Ultrasound versus fluoroscopy-guided cervical medial branch block for the treatment of chronic cervical facet joint pain: a retrospective comparative study

Objective To compare the mid-term effects and advantages of the ultrasound (US)-guided with fluoroscopy(FL)-guided cervical medial branch blocks (CMBBs) for chronic cervical facet joint pain through assessment of pain relief, functional improvement, and injection efficiency. Methods Patients with ch...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Skeletal radiology 2017, Vol.46 (1), p.81-91
Main Authors: Park, Ki Deok, Lim, Dong-Ju, Lee, Woo Yong, Ahn, JaeKi, Park, Yongbum
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Anesthetics, Local - administration & dosage
Arthralgia
Care and treatment
Chronic Pain - drug therapy
Disability Evaluation
Female
Fluoroscopy
Humans
Imaging
Low Back Pain - drug therapy
Lumbar Vertebrae
Male
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Nerve Block - methods
Nuclear Medicine
Orthopedics
Pain
Pain Management
Pain Measurement
Pathology
Radiography, Interventional
Radiology
Retrospective Studies
Scientific Article
Ultrasonography, Interventional
Zygapophyseal Joint - drug effects
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective To compare the mid-term effects and advantages of the ultrasound (US)-guided with fluoroscopy(FL)-guided cervical medial branch blocks (CMBBs) for chronic cervical facet joint pain through assessment of pain relief, functional improvement, and injection efficiency. Methods Patients with chronic cervical facet joint pain who received US- ( n  = 68) or FL-guided CMBBs ( n  = 58) were included in this retrospective study. All procedures were performed using a FL or US. The complication frequencies, treatment effects, functional improvement, and injection efficiency of CMBBs were compared at 1, 3, and 6 months after the last injection. Results Both the NDI and VNS scores showed improvements at 1, 3, and 6 months after the last injection in both groups, with no significant differences between groups ( p  
ISSN:0364-2348
1432-2161
DOI:10.1007/s00256-016-2516-2