Observational studyMedicine2019
The effect of additional transforaminal epidural blocks on percutaneous epidural neuroplasty with a wire-type catheter: A retrospective observational study.
Observational study in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03867630 (The Effect of Additional Transforaminal Epidural Blocks in Percutaneous Epidural Neuroplasty With Wire Type Catheter in Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
The Effect of Additional Transforaminal Epidural Blocks in Percutaneous Epidural Neuroplasty With Wire Type Catheter in Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis Patients
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computed Tomographic Epidurography in Patients with Low Back Pain and Leg Pain: A Single-Center Observational Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Effects of Combined Spinal Epidural Anesthesia in Orthopaedic Surgery of Elderly Patients.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Percutaneous epidural neuroplasty (PEN) is an effective interventional treatment for radicular pain. However, in some cases, contrast runoff to the spinal nerve root does not occur. We investigated whether contrast runoff to the spinal nerve root affects the success rate of PEN and whether additional transforaminal epidural blocks for intentional contrast runoff affect the success rate of PEN in cases in which contrast runoff is absent.This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03867630) in March 2019. We reviewed the medical records of 112 patients who underwent PEN with a wire-type catheter from May 2016 to August 2018. Patients were divided in 3 groups (Runoff group, Non-runoff group, Transforaminal group).Patients with low back pain and leg radicular pain who did not respond to lumbar epidural steroid injectionsPEN was performed in 112 patients with a wire-type catheter in target segment. We compared the success rate of PEN betweenThe success rate was significantly different between the Runoff group and the Non-runoff group (P < .0007) and between the Non-runoff group and the Transforaminal group (P = .0047), but not between the Runoff group and the Transforaminal group (P = .57).Contrast runoff influenced the success rate of PEN. In cases without contrast runoff, additional transforaminal epidural blocks for intentional contrast runoff increased the success rate of PEN with a wire-type catheter.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.