Evaluation of the efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency therapy in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain: An analysis of single-center data.

IF 0.8 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Agri-The Journal of the Turkish Society of Algology Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.14744/agri.2022.60234
Gökhan Yıldız, Şeref Çelik, Erkan Yavuz Akçaboy, Şaziye Şahin, Samet Sancar Kaya, Müge Baran, Hamit Göksu
{"title":"Evaluation of the efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency therapy in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain: An analysis of single-center data.","authors":"Gökhan Yıldız, Şeref Çelik, Erkan Yavuz Akçaboy, Şaziye Şahin, Samet Sancar Kaya, Müge Baran, Hamit Göksu","doi":"10.14744/agri.2022.60234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Lumbosacral radicular pain (LRP) is one of the most common causes of neuropathic pain. This pain often arises from inflammation in the dorsal root ganglia (DRG) or spinal nerves. Despite various treatment modalities, success rates are not very high in chronic LRP cases. Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) therapy, frequently applied to the DRG, is widely used, but its effectiveness is often questioned in various studies. The primary aim of our study is to evaluate the effectiveness of PRF treatment in 154 patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with LRP for longer than 3 months, treated with PRF, were included in this study. To assess the efficacy of PRF treatment, numerical rating scale (NRS) scores were evaluated at the 4th-week and 6th-month follow-ups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The NRS scores were significantly lower at the 4th-week and 6th-month follow-ups compared to pre-treatment levels (p<0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the mean NRS scores at the 4th week and 6th month.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Success in interventional pain procedures is often considered as at least a 50% reduction in pain scores. The success rate for PRF treatment for LRP in the literature varies between 30% and 60%, which is similar to our findings at the 4th week and 6th month. PRF treatment is widely used due to its low side-effect profile and cost-effectiveness in the long term. There is no fully standardized practice regarding procedural aspects, such as the duration of the application, and prospective studies with larger participation are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":45603,"journal":{"name":"Agri-The Journal of the Turkish Society of Algology","volume":"1 1","pages":"38-44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agri-The Journal of the Turkish Society of Algology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/agri.2022.60234","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Lumbosacral radicular pain (LRP) is one of the most common causes of neuropathic pain. This pain often arises from inflammation in the dorsal root ganglia (DRG) or spinal nerves. Despite various treatment modalities, success rates are not very high in chronic LRP cases. Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) therapy, frequently applied to the DRG, is widely used, but its effectiveness is often questioned in various studies. The primary aim of our study is to evaluate the effectiveness of PRF treatment in 154 patients.

Methods: Patients with LRP for longer than 3 months, treated with PRF, were included in this study. To assess the efficacy of PRF treatment, numerical rating scale (NRS) scores were evaluated at the 4th-week and 6th-month follow-ups.

Results: The NRS scores were significantly lower at the 4th-week and 6th-month follow-ups compared to pre-treatment levels (p<0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the mean NRS scores at the 4th week and 6th month.

Conclusion: Success in interventional pain procedures is often considered as at least a 50% reduction in pain scores. The success rate for PRF treatment for LRP in the literature varies between 30% and 60%, which is similar to our findings at the 4th week and 6th month. PRF treatment is widely used due to its low side-effect profile and cost-effectiveness in the long term. There is no fully standardized practice regarding procedural aspects, such as the duration of the application, and prospective studies with larger participation are needed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估脉冲射频疗法对腰骶部根性疼痛患者的疗效:单中心数据分析。
目的:腰骶部根性疼痛(LRP)是神经性疼痛最常见的原因之一。这种疼痛通常源于背根神经节(DRG)或脊神经的炎症。尽管治疗方法多种多样,但慢性 LRP 病例的成功率并不高。脉冲射频(PRF)疗法经常应用于背根神经节,被广泛使用,但其有效性经常在各种研究中受到质疑。我们研究的主要目的是评估 154 例患者接受脉冲射频治疗的效果:本研究纳入了接受 PRF 治疗超过 3 个月的 LRP 患者。为了评估 PRF 治疗的疗效,我们在第 4 周和第 6 个月的随访中对数字评分量表(NRS)评分进行了评估:结果:第四周和第 6 个月随访时的 NRS 评分明显低于治疗前的水平(p):介入性疼痛治疗的成功通常被认为是疼痛评分至少降低 50%。文献中 PRF 治疗 LRP 的成功率在 30% 到 60% 之间,这与我们在第 4 周和第 6 个月的研究结果相似。PRF 治疗因其副作用小、长期成本效益高而被广泛使用。在程序方面,如应用时间的长短,目前还没有完全标准化的做法,因此需要更多参与的前瞻性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
22
期刊最新文献
Percutaneous fluoroscopic lumbar facet joint synovial cyst aspiration for manifesting with radiculopathy and low back pain. Evaluation of the efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency therapy in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain: An analysis of single-center data. The effectiveness of the erector spinae plane block using methylprednisolone and bupivacaine in post-herpetic neuralgia: Case series. The effect of consecutive facet medial branch radiofrequency denervation and dorsal root ganglion pulse radiofrequency therapy on lumbar facet joint pain. [Pain beliefs of cancer patients and associated factors].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1