ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Predictive Value of the Phase Angle for Analgesic Efficacy in Lumbosacral Transforaminal Block.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The mechanism of low back and leg pain involves mixed neuropathic and nociceptive components. Spinal neuropathic pain is related to increased levels of inflammatory cytokines and disrupted and increased permeability of the blood-spinal cord barrier, originally composed of tight junctions of capillary endothelial cells surrounded by lamina. The phase angle (PA) estimates cell membrane integrity using bioelectrical impedance analysis. We evaluated the predictive value of the PA for analgesic efficacy in lumbosacral transforaminal block. We retrospectively collected data from 120 patients receiving transforaminal blocks for lumbosacral radicular pain and assessed the PA before and 5 min following the block. Responders (group R) and non-responders (group N) were defined by ≥50% and <50% pain reduction, respectively, on a numerical rating scale, 30 min following the block; clinical data and the PA were compared. Among the 109 included patients, 50 (45.9%) and 59 (54.1%) had ≥50% and <50% pain reduction, respectively. In group N, the PA change ratio showed 88.1% specificity, 32.0% sensitivity, and 62.4% accuracy; a ratio of <0.087 at 5 min following the block predicted non-response. A PA change ratio of <0.087 at 5 min following lumbar transforaminal blocks predicted non-responders with high specificity.
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.