Retrospective Comparison of Ultrasound and Fluoroscopic Image Guidance for Intercostal Steroid Injections
Introduction: Steroid injection around the intercostal nerves is one of the treatment options for intercostal neuralgia. The technique may be performed blindly, under fluoroscopic guidance (FSG) or with the use of ultrasound guidance (USG). This study is a retrospective comparison of image guidance...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Pain practice 2010-07, Vol.10 (4), p.312-317 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 317 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 312 |
container_title | Pain practice |
container_volume | 10 |
creator | Shankar, Hariharan Eastwood, Dan |
description | Introduction: Steroid injection around the intercostal nerves is one of the treatment options for intercostal neuralgia. The technique may be performed blindly, under fluoroscopic guidance (FSG) or with the use of ultrasound guidance (USG). This study is a retrospective comparison of image guidance for intercostal steroid injections.
Methods: After Institutional Review Board approval, a retrospective review of all patient charts who received intercostal steroid injections from 2005 to 2009 was performed. A total of 39 blocks were performed in that period. Of that 12 were USG blocks and 27 FSG blocks. The preprocedure visual analog scale (VAS) and postprocedure VAS and the duration of pain relief were compared between the 2 techniques. A Mann–Whitney test and Kruskal–Wallis test were performed looking for differences between the techniques.
Results: The median change in the VAS for FSG and USG were −5.000 and −4.000, respectively, and duration of pain relief with a median difference of 2 weeks (95% confidence interval of −4, 7). There were 2 occasions of intravascular spread noticed with the FSG although this should not affect the study result as the needle was repositioned and steroid injected only after contrast dye confirmation.
Conclusion: With similar change in VAS scores and duration of pain relief between the 2 guidance methods based on this retrospective study, both image guidance techniques may offer similar pain relief. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2009.00345.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_754559028</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>754559028</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4385-57a87a19932b9c5ff0958a915ee91154cb62459b09ea9cb1ab554040959185e43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUFv1DAQhS0EoqXwF5BvnBLs2LOJDxyqFV22qpbSUnG0HO8EeUniYCdl--_rdMtewZLlJ_t7M_I8QihnOU_r4y7nIERWAGN5wZjKGRMS8v0Lcnp8ePmkWVayCk7Imxh3jPFSCfGanBSsEEzK6pS4GxyDjwPa0d0jXfpuMMFF31Pf0Lt2DCb6qd9Sk_ZFO_nEWj84S9ed-Yl0Nbmt6S3Sxge67kcM1sfRtPQ2Se-26W43l_Z9fEteNaaN-O75PCN3F5-_L79kV19X6-X5VWalqCCD0lSl4UqJolYWmoYpqIzigKg4B2nrRSFB1UyhUbbmpgaQTCZK8QpQijPy4VB3CP73hHHUnYsW29b06KeoS5AAihXVv0kh1AwuElkdSJv-HwM2egiuM-FBc6bnRPROz4PX8-D1nIh-SkTvk_X9c5Op7nB7NP6NIAGfDsAf1-LDfxfW1-fXN0klf3bwuzji_ug34ZdelKIE_WOz0pvLpRD8263eiEcXLqkB</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>733990286</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Retrospective Comparison of Ultrasound and Fluoroscopic Image Guidance for Intercostal Steroid Injections</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Shankar, Hariharan ; Eastwood, Dan</creator><creatorcontrib>Shankar, Hariharan ; Eastwood, Dan</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction: Steroid injection around the intercostal nerves is one of the treatment options for intercostal neuralgia. The technique may be performed blindly, under fluoroscopic guidance (FSG) or with the use of ultrasound guidance (USG). This study is a retrospective comparison of image guidance for intercostal steroid injections.
Methods: After Institutional Review Board approval, a retrospective review of all patient charts who received intercostal steroid injections from 2005 to 2009 was performed. A total of 39 blocks were performed in that period. Of that 12 were USG blocks and 27 FSG blocks. The preprocedure visual analog scale (VAS) and postprocedure VAS and the duration of pain relief were compared between the 2 techniques. A Mann–Whitney test and Kruskal–Wallis test were performed looking for differences between the techniques.
Results: The median change in the VAS for FSG and USG were −5.000 and −4.000, respectively, and duration of pain relief with a median difference of 2 weeks (95% confidence interval of −4, 7). There were 2 occasions of intravascular spread noticed with the FSG although this should not affect the study result as the needle was repositioned and steroid injected only after contrast dye confirmation.
