The Outcome of Pulsed Radiofrequency Treatment According to Electodiagnosis in Patients with Intractable Lumbosacral Radicular Pain

Pain Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (9) ◽  
pp. 1697-1701
Author(s):  
Chan Hong Park ◽  
Sang Ho Lee
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Numeric Rating Scale ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Spinal Nerve ◽  
Pulsed Radiofrequency ◽  
Pulsed Radiofrequency Treatment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Group 2

AbstractBackgroundRadicular pain is related to lesions that either directly compromise the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) or indirectly compromise the spinal nerve and its roots by causing ischemia or inflammation of the axons.ObjectiveOur study aimed to assess the outcomes of pulsed readiofrequency treatment (PRF) according to electrodiagnosis results in patients with chronic intractable lumbosacral radicular pain.MethodsA total of 82 failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) patients were included in this study. All of them underwent electromyography/nerve conduction studies before pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment at the DRG, and they were classified according to the electrodiagnostic results as: group 1, no definite finding (normal); group 2, radiculopathy; and group 3, neuropathy. Pain intensity was assessed according to a numeric rating scale score and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) before treatment and at one, three, six, and 12 months after treatment, and successful treatment was defined as a pain score reduction of ≥50% at 12 months, as compared with the pretreatment score.ResultsPretreatment electrodiagnosis identified 28 patients with no definite findings, 31 patients with radiculopathy, and 23 patients with neuropathy. The patients with neuropathy had less pain relief after treatment than those with no definite findings and those with radiculopathy. The prevalence of pain reduction of at least 50% was lower in the neuropathy group than in the other groups. There was no statistically significant difference in ODI between group.ConclusionOutcomes after PRF at the DRG did not show strong differences according to electrodiagnostic findings in FBSS patients with chronic intractable lumbosacral radicular pain.

Comparison between ultrasound-guided monopolar and bipolar pulsed radiofrequency treatment for refractory chronic cervical radicular pain: A randomized trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Sang Hoon Lee ◽  
Hyun Hee Choi ◽  
Min Cheol Chang
Keyword(s):  
Pain Relief ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Cervical Radiculopathy ◽  
Numeric Rating Scale ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Pulsed Radiofrequency ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Pulsed Radiofrequency Treatment ◽  
Epidural Steroid ◽  
Positive Effect

BACKGROUND: Many patients complain of chronic cervical radicular pain, and pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) is known to have a positive effect for alleviating neuropathic pain. OBJECTIVES: In the present study, we used ultrasound (US) guidance and compared the effects of monopolar PRF with those of bipolar PRF in patients with chronic cervical radicular pain refractory to repeated transforaminal epidural steroid injections. METHODS: Sixty-six patients with chronic cervical radicular pain were included in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to one of the two groups: monopolar or bipolar PRF group (n= 33 per group). Pain intensity was evaluated using a numeric rating scale (NRS) at pretreatment, and at 1 and 3 months after the treatment. Target stimulation site was the extraforaminal nerve root. RESULTS: Compared to the pretreatment NRS scores, patients in both groups showed a significant decrease in NRS scores at 1 and 3 months after the treatment. Reductions in the NRS scores over time were significantly larger in the bipolar PRF group. Three months after the treatment, 18 patients (54.5%) in the monopolar PRF group and 27 (81.8%) in the bipolar PRF group reported successful pain relief (pain relief of ⩾50%). CONCLUSIONS: US-guided PRF can be an effective interventional technique for the management of chronic refractory cervical radiculopathy. Moreover, bipolar PRF has better treatment outcome than monopolar PRF.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcome of Pulsed-Radiofrequency Combined With Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection for Lumbosacral Radicular Pain Caused by Distinct Etiology

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liuqing Yang ◽  
Yuzhao Huang ◽  
Jiahui Ma ◽  
Zhenxing Li ◽  
Rui Han ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Pulsed Radiofrequency ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Back Surgery ◽  
Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Epidural Steroid

BackgroundLumbosacral radicular pain (LSRP) can be caused by disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and failed back surgery syndrome. The clinical effect of pulsed-radiofrequency (PRF) combined with transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TESI) for radiating pain in different population remains unclear.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical recordings of patients with LSRP caused by different etiologies, who underwent PRF and TESI treatment. The primary clinical outcome was assessed by a 10-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pre- and post-treatment.ResultsA total of 34 LSRP patients were identified and classified into 3 subgroups (disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and failed back surgery syndrome). The overall immediate pain reduction was 4.4 ± 1.1 after procedure. After a median follow-up of 9.5 months, the VAS decreased from 6.5 ± 1.0 to 2.4 ± 1.9 at the last follow-up.ConclusionPRF combined with TESI is an effective approach to treat persistent LSRP in distinct population.

scholarly journals Transforaminal Epiduroscopy in Patients with Failed Back Surgery Syndrome

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (22;1) ◽  
pp. 89-95
Author(s):  
Martín Avellanal
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Numeric Rating Scale ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Transforaminal Approach ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Back Surgery

Background: Epiduroscopy is a useful diagnostic and therapeutic tool for managing failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). The conventional approach is via either the sacral hiatus or the interlaminar. Major causes of FBSS include epidural fibrosis, disc herniation, and stenosis. When these problems are located at the intervertebral foramen level, it can be difficult to reach the lateral recess and the foramen with the epiduroscope. Transforaminal epiduroscopy could be a useful alternative approach in patients with FBSS located at the foraminal level. Objective: We present a new procedure for lumbar epiduroscopy via a transforaminal approach and its application in patients with FBSS. The technique is described and long-term results are reported. Study Design: This study used a single-arm prospective observational design. Setting: The research took place at the University Hospital in Spain. Methods: Patients with FBSS suffering severe chronic radicular pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS11] > 7) who had not responded to other treatments were included. Selective root stimulation during a pulsed radiofrequency procedure confirmed the origin of pain by means of an exact reproduction of typical pain. Transforaminal epiduroscopy was performed at the affected level. The severity of fibrosis observed was recorded. The NRS-11 score was reevaluated at 1, 6, and 12 months after the procedure. Any complications related to the treatment were recorded. Results: Twenty-four patients were included. The mean number of back surgeries was 1.66 (range, 1-5). The basal NRS-11 score was 7.83 (0.14); at 1 month, 3.66 (0.38) (P < 0.001); at 6 months, 4.46 (0.48) (P < 0.01); and at 1 year after treatment, 4.17 (0.51) (P < 0.01). Most patients (54%; 95% CI, 34%-74%) obtained > 50% pain reduction on the NRS-11, maintained during a 1-year follow-up period. No major complications were registered. Limitations: The research was limited by the lack of a control group. Conclusions: We have described a new procedure for epiduroscopy via the transforaminal approach. It is a useful and safe approach to managing FBSS at the foraminal level and shows better long-term results than other endoscopic procedures. Key words: Epidural, epiduroscopy, chronic pain, spinal cord, back surgery

Defining minimal clinically important differences in pain and disability outcomes of patients with chronic pain treated with spinal cord stimulation

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Shelby Sabourin ◽  
Justin Tram ◽  
Breanna L. Sheldon ◽  
Julie G. Pilitsis
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Numerical Rating Scale ◽  
Pain Catastrophizing ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Mcgill Pain Questionnaire ◽  
Minimum Detectable Change ◽  
Failed Back Surgery

OBJECTIVE Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds for a limited number of outcome metrics were previously defined for patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) at 6 months after spinal cord stimulation (SCS). This study aimed to further define MCID values for pain and disability outcomes. Additionally, the authors established 1-year MCID values for outcome measures with previously defined metrics commonly used to assess SCS efficacy. METHODS Preoperative and 1-year postoperative outcomes were collected from 114 patients who received SCS therapy for FBSS, complex regional pain syndrome, and neuropathic pain. MCID values were established for the numerical rating scale (NRS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), and Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). Four established anchor-based methods were utilized to compute MCID values with two anchored questions: “Are you satisfied with SCS therapy?” and “Would you have SCS surgery again?” For each question, patients were categorized as responders if they answered “yes” or as nonresponders if they responded “no.” The methodologies utilized to compute MCID scores included the average change method, minimum detectable change approach, change difference calculation, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Area under the ROC curve (AUC) analysis has been shown to inform the accuracy at which the MCID value can distinguish responders from nonresponders and was analyzed for each instrument. RESULTS For the first time, ranges of MCID values after SCS were established for MPQ (1–2.3) and PCS (1.9–13.6). One-year MCID values were defined for all indications: NRS (range 0.9–2.7), ODI (3.5–6.9), and BDI (2–5.9). AUC values were significant for NRS (0.78, p < 0.001), ODI (0.71, p = 0.003), MPQ (0.74, p < 0.001), and PCS (0.77, p < 0.001), indicating notable accuracy for distinguishing satisfied patients. CONCLUSIONS This was the first study to successfully determine MCID values for two prominent instruments, MPQ and PCS, used to assess pain after SCS surgery. Additionally, previously established MCID values for ODI, BDI, and the visual analog scale for patients with FBSS at 6 months after treatment were explored at 12 months for the most common indications for SCS. These data may better inform physicians of patient response to and success with SCS therapy.

Oral paracetamol versus zolmitriptan to treat acute migraine attack in the emergency department

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Rescue Therapy ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Numeric Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Acute Migraine ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Treatment provided in an emergency department is aimed at alleviating pain immediately with minimized adverse effects as well as warding off further migraine attacks. The primary aim of this article is to compare the effectiveness of oral paracetamol versus zolmitriptan in treating acute migraine attacks. Methods: This prospective, randomized, and controlled study was carried out at a tertiary care hospital visited by 95,000 patients annually. The study recruited 200 participants who were randomized into two groups. One group received 1000 mg paracetamol while the other group received 2.5 mg zolmitriptan orally. Baseline pain scores were recorded using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at 15, 30 and at 60 min following administration of the study drugs. Patients requiring further treatment were provided fentanyl at a dosage of 1 µg/kg as a rescue therapy. Results: A significant decrease was evident in VAS and NRS scores following the administration of the study drugs in both groups (P < 0.001). The change in VAS pain scores after 15, 30 and 60 min was calculated as 17.0 ± 13.9, 41.2 ± 16.3 and 61.2 ± 17.5 mm, respectively, in the paracetamol group and 14.2 ± 11.7, 39.2 ± 17.9 and 59.2± 19.3 mm, respectively, in the zolmitriptan group, which did not indicate significant differences (P = 0.103, P = 0.425, P = 0.483, respectively). Likewise, NRS pain scores showed a downward trend in line with VAS pain scores and did not yield a significant difference (P = 0.422). No significant difference concerning rescue therapy was noted between the two groups (P = 0.596). Conclusion: Oral paracetamol and zolmitriptan prove to be similarly effective and have low incidence of acute side effects in treating acute migraine cases without aura.

scholarly journals A comparison of pain registration by Visual Analog Scale and Numeric Rating Scale – a cross-sectional study of primary triage registration

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jofrid Kollltveit ◽  
Malin Osaland ◽  
Marianne Reimers ◽  
Magnus Berle
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Visual Analog Scale ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Emergency Admission ◽  
Numeric Rating Scale ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Analog Scale ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Numeric Rating

BackgroundPain is a subjective sensation; self-reporting is important for quantifying pain intensity. There are several different validated tools for this, such as Visual Analog Scale and Numeric Rating Scale. In the clinic, these terms are often used as equivalent. The objective of this study was to examine correlation and agreement between the pain registration tools in triage in an emergency department.Materials and MethodsThe study was performed in the Department of Emergency Medicine at Haukeland University Hospital in the period June-August 2019. We registered the pain score with two tools in 200 unselected patients in emergency admission with pain. In addition, we registrered gender, age, triage and general department affiliation.ResultsWe found a strong correlation between the pain registration tools by Spearmans correlation test (rho=0,930, p<0,001). There were no significant difference between the pain registration tools within the subgroups. Bland-Altman analysis show agreement between the two pain registration tools.ConclusionsIn an Emergency Department triage is it acceptable to use Visual Analog Scale and Numeric Rating Scale as equivalent, as long as the correct terminology is used.

scholarly journals A Comparative Clinical Evaluation of the efficacy of two Desensitizing dentifrices in Relieving Dentine Hypersensitivity

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 33-38
Author(s):  
Rojin Joshi ◽  
S Gautam ◽  
B Joshi
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Condition ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Potassium Nitrate ◽  
Chemical Compositions ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Sensitivity Score ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Dentinal Hypersensitivity

Dentinal hypersensitivity has been defined as a short, sharp pain arising from exposed dentine in response to stimuli thermal, evaporative, tactile, chemical or osmotic and which cannot be ascribed to any other form of dental defect or pathology. This is a common clinical condition which may cause patients more distress due to exposure of dentin. There are various management options for this clinical condition which can be either home applied or in office techniques. Various dentifrices are commercially available in the market. The chemical compositions of the dentifrices are different. We conducted this study to compare the effectiveness of a potassium nitrate containing dentifrice and a Novamin based dentifrice in relieving dentinal hypersensitivity. The patients were divided into two experimental groups; group 1-potassium nitrate containing dentifrice and group 2-Novamin containing dentifrice. The sensitivity score was analyzed by using a verbal rating scale at baseline, at three weeks and at six weeks after using the dentifrices. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 17. Chi-square test showed that there was no significant difference between the effectiveness and efficacy of the two dentifrices. The results were highly significant (p<0.001). Hence, potassium nitrate and Novamin were equally effective in reducing dentinal hypersensitivity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document