Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27465823›Full record

Trial reportBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2017

Adding corticosteroids to the pudendal nerve block for pudendal neuralgia: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.

J J Labat, T Riant, A Lassaux, B Rioult, B Rabischong, M Khalfallah, C Volteau, A-M Leroi, S Ploteau

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Pudendal Neuralgia: A Review of the Current Literature.Current pain and headache reports · 2025
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

J J LabatFederative Centre of Pelvi-Perineology, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France.
T RiantFederative Centre of Pelvi-Perineology, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France.
A LassauxPain Clinic, Hôpital Rothschild, Paris, France.
B RioultPain Unit, Centre Catherine de Sienne, Nantes, France.
B RabischongGynaecology Department, Polyclinique Hôtel-Dieu, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
M KhalfallahCentre Hospitalier de la Cote Basque, Bayonne, France.
C VolteauDRCI, Hôtel Dieu, Nantes, France.
A-M LeroiDigestive Physiology Department, Hôpital Charles Nicolle, Rouen, France.
S PloteauFederative Centre of Pelvi-Perineology, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes · FRCentre Hospitalier de la Côte Basque · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rouen · FRHôpital privé du Confluent · FRSorbonne Université · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the effect of corticosteroids combined with local anaesthetic versus local anaesthetic alone during infiltrations of the pudendal nerve for pudendal nerve entrapment.

designRandomised, double-blind, controlled trial.

settingMulticentre study. POPULATION: 201 patients were included in the study, with a subgroup of 122 women.

methodsCT-guided pudendal nerve infiltrations were performed in the sacrospinous ligament and Alcock's canal. There were three study arms: patients in Arm A (n = 68) had local anaesthetic alone, those in Arm B (n = 66) had local anaesthetic plus corticosteroid and those in Arm C (n = 67) local anaesthetic plus corticosteroid with a large volume of normal saline.

main outcome measuresThe primary end-point was the pain intensity score at 3 months. Patients were regarded as responders (at least a 30-point improvement on a 100-point visual analogue scale of mean maximum pain over a 2-week period) or nonresponders.

resultsThree months' postinfiltration, 11.8% of patients in the local anaesthetic only arm (Arm A) were responders versus 14.3% in the local anaesthetic plus corticosteroid arms (Arms B and C). This difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.62). No statistically significant difference was observed in the female subgroup between Arm A and Arms B and C (P = 0.09). No significant difference was detected for the various pain assessment procedures, functional criteria or quality-of-life criteria.

conclusionsCorticosteroids provide no additional therapeutic benefits compared with local anaesthetic and should therefore no longer be used. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Steroid infiltrations do not improve the results of local anaesthetic infiltrations in pudendal neuralgia.

Indexed as

Adrenal Cortex HormonesAnesthetics, LocalDouble-Blind MethodDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHumansLidocaineMiddle AgedNerve BlockPain MeasurementProspective StudiesPudendal NervePudendal NeuralgiaRadiography, InterventionalTreatment OutcomeAdrenal Cortex HormonesAnesthetics, LocalLidocaineChronic paincorticosteroid infiltrationsnerve blockpelvic painperineal painpudendal neuralgia

Identifiers

PMID27465823
PMCPMC5215631
OpenAlexW2499163507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.