Erector Spinae Plane Block Versus Transcutaneous Radiofrequency in Postherpetic Neuralgia

February 23, 2026 updated by: Damla Yürük, Diskapi Teaching and Research Hospital

Which Is More Effective in the Treatment of Postherpetic Neuralgia: Erector Spinae Plane Block or Transcutaneous Radiofrequency?

This observational study aims to compare the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane (ESP) block and transcutaneous radiofrequency (RF) treatment in patients with postherpetic neuralgia. Pain intensity and neuropathic pain characteristics will be evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Self-Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-LANSS) score.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Recruiting

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Postherpetic neuralgia is a challenging neuropathic pain condition that significantly affects quality of life. In routine clinical practice, patients are treated with either ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block or transcutaneous radiofrequency therapy based on clinician preference and experience.

This observational study includes patients who have already completed one of these treatments as part of standard care in the Algology Clinic. No randomization or modification of treatment plans was performed for research purposes. Patients will be divided into two cohorts according to the treatment they received. Treatment outcomes will be retrospectively evaluated and compared using VAS and S-LANSS scores before treatment, immediately after treatment, and at 1-month follow-up.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Estimated)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
50

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact

The name and contact information for the person who can answer enrollment questions for a clinical study. Each location where the study is being conducted may also have a specific contact, who may be better able to answer those questions.

Study Locations

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Patients aged 18 to 80 years diagnosed with postherpetic neuralgia involving cervical, thoracic, or lumbar dermatomes who underwent either ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block or transcutaneous radiofrequency treatment as part of routine clinical care. Patients were included if they had persistent pain despite conservative treatment and a baseline Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score greater than 5. All treatments were completed prior to study enrollment, and no changes were made to clinical management for research purposes.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

Diagnosis of postherpetic neuralgia involving cervical, thoracic, or lumbar regions

Age between 18 and 80 years

Persistent pain despite conservative treatment

Baseline VAS score > 5

Exclusion Criteria:

Ophthalmic or extremity postherpetic neuralgia

Allergy to local anesthetics

Pregnancy

Coagulopathy or use of antiplatelet therapy

Cognitive impairment preventing informed consent

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort

Group / Cohort

A group or subgroup of participants in an observational study that is assessed for biomedical or health outcomes.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Erector Spinae Plane Block
Patients with postherpetic neuralgia who received ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block as part of routine clinical care.
Procedure: Erector Spinae Plane Block
  1. Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block performed under sterile conditions as part of routine clinical care. After skin antisepsis, a 22-G spinal needle was advanced to the erector spinae plane at the level corresponding to the affected dermatome, and a total volume of 10 mL consisting of dexamethasone, bupivacaine, and normal saline was injected. Patients were observed post-procedure according to standard clinical practice.
  2. Transcutaneous radiofrequency treatment applied adjacent to the affected dermatome as part of routine clinical care. Adhesive surface electrodes were placed over the painful area, and pulsed electrical stimulation was delivered by the device for 10 minutes per session. The procedure was performed once weekly for two sessions, without any modification for research purposes.
Other Names:
  • Transcutaneous Radiofrequency
Transcutaneous Radiofrequency
Patients with postherpetic neuralgia who received transcutaneous radiofrequency treatment applied adjacent to the lesion area as part of routine clinical care
Procedure: Erector Spinae Plane Block
  1. Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block performed under sterile conditions as part of routine clinical care. After skin antisepsis, a 22-G spinal needle was advanced to the erector spinae plane at the level corresponding to the affected dermatome, and a total volume of 10 mL consisting of dexamethasone, bupivacaine, and normal saline was injected. Patients were observed post-procedure according to standard clinical practice.
  2. Transcutaneous radiofrequency treatment applied adjacent to the affected dermatome as part of routine clinical care. Adhesive surface electrodes were placed over the painful area, and pulsed electrical stimulation was delivered by the device for 10 minutes per session. The procedure was performed once weekly for two sessions, without any modification for research purposes.
Other Names:
  • Transcutaneous Radiofrequency

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
VAS
Time Frame: Baseline, post-procedure 1 month
Pain intensity assessed by Visual Analog Scale (VAS): is a simple tool used in clinical trials to measure pain intensity. Patients rate their pain on a scale, typically from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). It provides a quick, quantitative assessment of subjective pain and is commonly used to evaluate treatment effectiveness before and after intervention.
Baseline, post-procedure 1 month

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
S-LANSS
Time Frame: Baseline, post-procedure 1 month
Neuropathic pain characteristics were assessed using the Self-report Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-LANSS) questionnaire. The S-LANSS is a validated self-administered screening tool consisting of seven items evaluating pain quality and sensory abnormalities, including burning sensation, electric shock-like pain, dysesthesia, and altered skin sensitivity. Total scores range from 0 to 24, with scores ≥12 indicating a probable neuropathic pain component. The questionnaire has demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity for identifying neuropathic pain in both clinical and research settings.
Baseline, post-procedure 1 month

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Diskapi Teaching and Research Hospital

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: AYSE BETUL ACAR, Diskapi TRH

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
June 1, 2025

Primary Completion (Estimated)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
June 1, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
October 1, 2026

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
February 3, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
February 3, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
February 10, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
February 25, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
February 23, 2026

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
February 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • ESP Block & Transcutaneous PRF

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Neuropathic Pain

Clinical Trials on Erector Spinae Plane Block

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings