4.1 Article

Are steroids required in the treatment of ganglion impar blockade in chronic coccydynia? a prospective double-blinded clinical trial

期刊

KOREAN JOURNAL OF PAIN
卷 32, 期 4, 页码 301-306

出版社

KOREAN PAIN SOC
DOI: 10.3344/kjp.2019.32.4.301

关键词

Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Anesthetics, Local; Beck Test; Coccygeal Pain; Depression; Ganglion Impar Blockade; Pain; Rating Scale

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Ganglion impar blockade is a reliable and effective treatment option used in patients with coccydynia. Our primary objective was to specify the role of corticosteroids in impar blockade. We compared applications of local anesthetic with the local anesthetic + corticosteroid combination in terms of treatment efficiency in patients with chronic coccydynia. Methods: Our study was a prospective randomize double-blind study. The patients were divided into 2 groups after randomization. The first group (group SL) was made up of patients where a corticosteroid + local anesthetic were used during ganglion impar blockade. In the second group (group L) we used only local anesthetic. We evaluated numeric rating scale (NRS) and Beck depression scale, which were employed before the procedure and in 1st and 3rd months after the procedure. Results: Seventy-three patients were included in the final analysis. We detected a significantly greater decrease in NRS values in the 1st month in group SL than in group L (P = 0.001). In the same way, NRS values in the 3rd month were significantly lower in the group with steroids (P = 0.0001). During the evaluation of the Beck test, we detected significantly greater decreases in the 1st month (P = 0.017) and 3rd month (P = 0.021) in the SL group than in the L group. Conclusions: Ganglion impar blockade decreases pain in the treatment of chronic coccydynia and improve depression. Addition of steroids in a ganglion impar blockade is required for treatment response that should accumulate over a long period of time.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据