Stellate Ganglion Block for the Management of Long COVID Symptoms: A Retrospective Cohort Study, 2025, Chiang et al

[forestglip]

Stellate Ganglion Block for the Management of Long COVID Symptoms: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Michael C. Chiang • Kathryn M. Satko • Christina Shin • Beau P. Sperry • Meghan L. Cabral • Zack Crockett • Richard Gao • Robert J. Yong • Samuel P. Ang • Stacey L. Burns • Alexander J. Kim

[Line breaks added]

Introduction
The efficacy of stellate ganglion block (SGB) for managing post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC) remains an area of active exploration. In this study, we performed a retrospective analysis of PASC symptom improvements following SGB.

Methods
We performed a retrospective, survey-based cohort study at a single institution of patients with a history of PASC who underwent SGB at one of three different sites within Boston, MA, USA, between September 2022 and September 2024. The intervention was outpatient, office-based, with one or more unilateral SGBs.

Results
Fifty-two patients were included in the analysis. On average, patients underwent three SGB injections.

Most patients reported improvement in PASC symptoms after SGB treatment. The most commonly reported symptoms that showed improvement were brain fog, fatigue, dizziness, and headache.

A quarter of patients reported experiencing at least one adverse effect that was mostly short-lived.

Conclusion
SGB reduced the severity of many PASC symptoms, although there was high variability in the duration of symptom improvement. Further high-quality randomized clinical trials are warranted to investigate SGBs for the effective treatment of PASC.

Web | PDF | Cureus | Open Access

 

[Utsikt]

«We’ve been treating patients for many years with an expensive and potentially fatal intervention with no proof of efficacy».

Only 52 of 102 patients participated in the survey.

They were asked to rate everything retrospectively, including their baseline.

No change in reported PEM, which half of the participants experienced.

Three participants experienced worsened PEM for weeks to months.

Future prospective cohort studies may incorporate a control group, randomization, blinding, larger sample sizes, and standardized evaluation times to better characterize the efficacy of SGB treatments on PASC symptomatology.

They seem to understand the limitations of this study, yet they talk of causation and improvements in the abstract:

SGB reduced the severity of many PASC symptoms, although there was high variability in the duration of symptom improvement.

There are no discussions about the possibility that this might be all expectation bias and essentially placebo.

I assume they intend to continue enriching themselves by providing unevidenced, dangerous and expensive treatments to desperate patients. Shame on them.