| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Anderberg, Leif, et al.
(författare)
-
Selective diagnostic nerve root block for the evaluation of radicular pain in the multilevel degenerated cervical spine.
- 2006
-
Ingår i: European Spine Journal. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0940-6719 .- 1432-0932. ; 15:6, s. 794-801
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In patients with radiculopathy due to degenerative disease in the cervical spine, surgical outcome is still presenting with moderate results. The preoperative investigations consist of clinical investigation, careful history and most often magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the cervical spine. When MRI shows multilevel degeneration, different strategies are used for indicating which nerve root/roots are affected. Some authors use selective diagnostic nerve root blocks (SNRB) for segregating pain mediating nerve roots from non-pain mediators in such patients. The aim of the present study is to assess the ability of transforaminal SNRB to correlate clinical symptoms with MRI findings in patients with cervical radiculopathy and a two-level MRI degeneration, on the same side as the radicular pain. Thirty consecutive patients with cervical radiculopathy and two levels MRI pathology on the same side as the radicular pain were studied with SNRBs at both levels. All patients underwent clinical investigation and neck and arm pain assessment with visual analogue scales (VAS) before and after the blocks. The results from the SNRBs were compared to the clinical findings from neurological investigation as well as the MRI pathology and treatment results. Correlation between SNRB results and the level with most severe degree of MRI degeneration were 60% and correlation between SNRB results and levels decided by neurological deficits/dermatome radicular pain distribution were 28%. Twenty-two of the 30 patients underwent treatment guided by the SNRB results and 18 reported good/excellent outcome results. We conclude that the degree of MRI pathology, neurological investigation and the pain distribution in the arm are not reliable parameters enough when deciding the affected nerve root/roots in patients with cervical radiculopathy and a two-level degenerative disease in the cervical spine. SNRB might be a helpful tool together with clinical findings/history and MRI of the cervical spine when performing preoperative investigations in patients with two or more level of degeneration presenting with radicular pain that can be attributed to the degenerative findings.
|
|
| 3. |
- Anderberg, Leif, et al.
(författare)
-
Transforaminal steroid injections for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy: a prospective and randomised study.
- 2007
-
Ingår i: European Spine Journal. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0940-6719 .- 1432-0932. ; 16:3, s. 321-328
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Steroid injections are often employed as an alternative treatment for radicular pain in patients with degenerative spinal disorders. Prospective randomised studies of the lumbar spine reveal contradictory results and non-randomised and most often retrospective studies of the cervical spine indicate pain reduction from steroid injections. No prospective randomised study on transforaminal steroid injections for the treatment of radicular pain in the cervical spine focusing on short-term results has been performed. Forty consecutive patients were employed for the study. The inclusion criteria were one-sided cervical radiculopathy with radicular distribution of arm pain distal to the elbow and corresponding significant degenerative pathology of the cervical spine at one or two levels on the same side as the radicular pain and visualised by MRI. A transforaminal technique was used for all injections. A positive response to a diagnostic selective nerve root block at one or two nerve roots was mandatory for all patients. The patients were randomised for treatment with steroids/local anaesthetics or saline/local anaesthetic. Only the neuroradiologist performing the blocks was aware of the content of the injection; all other persons involved in the study were blinded. Follow up was made 3 weeks after the randomised treatment by a clinical investigation and with a questionnaire focusing on the subjective effects from the injections. At follow up, there were no differences in treatment results in the two patient groups. Statistical analysis of the results confirmed the lack of difference in treatment effect. Further studies have to be performed before excluding steroids in such treatment and for evaluating the influence of local anaesthetics on radiculopathy in transforaminal injections.
|
|
