Dataset Information

Comparison of treatment outcomes in chronic coccygodynia patients treated with ganglion impar blockade versus caudal epidural steroid injection: a prospective randomized comparison study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Coccygodynia is one of the chronic, refractory painful musculoskeletal disorders. Interventional procedures are applied to patients unresponsive to initial treatment in coccygodynia. This study aims to compare the treatment outcomes of ganglion impar block (GIB) and caudal epidural steroid injection (CESI) in patients with chronic coccygodynia.

Methods

This study was a prospective randomized comparison study conducted between June 2019 and January 2021. Patients diagnosed with chronic coccygodynia were randomly divided into two groups: the GIB group and the CESI group. The severity of pain, presence of neuropathic pain, and quality of life were evaluated using the Numeric Rating Scale, Leeds Assessment of the Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs Scale, and Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12), respectively.

Results

A total of 34 patients in each group were included in the final analyses. While there was a significant decrease in pain intensity in both groups in the 3-month follow-up, this decrease was more significant in the GIB group at the 3rd week. There was a significant improvement in the SF-12 physical score and the number of patients with neuropathic pain in both groups in the 3rd week, but this improvement was not observed in the 3rd month.

Conclusions

Although GIB may provide more pain relief in short term, both GIB and CESI are useful treatment methods in coccygodynia unresponsive to more conservative treatments.

SUBMITTER: Sencan S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8728552 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPrevious systemic reviews have examined the efficacy of individual therapeutic agents, but which type of treatment is superior to another has not been pooled or analyzed. The objective of the current study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of epidural steroid injection (ESI) versus conservative treatment for patients with lumbosacral radicular pain.MethodsA systematic search was conducted with MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases with a double-extraction technique for relevant studies published between 2000 and January 10, 2019. The randomized controlled trials which directly compared the efficacy of ESI with conservative treatment in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain were included. Outcomes included visual analog scale, numeric rating scale, Oswetry disability index, or successful events. Two reviewers extracted data and evaluated the methodological quality of papers using the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. A meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.2 software. The heterogeneity of the meta-analysis was also assessed.ResultsOf 1071 titles initially identified, 6 randomized controlled trials (249 patients with ESI and 241 patients with conservative treatment) were identified and included in this meta-analysis. The outcome of the pooled analysis showed that ESI was beneficial for pain relief at short-term and intermediate-term follow-up when compared with conservative treatment, but this effect was not maintained at long-term follow-up. Successful event rates were significantly higher in patients who received ESI than in patients who received conservative treatment. There were no statistically significant differences in functional improvement after ESI and conservative treatment at short-term and intermediate-term follow-up. The limitations of this meta-analysis resulted from the variation in types of interventions and small sample size.ConclusionsAccording to the results of this meta-analysis, the use of ESI is more effective for alleviating lumbosacral radicular pain than conservative treatments in terms of short-term and intermediate-term. Patients also reported more successful outcomes after receiving ESI when compared to conservative treatment. However, this effect was not maintained at long-term follow-up. This meta-analysis will help guide clinicians in making decisions for the treatment of patients with lumbosacral radicular pain, including the use of ESI, particularly in the management of pain at short-term.

Project description:BackgroundAn epidural steroid injection (ESI) is used to treat a number of morbid central nervous system pathologies and is considered a reasonably safe procedure. This study aimed to determine the relative infection risk after spinal surgery by comparing outcomes in spinal surgery patients who received an ESI shortly prior to the surgery against those who did not receive an ESI shortly prior to the surgery.MethodsThe present study is a retrospective cohort study using a multi-institutional healthcare database, TriNetX, to collect data on patients who received spinal surgery with and without having had ESIs six months before surgery. Two cohorts were generated: Cohort 1 included patients who had received an ESI in the six months prior to spinal surgery, and cohort 2 included patients who did not have an ESI in the six months prior to spinal surgery. The patients in cohort 2 had propensity scores matched 1:1 to those in cohort 1 using common baseline demographics, comorbidities and spinal procedure indications. The spinal procedures and surgeries considered for the analysis included open procedures for any purpose, including exploration, decompression, resection, revision or biopsy. Multiple outcomes were compared across these two cohorts in the three months following the spinal procedure/surgery, including the occurrence of death, surgical site infection, epidural and/or spinal abscess, and dural tear.ResultsAn ESI in the six months prior to spinal surgery was associated with a significant decrease in the likelihood epidural/spinal abscess in the three months after surgery. There was no change in mortality, wound infection or identification of dural tear in the three months after spinal surgery for those who received an ESI six months before spinal surgery.ConclusionThis data suggests that epidural steroid injections' anti-inflammatory effects provide benefits before surgery beyond symptomatic relief. Given that the degeneration of spinal pathologies is typically advanced rather than corrected by the body's inflammatory response, it is likely that preventing hyperactivation of the body's immune system in the months preceding surgical intervention, a traumatic insult, is protective compared to no intervention and, importantly, without major adverse effects.