The effectiveness of L2 nerve root block for the management of patients who are suffering from chronic low back and referred pain

Lim, Hyung-Woo; Cho, Yong-Hyun; Kim, Sun‐Hee; Lee, Dong-Hyun; Kang, Seunghyun

doi:10.4097/kjae.2013.65.2.182

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results from a prospective analysis on the assessment of pulsed radiofrequency treatment at the L2 dorsal root ganglion for providing pain relief in patients with chronic low back pain with or without lower limb pain showed that the procedure is safe and effective for treating chronic low back pain (Tsou et al, 2010). Targeting the L2 nerve root can possibly be used as a diagnostic tool and treatment opportunity (Nakamura et al, 1996;Lim et al, 2013), requiring further scientific research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomized sham‐controlled, double‐blind, multicenter clinical trial on the effect of percutaneous radiofrequency at the ramus communicans for lumbar disc pain

Tilburg

Stronks

Groeneweg

et al. 2016

European Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundInvestigate the effect of percutaneous radiofrequency compared to a sham procedure, applied to the ramus communicans for treatment of lumbar disc pain.MethodsRandomized sham‐controlled, double‐blind, crossover, multicenter clinical trial. Multidisciplinary pain centres of two general hospitals. Sixty patients aged 18 or more with medical history and physical examination suggestive for lumbar disc pain and a reduction of two or more on a numerical rating scale (0–10) after a diagnostic ramus communicans test block. Treatment group: percutaneous radiofrequency treatment applied to the ramus communicans; sham: same procedure except radiofrequency treatment. Primary outcome measure: pain reduction. Secondary outcome measure: Global Perceived Effect.ResultsNo statistically significant difference in pain level over time between the groups, as well as in the group was found; however, the factor period yielded a statistically significant result. In the crossover group, 11 out of 16 patients experienced a reduction in NRS of 2 or more at 1 month (no significant deviation from chance). No statistically significant difference in satisfaction over time between the groups was found. The independent factors group and period also showed no statistically significant effects. The same applies to recovery: no statistically significant effects were found.ConclusionsThe null hypothesis of no difference in pain reduction and in Global Perceived Effect between the treatment and sham group cannot be rejected. Post hoc analysis revealed that none of the investigated parameters contributed to the prediction of a significant pain reduction.SignificanceInterrupting signalling through the ramus communicans may interfere with the transition of painful information from the discs to the central nervous system. Methodological differences exist in studies evaluating the efficacy of radiofrequency treatment for lumbar disc pain. A randomized, sham‐controlled, double‐blind, multicenter clinical trial on the effect of radiofrequency at the ramus communicans for lumbar disc pain was conducted. The null hypothesis of no difference in pain reduction and in Global Perceived Effect between the treatment and sham group cannot be rejected.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomized sham‐controlled, double‐blind, multicenter clinical trial on the effect of percutaneous radiofrequency at the ramus communicans for lumbar disc pain

Tilburg

Stronks

Groeneweg

et al. 2016

European Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Predictive Validity of Lumbar X-ray Images and MRIs for Chronic Low Back Pain Subtypes

Tilburg¹,

Groeneweg²,

Stronks³

et al. 2018

J Pain Relief

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrating Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment and Injections in the Diagnosis and Management of a Hip Labral Tear

Snyder¹,

Knox²,

Smutny³

2020

Journal of Osteopathic Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hip pain in adults is a common complaint. Secondary processes can often mask underlying conditions, prolonging the course to diagnosis and definitive treatment. In this case, a 74-year-old man presented to an outpatient clinic after 6 weeks of right hip pain that began upon initiation of a rehabilitation program following coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Various imaging and treatment modalities (including radiography, osteopathic manipulative treatment, injection of the greater trochanteric bursa, L2-3 paravertebral block, magnetic resonance imaging, and intra-articular hip injection with 1% lidocaine) ultimately led to the definitive diagnosis of a labral tear. This case report highlights how a comprehensive osteopathic approach was used to evaluate and treat a patient with persistent unilateral hip pain because of an acetabular labral tear, associated psoas syndrome, and trochanteric bursitis, all within 2 months and with a positive clinical outcome.

show abstract

The effectiveness of L2 nerve root block for the management of patients who are suffering from chronic low back and referred pain

Cited by 3 publications

References 5 publications

Randomized sham‐controlled, double‐blind, multicenter clinical trial on the effect of percutaneous radiofrequency at the ramus communicans for lumbar disc pain

Randomized sham‐controlled, double‐blind, multicenter clinical trial on the effect of percutaneous radiofrequency at the ramus communicans for lumbar disc pain

Predictive Validity of Lumbar X-ray Images and MRIs for Chronic Low Back Pain Subtypes

Integrating Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment and Injections in the Diagnosis and Management of a Hip Labral Tear

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About