Conclusion: With similar change in VAS scores and duration of pain relief between the 2 guidance methods based on this retrospective study, both image guidance techniques may offer similar pain relief.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1530-7085</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1533-2500</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2009.00345.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20230448</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><subject>chest pain ; fluoroscopy ; Fluoroscopy - methods ; Humans ; imaging ; intercostal nerve block ; Intercostal Nerves - drug effects ; Intercostal Nerves - pathology ; Nerve Block - methods ; Neuralgia - diagnosis ; Neuralgia - drug therapy ; Pain Measurement - methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Statistics, Nonparametric ; Steroids - therapeutic use ; Ultrasonography, Doppler - methods ; ultrasound-guidance</subject><ispartof>Pain practice, 2010-07, Vol.10 (4), p.312-317</ispartof><rights>Published 2010. This article is a US Government work and is in the public domain in the WA</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4385-57a87a19932b9c5ff0958a915ee91154cb62459b09ea9cb1ab554040959185e43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4385-57a87a19932b9c5ff0958a915ee91154cb62459b09ea9cb1ab554040959185e43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1533-2500.2009.00345.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1533-2500.2009.00345.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20230448$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Shankar, Hariharan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eastwood, Dan</creatorcontrib><title>Retrospective Comparison of Ultrasound and Fluoroscopic Image Guidance for Intercostal Steroid Injections</title><title>Pain practice</title><addtitle>Pain Pract</addtitle><description>Introduction: Steroid injection around the intercostal nerves is one of the treatment options for intercostal neuralgia. The technique may be performed blindly, under fluoroscopic guidance (FSG) or with the use of ultrasound guidance (USG). This study is a retrospective comparison of image guidance for intercostal steroid injections.
Methods: After Institutional Review Board approval, a retrospective review of all patient charts who received intercostal steroid injections from 2005 to 2009 was performed. A total of 39 blocks were performed in that period. Of that 12 were USG blocks and 27 FSG blocks. The preprocedure visual analog scale (VAS) and postprocedure VAS and the duration of pain relief were compared between the 2 techniques. A Mann–Whitney test and Kruskal–Wallis test were performed looking for differences between the techniques.
Results: The median change in the VAS for FSG and USG were −5.000 and −4.000, respectively, and duration of pain relief with a median difference of 2 weeks (95% confidence interval of −4, 7). There were 2 occasions of intravascular spread noticed with the FSG although this should not affect the study result as the needle was repositioned and steroid injected only after contrast dye confirmation.
Conclusion: With similar change in VAS scores and duration of pain relief between the 2 guidance methods based on this retrospective study, both image guidance techniques may offer similar pain relief.</description><subject>chest pain</subject><subject>fluoroscopy</subject><subject>Fluoroscopy - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>imaging</subject><subject>intercostal nerve block</subject><subject>Intercostal Nerves - drug effects</subject><subject>Intercostal Nerves - pathology</subject><subject>Nerve Block - methods</subject><subject>Neuralgia - diagnosis</subject><subject>Neuralgia - drug therapy</subject><subject>Pain Measurement - methods</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Statistics, Nonparametric</subject><subject>Steroids - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Ultrasonography, Doppler - methods</subject><subject>ultrasound-guidance</subject><issn>1530-7085</issn><issn>1533-2500</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUFv1DAQhS0EoqXwF5BvnBLs2LOJDxyqFV22qpbSUnG0HO8EeUniYCdl--_rdMtewZLlJ_t7M_I8QihnOU_r4y7nIERWAGN5wZjKGRMS8v0Lcnp8ePmkWVayCk7Imxh3jPFSCfGanBSsEEzK6pS4GxyDjwPa0d0jXfpuMMFF31Pf0Lt2DCb6qd9Sk_ZFO_nEWj84S9ed-Yl0Nbmt6S3Sxge67kcM1sfRtPQ2Se-26W43l_Z9fEteNaaN-O75PCN3F5-_L79kV19X6-X5VWalqCCD0lSl4UqJolYWmoYpqIzigKg4B2nrRSFB1UyhUbbmpgaQTCZK8QpQijPy4VB3CP73hHHUnYsW29b06KeoS5AAihXVv0kh1AwuElkdSJv-HwM2egiuM-FBc6bnRPROz4PX8-D1nIh-SkTvk_X9c5Op7nB7NP6NIAGfDsAf1-LDfxfW1-fXN0klf3bwuzji_ug34ZdelKIE_WOz0pvLpRD8263eiEcXLqkB</recordid><startdate>201007</startdate><enddate>201007</enddate><creator>Shankar, Hariharan</creator><creator>Eastwood, Dan</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201007</creationdate><title>Retrospective