Suppr超能文献

颈椎经椎间孔与椎板间硬膜外类固醇注射的回顾性分析。

Retrospective analysis of cervical transforaminal versus interlaminar epidural steroid injections.

作者信息

Levin Josh, Chan John, Gall Nolan, Koltsov Jayme, Huynh Lisa

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, United States.

Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, United States.

出版信息

Interv Pain Med. 2022 May 25;1(2):100102. doi: 10.1016/j.inpm.2022.100102. eCollection 2022 Jun.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Several studies have compared outcomes from lumbar epidural steroid injections (ESIs) based upon technique (transforaminal (TF) vs interlaminar (IL) vs caudal). However, little on this topic has been reported in the cervical spine, and results have been conflicting.

PURPOSE

To compare success rates of fluoroscopically-guided cervical TFESIs vs ILESIs.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective, observational, in vivo study of consecutive patients at outpatient Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation clinics at a single academic spine center.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Consecutive patients who received a cervical TF or IL ESI between January 2010 and October 2018.

OUTCOME MEASURES

NRS pain scores within 60 days of the ESI.

METHODS

Current procedural terminology (CPT) codes were used to search all consecutive patients at a single outpatient academic spine center who received a cervical TF or IL ESI between January 2010 October 2018. All patients with pre and post injection NRS pain scores within 60 days of the injection were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 178 ​TF and 185 ILESIs were analyzed. Success was defined as ≥ 50% improvement in NRS pain score. 52% [95% CI: 47 - 57%] of all patients receiving a cervical ESI achieved a successful outcome. There was a strong trend towards better results in the ILESI group with 59% [95% CI: 52 - 66%] of patients achieving at least 50% pain relief compared to 46% [95% CI: 39 - 53%] in the TF group. A higher proportion of patients in the IL group obtained at least 80% pain relief (37% [95% CI: 30 - 44%]) compared to those in the TF group (17% [95% CI: 11 - 23%]). Post-procedure median NRS pain scores, and improvement in median NRS pain scores were better in the ILESI group compared to the TFESI group (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

This retrospective study demonstrated better results in the cervical ILESI group compared to the cervical TFESI group.

摘要

背景

多项研究基于技术(经椎间孔(TF)与椎板间(IL)与骶管)比较了腰椎硬膜外类固醇注射(ESI)的结果。然而,关于颈椎的这一主题报道较少,且结果相互矛盾。

目的

比较透视引导下颈椎经椎间孔ESI(TFESI)与椎板间ESI(ILESI)的成功率。

研究设计/地点:对单一学术脊柱中心门诊物理医学与康复诊所的连续患者进行回顾性、观察性体内研究。

患者样本

2010年1月至2018年10月期间接受颈椎TF或IL ESI的连续患者。

观察指标

ESI后60天内的数字评定量表(NRS)疼痛评分。

方法

使用当前程序术语(CPT)编码搜索单一门诊学术脊柱中心2010年1月至2018年10月期间接受颈椎TF或IL ESI的所有连续患者。所有在注射后60天内有注射前和注射后NRS疼痛评分的患者均纳入分析。

结果

共分析了178例TFESI和185例ILESI。成功定义为NRS疼痛评分改善≥50%。所有接受颈椎ESI的患者中有52%[95%CI:47 - 57%]取得了成功结果。ILESI组有更好结果的趋势明显,59%[95%CI:52 - 66%]的患者疼痛缓解至少50%,而TF组为46%[95%CI:39 - 53%]。与TF组(17%[95%CI:11 - 23%])相比,IL组有更高比例的患者疼痛缓解至少80%(37%[95%CI:30 - 44%])。ILESI组术后NRS疼痛评分中位数及NRS疼痛评分中位数的改善情况均优于TFESI组(p<0.001)。

结论

这项回顾性研究表明,颈椎ILESI组的结果优于颈椎TFESI组。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2d55/11372919/1c4bb17dca9f/gr1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验