NCT05950321

Paramedian CESI vs Selective Nerve Root PRF for Lower Cervical Radicular Pain

Comparison of Fluoroscopy-guided Cervical Paramedian Interlaminar Epidural Block Versus Ultrasound-guided Selective Nerve Root Pulsed Radiofrequency for the Management of Chronic Lower Cervical Radicular Pain

• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 60 (actual)
• Sponsor: Diskapi Teaching and Research Hospital · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years – 75 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

This study aims to compare the efficacy of ultrasound-guided selective cervical nerve root pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) versus fluoroscopy-guided paramedian cervical epidural steroid administration (CESI) for the treatment of lower cervical radicular pain refractory to conservative treatments. For this evaluation, a numerical rating (NRS), neck disability index (NDI), and Leeds Assessment Of Neuropathic Symptoms And Signs (LANSS) scale will be used before and after both interventions.

Detailed description

Chronic cervical radicular pain is a common condition that affects the quality of life of many patients and is caused by compression or irritation of the cervical nerve roots. Treatment options for this condition include conservative methods such as medications and physical therapy, as well as interventions such as surgery or injections. Two commonly used injections for chronic cervical radicular pain are ultrasound-guided selective nerve root PRF and fluoroscopy-guided paramedian CESI. PRF involves the application of pulsed radiofrequency energy (intermittent current, tissue temperature not exceeding 42 °C) to the cervical nerve root under ultrasound guidance. PRF is a non-destructive technique that modulates the activity of nerve fibers without causing thermal damage. CESI involves injecting local anesthetic and steroids into the epidural space between the laminae of the vertebrae under fluoroscopic guidance. The aim of both techniques is to reduce inflammation and pain transmission from the affected nerve root. The efficacy of both CESI and selective nerve root PRF has been demonstrated in clinical trials. The primary aim of the investigators in this study is to compare the efficacy of these two treatments. A total of at least 60 patients, 30 patients in each group, will be enrolled for comparison. NRS, NDI, and LANSS scores before, 3 months, and 6 months after treatment will be compared both within and between groups. The secondary aim is to reveal the side effects and adverse events in these two treatment modalities.

Conditions

• Neck Pain
• Cervical Radiculopathy

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
PROCEDURE	Paramedian cervical epidural steroid injection	For paramedian cervical epidural steroid injection, the cervical 7 (C7) - thoracic 1 (T1) interval is determined by taking an appropriate angle with C-arm fluoroscopy to determine the interlaminar space from the posterior cervical region. The epidural space is recognized by the negative pressure reflected on the resistance syringe.
PROCEDURE	Selective nerve root pulsed radiofrequency	For selective nerve root PRF, an 8-12 Hz linear ultrasound probe is first placed posterolateral to the neck. The level of the cervical nerve roots is determined according to the morphology of the anterior and posterior vertebral tubercles. The corresponding nerve root is visualized hypoechoically between the tubercles. The radiofrequency cannula is inserted in the same plane as the ultrasound probe (in plane) and the relevant nerve root is approached. Pulsed radiofrequency current, which has therapeutic properties in chronic pain, is applied to the relevant nerve root for 240 seconds.

Timeline

• Start date: 2022-08-01
• Primary completion: 2023-08-05
• Completion: 2023-08-20
• First posted: 2023-07-18
• Last updated: 2023-09-18

Locations

1 site across 1 country: Turkey (Türkiye)