Periradicular therapy in lumbar radicular syndromes: Methodology and results

1997 ◽  
Vol 139 (8) ◽  
pp. 719-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Lutze ◽  
R. Stendel ◽  
J. Vesper ◽  
M. Brock
Keyword(s):  
Periradicular Therapy

scholarly journals The physician as a success determining factor in CT-guided pain therapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph A. Stueckle ◽  
Benedikt Hackert ◽  
Sarah Talarczyk ◽  
Martin Wawro ◽  
Patrick Haage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Pain Therapy ◽  
Trial Registration ◽  
Visual Analogue Pain Scale ◽  
Additional Time ◽  
Pain Group ◽  
Ct Guided ◽  
Visual Analogue Pain ◽  
Periradicular Therapy

Abstract Background Back pain is a common problem and a burden for the patient. MR-morphologically proven pain-causing changes of the spine is often successfully treated utilizing CT-guided pain therapy. The CT-guided execution enables a controlled and reproducible therapy. Nevertheless, treatment results can differ even with the same patient; the physician is a possible influencing factor of the outcome. Accordingly, the present study analyzes the different behaviors and forms of communication of the treating physicians during the course of the intervention as factors influencing the outcome of treatment. Methods 67 patients suffering from specific back pain were included in this study. 5 treating physicians (2 female, 3 male) of different age (29–63 years), and experience and a total of 244 CT-guided treatments were included in this study. In every case a psychologist observed the treatment based on a standardized observation protocol. Observed were both the verbal and non-verbal interactions as well as the reaction of patient and physician. The success of the therapy was measured in the course of the treatment using the visual analogue pain scale. The technical comparability of the performed CT-guided periradicular therapy was ensured by the distribution of the drug mixture. Results The outcome is significantly better if the patient considers the treating physician to be competent (correlation coefficient: 0.24, p < 0.006) and feels understood (correlation coefficient: 0.29, p < 0.001). In addition, the outcome is better when the physician believes that the treatment brings a positive reduction of pain, underlining his belief with positive statements of affirmation before the intervention thus creating a positive atmosphere [correlation coefficient: 0.24 (p < 0.009)]. In contrast, the outcome is worse if the patient complains about pain during the intervention [average pain reduction M = 0.9 (pain group) vs. M = 2.0 (no-pain group)]. Conclusion Our study shows that with comparable implementation of CT-guided periradicular therapy, the outcome of the patient with specific back pain can be significantly improved by certain behavioral patterns of the performing physician and this without side effects and without significant additional time expenditure. Our findings indicate that there is a non-negligible psychological factor linking confidence in therapy to actual therapy success. Trial Registration: The study was designed as an observational study, therefore a trial registration was not necessary.

scholarly journals CT-guided Interventional Therapy of Back Pain – Predictors of Success in Treatment

2020 ◽  
Vol 193 (01) ◽  
pp. 42-48
Author(s):  
Christoph Alexander Stueckle ◽  
Sarah Talarczyk ◽  
Benedikt Hackert ◽  
Martin Wawro ◽  
Patrick Haage ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pain Score ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Drug Distribution ◽  
Interventional Therapy ◽  
Relative Distribution ◽  
Ct Guided ◽  
Drug Mixture ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Reduction Of Pain ◽  
Periradicular Therapy

Purpose The aim of the presented study was to investigate if distribution of the drug-contrast medium mixture in CT-guided periradicular therapy can predict intervention success. Materials and Methods Over a 15-month period, 97 patients admitted to our institution by a pain physician for CT guided periradicular therapy were treated. In 420 CT guided interventions, we measured the relative distribution of the drug mixture in relationship to the neuroforamen. The distribution was correlated to the patient’s pain score over time. In addition, dependence of success in treatment with regards to the treating physician was evaluated. Results Ninety percent of the patients experienced a decrease of pain score under therapy, only 10 % showed no change. On average there was an improvement in pain score from 7.4 (2–10) before therapy to 3.7 (0–9) at the end of therapy. We observed a weak correlation of –0.22 (p < 0.028) between distribution of drug mixture to the neuroforamen and reduction of pain score. The therapy outcome displayed a dependency regarding the treating physician (p < 0.0084). Conclusion CT guided periradicular therapy offers good pain reduction in most of the patients. Drug distribution near the affected nerve and treating physician are factors for clinical success. Key Points:  Citation Format

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document