Pain physician · 2019
Role of 3 Tesla MR Neurography and CT-guided Injections for Pudendal Neuralgia: Analysis of Pain Response.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ly Jimmy, Scott Kelly, Xi Yin, Ashikyan Oganes, Chhabra Avneesh
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance neurography (MRN) has an increasing role in the diagnosis and management of pudendal neuralgia, a neurogenic cause of chronic pelvic pain.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research was to determine the role of MRN in predicting improved pain outcomes following computed tomography (CT)-guided perineural injections in patients with pudendal neuralgia.
STUDY DESIGN: This study used a retrospective cross-sectional study design.
SETTING: The research was conducted at a large academic hospital.
METHODS: Patients: Ninety-one patients (139 injections) who received MRN and CT-guided pudendal blocks were analyzed.
INTERVENTION: A 3Tesla (T) scanner was used to evaluate the lumbosacral plexus for pudendal neuropathy. Prior to receiving a CT-guided pudendal perineural injection, patients were given pain logs and asked to record pain on a visual analog scale.
MEASUREMENT: MRN findings for pudendal neuropathy were compared to the results of the CT-guided pudendal nerve blocks. Injection pain responses were categorized into 3 groups - positive block, possible positive block, and negative block.Statistical Tests: A chi-square test was used to test any association, and a Cochran-Armitage trend test was used to test any trend. Significance level was set at .05. All analyses were done in SAS Version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC).
RESULTS: Ninety-one patients (139 injections) who received MRN were analyzed. Of these 139 injections, 41 were considered positive (29.5%), 52 of 139 were possible positives (37.4%), and 46 of 139 were negative blocks (33.1%). Of the patients who had a positive pudendal block, no significant difference was found between the MRN result and the pudendal perineural injection response (P = .57). Women had better overall response to pudendal blocks, but this response was not associated with MRN findings (P = .34). However, positive MRN results were associated with better pain response in men (P = .005). Patients who reported bowel dysfunction also had a better response to pudendal perineural injection (P = .02).
LIMITATIONS: Some limitations include subjectivity of pain reporting, reporting consistency, absence of a control group, and the retrospective nature of the chart review.
CONCLUSION: Pudendal perineural injections improve pain in patients with pudendal neuralgia and positive MRN results are associated with better response in men.
KEY WORDS: MRI, MRN, CT injection, pudendal neuralgia, pudendal nerve, pelvic pain, chronic pelvic pain, pudendal neuropathy.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research was to determine the role of MRN in predicting improved pain outcomes following computed tomography (CT)-guided perineural injections in patients with pudendal neuralgia.
STUDY DESIGN: This study used a retrospective cross-sectional study design.
SETTING: The research was conducted at a large academic hospital.
METHODS: Patients: Ninety-one patients (139 injections) who received MRN and CT-guided pudendal blocks were analyzed.
INTERVENTION: A 3Tesla (T) scanner was used to evaluate the lumbosacral plexus for pudendal neuropathy. Prior to receiving a CT-guided pudendal perineural injection, patients were given pain logs and asked to record pain on a visual analog scale.
MEASUREMENT: MRN findings for pudendal neuropathy were compared to the results of the CT-guided pudendal nerve blocks. Injection pain responses were categorized into 3 groups - positive block, possible positive block, and negative block.Statistical Tests: A chi-square test was used to test any association, and a Cochran-Armitage trend test was used to test any trend. Significance level was set at .05. All analyses were done in SAS Version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC).
RESULTS: Ninety-one patients (139 injections) who received MRN were analyzed. Of these 139 injections, 41 were considered positive (29.5%), 52 of 139 were possible positives (37.4%), and 46 of 139 were negative blocks (33.1%). Of the patients who had a positive pudendal block, no significant difference was found between the MRN result and the pudendal perineural injection response (P = .57). Women had better overall response to pudendal blocks, but this response was not associated with MRN findings (P = .34). However, positive MRN results were associated with better pain response in men (P = .005). Patients who reported bowel dysfunction also had a better response to pudendal perineural injection (P = .02).
LIMITATIONS: Some limitations include subjectivity of pain reporting, reporting consistency, absence of a control group, and the retrospective nature of the chart review.
CONCLUSION: Pudendal perineural injections improve pain in patients with pudendal neuralgia and positive MRN results are associated with better response in men.
KEY WORDS: MRI, MRN, CT injection, pudendal neuralgia, pudendal nerve, pelvic pain, chronic pelvic pain, pudendal neuropathy.