ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2020
Counterpoint: Conventional Fluoroscopy-Guided Selective Cervical Nerve Root Block-A Safe, Effective, and Efficient Modality in the Hands of an Experienced Proceduralist.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Can CT-guided cervical nerve root injections delay or prevent the need for surgical intervention in cervical radiculopathy?Skeletal radiology · 2026Observational
- A novel technique of ultrasound-guided nerve root block: anterior compression lateral approach.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2026Article
- Epidural spread of injectate from a costoclavicular catheter due to selective lodging in the middle trunk.Anaesthesia reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeThe conventional fluoroscopy-guided (CF) selective cervical nerve root block (SCNRB) is being used commonly as a treatment for cervical radicular pain as well as a diagnostic tool. This study aimed to identify any major complications and determine the safety and clinical utility of CF-SCNRB performed in a university hospital and associated outpatient clinics. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo-hundred fifty-four conventional fluoroscopy-guided selective cervical nerve root blocks were retrospectively identified from 2011 to 2018 using a radiology report search tool. Each procedure was performed by an experienced neuroradiologist performing spinal injections on a full-time basis in clinical practice. A 10-point pain scale was used for pre- and postprocedural pain-level assessment. Successful conventional, fluoroscopy-guided, selective cervical nerve root block was defined as a patient-reported pain scale reduction of at least 50% and/or alleviation of numbness or paresthesia at ≥2 weeks postinjection. All clinically important immediate and delayed complications were also recorded.
resultsTwo-hundred fifty-four conventional fluoroscopy-guided selective cervical nerve root blocks were performed via an anterolateral approach with an average fluoroscopy time of 24.3 seconds for all cases. There were no aborted procedures and no major or permanent complications. There were 14 minor complications; 12 of these were periprocedural and resolved by the 2-week follow-up visit. One-hundred eighty-five patients (75.2%) reported pain improvement of >50% from baseline at 15 minutes postinjection. Overall, 172 patients (67.7%) reported >50% pain scale reduction or alleviation from paresthesia at least 2 weeks postinjection.
conclusionsConventional fluoroscopy-guided selective cervical nerve root block is an efficacious, efficient, and safe outpatient procedure when performed by a skilled and experienced proceduralist.
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.