-
Something wrong with this record ?
Comparison of Pulsed Radiofrequency, Oxygen-Ozone Therapy and Epidural Steroid Injections for the Treatment of Chronic Unilateral Radicular Syndrome
P. Ryska, J. Jandura, P. Hoffmann, P. Dvorak, B. Klimova, M. Valis, M. Vajda
Language English Country Switzerland
Document type Journal Article
NLK
Directory of Open Access Journals
from 2007
PubMed Central
from 2018
Europe PubMed Central
from 2018
ProQuest Central
from 2018-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
from 2014-01-01
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
from 2018-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
from 2007
- MeSH
- Injections, Epidural MeSH
- Oxygen MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Ozone * therapeutic use MeSH
- Pulsed Radiofrequency Treatment * MeSH
- Radiculopathy * drug therapy MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
Background and objectives: For the treatment of chronic unilateral radicular syndrome, there are various methods including three minimally invasive computed tomography (CT)-guided methods, namely, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF), transforaminal oxygen ozone therapy (TFOOT), and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI). Despite this, it is still unclear which of these methods is the best in terms of pain reduction and disability improvement. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the short and long-term effectiveness of these methods by measuring pain relief using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and improvement in disability (per the Oswestry disability index (ODI)) in patients with chronic unilateral radicular syndrome at L5 or S1 that do not respond to conservative treatment. Materials and Methods: After screening 692 patients, we enrolled 178 subjects, each of whom underwent one of the above CT-guided procedures. The PRF settings were as follows: pulse width = 20 ms, f = 2 Hz, U = 45 V, Z ˂ 500 Ω, and interval = 2 × 120 s. For TFOOT, an injection of 4-5 mL of an O2-O3 mixture (24 μg/mL) was administered. For the TFESI, 1 mL of a corticosteroid (betamethasone dipropionate), 3 mL of an anaesthetic (bupivacaine hydrochloride), and a 0.5 mL mixture of a non-ionic contrast agent (Iomeron 300) were administered. Pain intensity was assessed with a questionnaire. Results: The data from 178 patients (PRF, n = 57; TFOOT, n = 69; TFESI, n = 52) who submitted correctly completed questionnaires in the third month of the follow-up period were used for statistical analysis. The median pre-treatment visual analogue scale (VAS) score in all groups was six points. Immediately after treatment, the largest decrease in the median VAS score was observed in the TFESI group, with a score of 3.5 points (a decrease of 41.7%). In the PRF and TFOOT groups, the median VAS score decreased to 4 and 5 points (decreases of 33% and 16.7%, respectively). The difference in the early (immediately after) post-treatment VAS score between the TFESI and TFOOT groups was statistically significant (p = 0.0152). At the third and sixth months after treatment, the median VAS score was five points in all groups, without a statistically significant difference (p > 0.05). Additionally, there were no significant differences in the Oswestry disability index (ODI) values among the groups at any of the follow-up visits. Finally, there were no significant effects of age or body mass index (BMI) on both treatment outcomes (maximum absolute value of Spearman's rank correlation coefficient = 0.193). Conclusions: Although the three methods are equally efficient in reducing pain over the entire follow-up, we observed that TFESI (a corticosteroid with a local anaesthetic) proved to be the most effective method for early post-treatment pain relief.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc21019283
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20210830100848.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 210728s2021 sz f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.3390/medicina57020136 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)33557175
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a sz
- 100 1_
- $a Ryska, Pavel $u Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Sokolska 581, 50005 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic $u Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Simkova 870, 50003 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic
- 245 10
- $a Comparison of Pulsed Radiofrequency, Oxygen-Ozone Therapy and Epidural Steroid Injections for the Treatment of Chronic Unilateral Radicular Syndrome / $c P. Ryska, J. Jandura, P. Hoffmann, P. Dvorak, B. Klimova, M. Valis, M. Vajda
- 520 9_
- $a Background and objectives: For the treatment of chronic unilateral radicular syndrome, there are various methods including three minimally invasive computed tomography (CT)-guided methods, namely, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF), transforaminal oxygen ozone therapy (TFOOT), and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI). Despite this, it is still unclear which of these methods is the best in terms of pain reduction and disability improvement. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the short and long-term effectiveness of these methods by measuring pain relief using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and improvement in disability (per the Oswestry disability index (ODI)) in patients with chronic unilateral radicular syndrome at L5 or S1 that do not respond to conservative treatment. Materials and Methods: After screening 692 patients, we enrolled 178 subjects, each of whom underwent one of the above CT-guided procedures. The PRF settings were as follows: pulse width = 20 ms, f = 2 Hz, U = 45 V, Z ˂ 500 Ω, and interval = 2 × 120 s. For TFOOT, an injection of 4-5 mL of an O2-O3 mixture (24 μg/mL) was administered. For the TFESI, 1 mL of a corticosteroid (betamethasone dipropionate), 3 mL of an anaesthetic (bupivacaine hydrochloride), and a 0.5 mL mixture of a non-ionic contrast agent (Iomeron 300) were administered. Pain intensity was assessed with a questionnaire. Results: The data from 178 patients (PRF, n = 57; TFOOT, n = 69; TFESI, n = 52) who submitted correctly completed questionnaires in the third month of the follow-up period were used for statistical analysis. The median pre-treatment visual analogue scale (VAS) score in all groups was six points. Immediately after treatment, the largest decrease in the median VAS score was observed in the TFESI group, with a score of 3.5 points (a decrease of 41.7%). In the PRF and TFOOT groups, the median VAS score decreased to 4 and 5 points (decreases of 33% and 16.7%, respectively). The difference in the early (immediately after) post-treatment VAS score between the TFESI and TFOOT groups was statistically significant (p = 0.0152). At the third and sixth months after treatment, the median VAS score was five points in all groups, without a statistically significant difference (p > 0.05). Additionally, there were no significant differences in the Oswestry disability index (ODI) values among the groups at any of the follow-up visits. Finally, there were no significant effects of age or body mass index (BMI) on both treatment outcomes (maximum absolute value of Spearman's rank correlation coefficient = 0.193). Conclusions: Although the three methods are equally efficient in reducing pain over the entire follow-up, we observed that TFESI (a corticosteroid with a local anaesthetic) proved to be the most effective method for early post-treatment pain relief.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a injekce epidurální $7 D007268
- 650 _2
- $a kyslík $7 D010100
- 650 12
- $a ozon $x terapeutické užití $7 D010126
- 650 12
- $a pulsní radiofrekvenční terapie $7 D061208
- 650 12
- $a radikulopatie $x farmakoterapie $7 D011843
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Jandura, Jiri $u Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Sokolska 581, 50005 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic $u Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Simkova 870, 50003 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Hoffmann, Petr $u Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Sokolska 581, 50005 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic $u Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Simkova 870, 50003 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Dvorak, Petr $u Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Sokolska 581, 50005 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic $u Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Simkova 870, 50003 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Klimova, Blanka $u Department of Neurology, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Sokolska 581, 50005 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Valis, Martin $u Department of Neurology, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Sokolska 581, 50005 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Vajda, Milan $u Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Hradec Kralove, Sokolska 581, 50005 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic $u Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Charles University, Simkova 870, 50003 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00180386 $t Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) $x 1648-9144 $g Roč. 57, č. 2 (2021)
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33557175 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20210728 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20210830100848 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1690173 $s 1139729
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2021 $b 57 $c 2 $e 20210204 $i 1648-9144 $m Medicina $n Medicina (Kaunas) $x MED00180386
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20210728