Publication:
Comparison of treatment outcomes in lumbar central stenosis patients treated with epidural steroid injections: interlaminar versus bilateral transforaminal approach

dc.contributor.authorYOLCU, GÜNAY
dc.contributor.authorGÜNDÜZ, OSMAN HAKAN
dc.contributor.authorŞENCAN, SAVAŞ
dc.contributor.authorsSencan, Savas; Edipoglu, Ipek Saadet; Celenlioglu, Alp Eren; Yolcu, Gunay; Gunduz, Osman Hakan
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-14T10:14:37Z
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-11T11:11:01Z
dc.date.available2022-03-14T10:14:37Z
dc.date.issued2020-07-01
dc.description.abstractBackground: We aimed to compare interlaminar epidural steroid injections (ILESI) and bilateral transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) on pain intensity, functional status, depression, walking distance, and the neuropathic component in patients with lumbar central spinal stenosis (LCSS). Methods: The patients were divided into either the ILESI or the bilateral TFESI groups. Prime outcome measures include the numerical rating scale (NRS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), Beck depression inventory (BDI), and pain-free walking distance. The douleur neuropathique en 4 questions score was used as a secondary outcome measure. Results: A total of 72 patients were finally included. NRS, ODI, and BDI scores showed a significant decline in both groups in all follow-ups. Third-month NRS scores were significantly lower in the ILESI group (P = 0.047). The percentages of decrease in the ODI and BDI scores between the baseline and the third week and third month were significantly higher in the ILESI group (P = 0.017, P = 0.001 and P = 0.048, P = 0.030, respectively). Pain-free walking distance percentages from the baseline to the third week and third month were significantly higher in the ILESI group (P = 0.036, P < 0.001). The proportion of patients with neuropathic pain in the bilateral TFESI group significantly decreased in the third week compared to the baseline (P = 0.020). Conclusions: Both ILESI and TFESI are reliable treatment options for LCSS. ILESI might be preferred because of easier application and more effectiveness. However, TFESI might be a better option in patients with more prominent neuropathic pain.
dc.identifier.doi10.3344/kjp.2020.33.3.226
dc.identifier.eissn2093-0569
dc.identifier.issn2005-9159
dc.identifier.pubmed32606267
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11424/244250
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000577357700005
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherKOREAN PAIN SOC
dc.relation.ispartofKOREAN JOURNAL OF PAIN
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectChronic Pain
dc.subjectDepression
dc.subjectInjections
dc.subjectEpidural
dc.subjectLow Back Pain
dc.subjectLumbosacral
dc.subjectRegion
dc.subjectNeuralgia
dc.subjectPain Management
dc.subjectPatient Outcome Assessment
dc.subjectSpinal
dc.subjectStenosis
dc.subjectLOW-BACK-PAIN
dc.subjectSPINAL STENOSIS
dc.subjectNEUROPATHIC PAIN
dc.subjectDOUBLE-BLIND
dc.subjectQUESTIONNAIRE
dc.subjectSCIATICA
dc.titleComparison of treatment outcomes in lumbar central stenosis patients treated with epidural steroid injections: interlaminar versus bilateral transforaminal approach
dc.typearticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.endPage233
oaire.citation.issue3
oaire.citation.startPage226
oaire.citation.titleKOREAN JOURNAL OF PAIN
oaire.citation.volume33

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
file.pdf
Size:
274.77 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format