Search

Background: To date, there have been no studies on the dynamics of areas of pain, paraesthesia and hypoesthesia after the use of various transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in the treatment of meralgia paresthetica. Methods: In this pilot study, we observed 68 patients with obesity-related bilateral meralgia paresthetica. Pain syndrome, paraesthesia symptoms, and hypoesthesia were evaluated using 10-point scores. In addition, pain drawing (PD) was used to determine the area of the spatial distribution of pain syndrome and paraesthesia symptoms, and body drawing was used to determine the area of hypoesthesia. Sham TENS was performed in the control group, and effective TENS was performed in the treatment group. The treatment group consisted of two subgroups. One subgroup underwent HF-LA TENS, and the second subgroup underwent LF-HA TENS. Results: Despite the greatest analgesic effect observed from HF-LA TENS, which was assessed using scoring methods, during and after treatment, the reduction in the area of pain and paraesthesia symptoms and the area of hypoesthesia was moderate, short-term, and reversible. In contrast, LF-HA TENS had a pronounced analgesic and sustained anti-paraesthesia effect, manifested by a noticeable decrease in pain and paraesthesia symptoms area in PD, gradually increasing during the first 2 months of follow-up and accompanied by an irreversible prolonged decrease in the area of hypoesthesia. Conclusion: The areas of paraesthesia and hypoesthesia correlate with affective reactions to long-term chronic pain, which noticeably regress under the influence of LF-HA TENS compared to HF-LA TENS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Despite the long-term use of intramuscular and intraosseous lidocaine trigger point injections (LTPI) in the treatment of patients with low back pain, there have been no studies examining their efficiency in treatment of residual pain after degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) decompression surgery. The purpose of our research is to examine the LTPI efficiency in the treatment of residual lumbar pain after DLSS decompression surgery and to compare the analgesic and recovery effects of intramuscular and intraosseous LTPI administered in the L4–S1 region and in the posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) after treatment and during four months of follow-up. Materials and Methods: We observed 99 patients (F:50, M:49) aged 42 to 59 years with residual neurological disorders after DLSS decompression surgery. In all patients, the pain syndrome exceeded 6 points on the VAS and averaged 7.2 ± 0.11 points. The control group (n = 21) underwent only pharmacotherapy. In addition to pharmacotherapy, the LTPI group underwent intramuscular LTPI in L4–S1 (n = 20), intramuscular LTPI in the PSIS (n = 19), intraosseous LTPI in L5, S1 (n = 20), and intraosseous LTPI in the PSIS (n = 19). A neurological examination was carried out before treatment, 7 days after completion of treatment, and at the end of the second and fourth months of the follow-up period. Results: In the control group, intramuscular LTPI in L4–S1 subgroup, intramuscular LTPI in PSIS subgroup, intraosseous LTPI in L5, S1 subgroup, and intraosseous LTPI in PSIS subgroup, the severity of pain decreased after treatment by 27.1% (p ≤ 0.05), 41.7% (p ≤ 0.01), 50.7% (p ≤ 0.01), 69% (p ≤ 0.01), and 84.7% (p ≤ 0.01), respectively, and at the end of the second month of follow-up, by 14.3% (p > 1), 29.2% (p ≤ 0.05), 38% (p ≤ 0.01), 53.5% (p ≤ 0.01), and 72.2% (p ≤ 0.01), respectively. Reduction of neurogenic claudication, regression of sensory deficit, increase of daily step activity, and improvement of quality of life after treatment were noted in intramuscular LTPI subgroups by 19.6% (p ≤ 0.05), 36.4 (p ≤ 0.05), 40.3% (p ≤ 0.01), and 21.0% (p ≤ 0.05), respectively, and in interosseous LTPI subgroups by 48.6% (p ≤ 0.01), 67.4% (p ≤ 0.01), 68.3% (p ≤ 0.01), and 46% (p ≤ 0.01), respectively. Conclusions: LTPI is highly effective in the treatment of patients with residual pain after DLSS decompression surgery. High analgesic effect, significant regression of sensory deficits and gait disorders, and remarkable improvement of daily step activity and quality of life are noted not only after the end of LTPI treatment but also continue for at least 2 months after treatment. Intraosseous LTPI is more effective than intramuscular LTPI by 92%, and LTPI in PSIS is more effective than LTPI in L4–S1 by 28.6%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]