尾侧硬膜外注射在治疗腰痛中的作用。

Paul A Banaszkiewicz, Deiary Kader, Douglas Wardlaw
{"title":"尾侧硬膜外注射在治疗腰痛中的作用。","authors":"Paul A Banaszkiewicz,&nbsp;Deiary Kader,&nbsp;Douglas Wardlaw","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The value of caudal epidural steroid injections (CEI) in treatment of low back pain and sciatica is controversial. It is believed that CEI are mainly effective in treating acute radiculopathy at intermediate term follow up and have no long-term benefit. The objective of this study was to evaluate the role of CEI in the management of low back pain. This study reviews all patients with low back pain and sciatica treated with CEI in a one-year period (1997) in the orthopaedic department at Aberdeen. The case notes of 163 out of a possible 175 patients (87 female 76 male) with mean age of 51 years (range: 17 to 88 years) were reviewed. Data collected included primary symptoms, presentation time, presumed diagnosis, MRI diagnosis, grade of the surgeon ordering and performing the procedure, the quality and duration of response, and final outcome. Patients were regarded as having an Excellent response if they had good or excellent pain relief for more than 3 months, a Good response (6 weeks to 3 months), Fair (4 to 6 weeks), Brief (any pain relief for less than 4 weeks), and No relief. Forty-one percent of patients had either an excellent/good response to CEI while 34% were no better or worse. Patients presenting acutely or with predominantly leg pain symptoms did not respond any better to the CEI than chronic presentations or low back pain alone. Only 36 of 73 patients who were discharged had an Excellent/Good response. Therefore the response to CEI did not influence the decision to discharge half of the patients. The experience of the surgeon performing the procedure did not make a difference in the outcome. We found that the outcome of CEI was unpredictable. The clinical value of CEI remains unproven. The decision to perform the procedure may well remain a matter of personal choice and experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":77050,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin (Hospital for Joint Diseases (New York, N.Y.))","volume":"61 3-4","pages":"127-31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of caudal epidural injections in the management of low back pain.\",\"authors\":\"Paul A Banaszkiewicz,&nbsp;Deiary Kader,&nbsp;Douglas Wardlaw\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The value of caudal epidural steroid injections (CEI) in treatment of low back pain and sciatica is controversial. It is believed that CEI are mainly effective in treating acute radiculopathy at intermediate term follow up and have no long-term benefit. The objective of this study was to evaluate the role of CEI in the management of low back pain. This study reviews all patients with low back pain and sciatica treated with CEI in a one-year period (1997) in the orthopaedic department at Aberdeen. The case notes of 163 out of a possible 175 patients (87 female 76 male) with mean age of 51 years (range: 17 to 88 years) were reviewed. Data collected included primary symptoms, presentation time, presumed diagnosis, MRI diagnosis, grade of the surgeon ordering and performing the procedure, the quality and duration of response, and final outcome. Patients were regarded as having an Excellent response if they had good or excellent pain relief for more than 3 months, a Good response (6 weeks to 3 months), Fair (4 to 6 weeks), Brief (any pain relief for less than 4 weeks), and No relief. Forty-one percent of patients had either an excellent/good response to CEI while 34% were no better or worse. Patients presenting acutely or with predominantly leg pain symptoms did not respond any better to the CEI than chronic presentations or low back pain alone. Only 36 of 73 patients who were discharged had an Excellent/Good response. Therefore the response to CEI did not influence the decision to discharge half of the patients. The experience of the surgeon performing the procedure did not make a difference in the outcome. We found that the outcome of CEI was unpredictable. The clinical value of CEI remains unproven. The decision to perform the procedure may well remain a matter of personal choice and experience.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77050,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin (Hospital for Joint Diseases (New York, N.Y.))\",\"volume\":\"61 3-4\",\"pages\":\"127-31\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin (Hospital for Joint Diseases (New York, N.Y.))\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin (Hospital for Joint Diseases (New York, N.Y.))","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尾侧硬膜外类固醇注射(CEI)治疗腰痛和坐骨神经痛的价值存在争议。CEI主要对急性神经根病的中期随访有效,无远期疗效。本研究的目的是评估CEI在治疗腰痛中的作用。本研究回顾了阿伯丁骨科在一年内(1997年)接受CEI治疗的所有腰痛和坐骨神经痛患者。对175例患者中的163例(女性87例,男性76例)的病例记录进行了回顾,平均年龄为51岁(范围:17至88岁)。收集的数据包括主要症状、表现时间、推定诊断、MRI诊断、外科医生的等级、手术的安排和实施、反应的质量和持续时间以及最终结果。如果患者在3个月以上有良好或极好的疼痛缓解,则认为患者有良好的缓解(6周到3个月),一般(4周到6周),短暂(任何疼痛缓解少于4周)和无缓解。41%的患者对CEI有极好或良好的反应,而34%的患者没有更好或更差。急性或以腿部疼痛为主要症状的患者对CEI的反应并不比慢性症状或单独的腰痛好。在出院的73名患者中,只有36名获得了极好/良好的反应。因此,对CEI的反应不影响一半患者的出院决定。外科医生的手术经验对结果没有影响。我们发现CEI的结果是不可预测的。CEI的临床价值尚未得到证实。是否进行手术的决定很可能仍然是个人选择和经验的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The role of caudal epidural injections in the management of low back pain.

The value of caudal epidural steroid injections (CEI) in treatment of low back pain and sciatica is controversial. It is believed that CEI are mainly effective in treating acute radiculopathy at intermediate term follow up and have no long-term benefit. The objective of this study was to evaluate the role of CEI in the management of low back pain. This study reviews all patients with low back pain and sciatica treated with CEI in a one-year period (1997) in the orthopaedic department at Aberdeen. The case notes of 163 out of a possible 175 patients (87 female 76 male) with mean age of 51 years (range: 17 to 88 years) were reviewed. Data collected included primary symptoms, presentation time, presumed diagnosis, MRI diagnosis, grade of the surgeon ordering and performing the procedure, the quality and duration of response, and final outcome. Patients were regarded as having an Excellent response if they had good or excellent pain relief for more than 3 months, a Good response (6 weeks to 3 months), Fair (4 to 6 weeks), Brief (any pain relief for less than 4 weeks), and No relief. Forty-one percent of patients had either an excellent/good response to CEI while 34% were no better or worse. Patients presenting acutely or with predominantly leg pain symptoms did not respond any better to the CEI than chronic presentations or low back pain alone. Only 36 of 73 patients who were discharged had an Excellent/Good response. Therefore the response to CEI did not influence the decision to discharge half of the patients. The experience of the surgeon performing the procedure did not make a difference in the outcome. We found that the outcome of CEI was unpredictable. The clinical value of CEI remains unproven. The decision to perform the procedure may well remain a matter of personal choice and experience.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信