ArticleCureus2023
Imaging Findings, Fluoroscopic Time, and Results of the Lumbosacral Selective Nerve Root Block: Focus on the L5 Nerve Root Block.
Article in Cureus, 2023. 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Selective nerve root block (SNRB) is a valuable diagnostic and therapeutic tool. In some cases, intra-nerve root puncture is difficult and time-consuming, and radiation exposure time for the surgeon may be prolonged. The aim of this study is to examine the contrast findings, fluoroscopic time, and outcomes of SNRB. Methods A total of 139 cases of SNRB were included in the study. We investigated radiating pain presence, duration of fluoroscopic time, contrast types for nerve roots, and SNRB outcomes. Contrast patterns of nerve roots were categorized into three types, which were: type 1: the presence of contrast along the nerve roots; type 2: the presence of contrast within the intravertebral foramen but not in the nerve root; and type 3: the absence of both nerve root and intravertebral foramen contrast. Results The mean fluoroscopic time was 12.8 ± 15.3 seconds for type 1, 11.1 ± 8.9 seconds for type 2, and 23.6 ± 18.8 seconds for type 3. Statistically significant differences were found between the three groups (p = 0.007), and subsequent multiple comparisons showed significant differences between type 1 and type 2 (p = 0.010) and between type 2 and type 3 (p = 0.015). The visual analog scale (VAS) score before and 30 minutes after SNRB demonstrated a significant improvement in all patients. The mean change in VAS before and after nerve root block was 49.6 ± 21.7 mm for type 1 cases, 49.8 ± 25.2 mm for type 2 cases, and 37.8 ± 23.6 mm for type 3 cases, with no statistically significant difference between the three groups (p = 0.090). The proportion of patients with subjective symptomatic improvement before and after SNRB was 91.3% in type 1 cases, 88.5% in type 2 cases, and 85.7% in type 3 cases, with no statistically significant difference between the three groups (p = 0.641). Conclusions The above findings indicate that type 3 is beneficial for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes.
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.