of Science.

RESULTS

A total of 15 studies were included, of which four were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), nine were observational studies, and two were case series. For patients receiving PNFS, a significant decrease in back pain intensity and analgesic consumption, together with a significant improvement in physical functioning, was observed upon implant of the permanent system. Meanwhile, the addition of PNFS to SCS in refractory cases was associated with a significant reduction in back and leg pain, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that PNFS, when used alone or in combination with SCS, appears to be effective in managing back pain. However, high-quality evidence that supports the long-term analgesic efficacy and safety is still lacking. Hence, RCTs with a larger patient population and of a longer follow-up duration are warranted.

Acupuncture and moxibustion combined with cupping for the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There are still controversies between the curative effect of acupuncture combined with cupping therapy and western medicine for post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN). Our meta-analysis fully incorporates the research of acupuncture combined with cupping therapy versus Western medicine for PHN, aiming to explore the difference in the efficacy of the 2 therapies, so as to provide guidance for clinical treatment.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, CQVIP, CBM, from establishment of the database to September, 2020. Include studies that are clearly defined as PHN or herpes zoster, and exclude duplicate publications; studies with no full text, incomplete information, or inability to extract data; the definition of exposure is quite different from most literature; animal experiments.

RESULTS

The total effective rate (relative ratio [RR] = 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-1.31) and the rate of remarkable effect (RR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.30-1.63) of acupuncture and moxibustion combined with cupping in the treatment of PHN were significantly higher than that of conventional western medicine. The visual analogue scale score of acupuncture and moxibustion combined with cupping for PHN was significantly lower than that of conventional western medicine treatment (WMD = -1.77, 95% CI [-2.79, -0.75]). In addition, acupuncture and moxibustion combined with cupping therapy significantly reduced the occurrence of PHN compared with conventional western medicine treatment after treatment of acute herpes zoster (RR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.20-0.45). In order to explore the differences in the efficacy and preventive effects of different types of acupuncture and cupping therapy, we have further conducted a subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSION

The effect of acupuncture and moxibustion combined with cupping in the treatment of PHN is significantly higher than that of conventional western medicine, and it can significantly prevent the occurrence of PHN. Chinese medicine should be used more widely in the treatment of PHN.