Person:
OKÇU, MEHMET

Profile Picture

Email Address

Birth Date

Research Projects

Organizational Units

OrgUnit Logo
Organizational Unit

Job Title

Last Name

OKÇU

First Name

MEHMET

Name

Filters

20222
Reset filters

Settings

Subject: Fizik Tedavi, Spor Terapisi ve Rehabilitasyon ×

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    PublicationOpen Access
    Rare complication of ganglion impar blockade with the transsacrococcygeal approach: A case of rectal perforation
    (2022-06-01) OKÇU, MEHMET; ŞENCAN, SAVAŞ; GÜNDÜZ, OSMAN HAKAN; OKÇU M., ŞENCAN S., GÜNDÜZ O. H.
    Although it has been reported that caution should be exercised in terms of rectal perforation, as the ganglion impar is located just behind the rectum in the presacral space, the authors could not find any case or images of rectal perforation occurring during ganglion impar blockade in the literature. In this report, the case of a 38-year-old female with rectal perforation that developed during ganglion impar blockade, performed by the transsacrococcygeal approach under fluoroscopy guidance, is presented. Wrong needle selection and the structurally short presacral space of the patient may have influenced the development of rectal perforation in the patient. This study presents the first case and images of rectal perforation in the literature that developed during the application of ganglion impar blockade using the transsacrococcygeal technique. In ganglion impar block applications, technically appropriate needles should be used, and care should be taken in terms of rectal perforation.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    PublicationMetadata only
    Is low-dose dextrose prolotherapy as effective as high-dose dextrose prolotherapy in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis? A double-blind, ultrasound guided, randomized controlled study
    (2022-01-01) OKÇU, MEHMET; Ciftci Y. G. D. , Tuncay F., Kocak F. A. , OKÇU M.
    © 2022 American Congress of Rehabilitation MedicineObjectives: To investigate the effects of prolotherapy (PrT) on pain, functionality, clinical improvement and to compare the 5% low and 15% high dose dextrose PrT in chronic lateral epicondylitis. Design: A double-blind, parallel groups, randomized controlled study. Settings: Outpatient Clinic. Participants: Sixty patients (N=60), aged 44.30±10.31 years old, with chronic lateral epicondylitis were allocated randomly into 3 groups. Interventions: To Group 1 5% dextrose PrT, to Group 2 15% dextrose PrT, to Group 3 0.9% saline injections were done at 3 times (weeks 0, 3, 6), to the entheses of forearm extensors and annular ligament. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcomes were handgrip strength, visual analog scale-rest (VAS-R), visual analog scale-activity (VAS-A), pressure-pain threshold, and Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (Q-DASH). The secondary outcomes were clinical improvement (Disease Global Assessment Questionnaire), side effects, and complications. Primary outcomes were collected at baseline week 0, week 3, and 12. Secondary outcomes were collected at weeks 3 and 12. Results: In Group 2, VAS-A and VAS-R (at week 3), handgrip strength and pressure-pain threshold (at week 12) were significantly different than other groups (P.05). Conclusion: In chronic lateral epicondylitis, 5% and 15% dextrose PrT is more effective in pain, handgrip strength, functionality, and clinical improvement than %0.9 saline. There was no difference in functionality, clinical improvement, side effects, and complications between the PrT groups. 15% dextrose PrT was more effective in handgrip strength and pressure-pain threshold at week 12 and pain at week 3. We recommend 15% dextrose PrT based on this study.