ArticleCureus2022
Efficacy of Nerve Root Block for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis in Adults Older Than 80 Years of Age.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Temporary Relative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis After Skip Partial Laminectomies in an Elderly Woman: A Case Report.Cureus · 2025Article
- Outcomes after selective nerve root blockade for lumbar radicular pain from lumbar disc hernia or lumbar spinal stenosis assessed by the PROMIS-29 - a prospective observational cohort study.Acta neurochirurgica · 2024Observational
- Functional Outcomes of Therapeutic Selective Nerve Root Block for Single-Segment Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with advanced lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LCS) often prefer non-operative treatment owing to decreased physiological function and comorbidities. Although the therapeutic value of selective nerve root block (SNRB) for LCS is confirmed, there are few reports of its effectiveness in the elderly. We investigated the efficacy of SNRB for LCS in patients over 80 years of age.
methodsThe subjects were 112 patients aged over 80 years (mean age: 84 years; 45 men and 67 women ) with medication-resistant LCS without cauda equina syndrome who underwent SNRB. Cases with acute-onset lumbar disc herniation were excluded. We retrospectively investigated and compared the presence or absence of surgery, effect of SNRB, number of procedures, duration of disease, and magnetic resonance imaging findings. Patients who could avoid the surgery by SNRB were defined as the effective group. Patients whose symptoms were not relieved by SNRB and who underwent surgery and those whose symptoms were not relieved but who continued conservative treatment were defined as the ineffective group. A total of one to seven SNRBs were performed in both groups, and the same spine surgeon performed the entire procedure from SNRB to surgery.
resultsThere were 86 nonoperative patients (69 effective cases) and 26 operative patients; the overall rate of effectiveness was 61% (69/112 patients). The area of the spinal canal at the responsible level was 108.63 mm DISCUSSION: Our outcome showed that more than 60% of older patients with LCS showed symptomatic improvement with SNRB. SNRB can be performed relatively safely in the elderly and appears to be a favorable treatment option for older patients with various risks, such as poor general condition.
conclusionsMultiple sessions of SNRB may provide older patients with symptomatic improvement and may be an option for treatment.
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.