Comparison of Ultrasound and Fluoroscopic Image Guidance for Intercostal Steroid Injections</title><author>Shankar, Hariharan ; Eastwood, Dan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4385-57a87a19932b9c5ff0958a915ee91154cb62459b09ea9cb1ab554040959185e43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>chest pain</topic><topic>fluoroscopy</topic><topic>Fluoroscopy - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>imaging</topic><topic>intercostal nerve block</topic><topic>Intercostal Nerves - drug effects</topic><topic>Intercostal Nerves - pathology</topic><topic>Nerve Block - methods</topic><topic>Neuralgia - diagnosis</topic><topic>Neuralgia - drug therapy</topic><topic>Pain Measurement - methods</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Statistics, Nonparametric</topic><topic>Steroids - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Ultrasonography, Doppler - methods</topic><topic>ultrasound-guidance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shankar, Hariharan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eastwood, Dan</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Pain practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shankar, Hariharan</au><au>Eastwood, Dan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Retrospective Comparison of Ultrasound and Fluoroscopic Image Guidance for Intercostal Steroid Injections</atitle><jtitle>Pain practice</jtitle><addtitle>Pain Pract</addtitle><date>2010-07</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>312</spage><epage>317</epage><pages>312-317</pages><issn>1530-7085</issn><eissn>1533-2500</eissn><abstract>Introduction: Steroid injection around the intercostal nerves is one of the treatment options for intercostal neuralgia. The technique may be performed blindly, under fluoroscopic guidance (FSG) or with the use of ultrasound guidance (USG). This study is a retrospective comparison of image guidance for intercostal steroid injections.
Methods: After Institutional Review Board approval, a retrospective review of all patient charts who received intercostal steroid injections from 2005 to 2009 was performed. A total of 39 blocks were performed in that period. Of that 12 were USG blocks and 27 FSG blocks. The preprocedure visual analog scale (VAS) and postprocedure VAS and the duration of pain relief were compared between the 2 techniques. A Mann–Whitney test and Kruskal–Wallis test were performed looking for differences between the techniques.
Results: The median change in the VAS for FSG and USG were −5.000 and −4.000, respectively, and duration of pain relief with a median difference of 2 weeks (95% confidence interval of −4, 7). There were 2 occasions of intravascular spread noticed with the FSG although this should not affect the study result as the needle was repositioned and steroid injected only after contrast dye confirmation.
Conclusion: With similar change in VAS scores and duration of pain relief between the 2 guidance methods based on this retrospective study, both image guidance techniques may offer similar pain relief.</abstract><cop>Malden, USA</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Inc</pub><pmid>20230448</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1533-2500.2009.00345.x</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1530-7085 |
ispartof | Pain practice, 2010-07, Vol.10 (4), p.312-317 |
issn | 1530-7085 1533-2500 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_754559028 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library |
subjects | chest pain fluoroscopy Fluoroscopy - methods Humans imaging intercostal nerve block Intercostal Nerves - drug effects Intercostal Nerves - pathology Nerve Block - methods Neuralgia - diagnosis Neuralgia - drug therapy Pain Measurement - methods Retrospective Studies Statistics, Nonparametric Steroids - therapeutic use Ultrasonography, Doppler - methods ultrasound-guidance |
title | Retrospective Comparison of Ultrasound and Fluoroscopic Image Guidance for Intercostal Steroid Injections |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T06%3A16%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Retrospective%20Comparison%20of%20Ultrasound%20and%20Fluoroscopic%20Image%20Guidance%20for%20Intercostal%20Steroid%20Injections&rft.jtitle=Pain%20practice&rft.au=Shankar,%20Hariharan&rft.date=2010-07&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=312&rft.epage=317&rft.pages=312-317&rft.issn=1530-7085&rft.eissn=1533-2500&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1533-2500.2009.00345.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E754559028%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=733990286&rft_id=info:pmid/20230448&rfr_iscdi=true |