Efficacy of local anaesthetic and steroid combination in prevention of post-herpetic neuralgia: A meta-analysis
Objective: The objective was to provide synthesized evidence on the efficacy of local anaesthetics and steroid injections for prevention and management of PHN, compared to the standard treatment using anti-viral and analgesic medications. The primary outcomes of interest were incidence of PHN and duration of neuralgic pain.
Methods: Comprehensive searches were done systematically through PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google scholar databases. Randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of local anaesthetics and steroid injections for preventing and managing PHN were included for this meta-analysis. A comprehensive search was done for papers published until 15th July 2021.
Results: A total of 10 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. In the overall pooled analyses, compared to standard care/placebo, those receiving a combination of local anaesthetic and steroid injection had 55% lower risk of PHN at 3 months from onset of rash (RR 0.45; 95% CI, 0.29; 0.70). Out of the different modes of intervention delivery i.e., intravenous, subcutaneous and nerve block, maximum beneficial effect in reducing the incidence of PHN was noted in nerve block (RR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.34, 0.89).
Conclusions: The meta-analysis provides some evidence to support the use of combined local anaesthetic and steroids in reducing risk of post-herpetic neuralgia and duration of neuralgic pain in patients with herpes zoster rash.
How to cite this:
Zhang X, Wang Z, Xian Y. Efficacy of local anaesthetic and steroid combination in prevention of post-herpetic neuralgia: A meta-analysis. Pak J Med Sci. 2022;38(3):757-765. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.38.3.5140
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.