OBJECTIVE: To describe an "indirect" cervical nerve root injection technique with a dorsal approach that should carry less inherent risk than the "direct" cervical transforaminal injection approach, and to compare the immediate post-injection results of the two procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The indirect and direct cervical nerve root injection procedures are described in detail. Fifty-three consecutive patients receiving the indirect nerve root injections during 2009-2010 were age- and gender-matched to 53 patients who underwent direct transforaminal nerve root injections performed in 2006. Pain level data were collected immediately before and 20-30 min after each procedure. The percentages of pain change in the two groups were compared using the unpaired Student's t test. RESULTS: Fifty-two men (mean age 49) and 54 women (mean age 55) were included. The mean percentage of pain reduction for patients receiving indirect nerve root injections was 38.4% and for those undergoing the direct nerve root injections approach it was 43.2%. This was not significantly different (P = 0.455). No immediate or late adverse effects were reported after either injection procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The indirect cervical nerve root injection procedure is a potentially safer alternative to direct cervical transforaminal nerve root injections. The short-term pain reduction is similar using the two injection methods.
OBJECTIVE: To describe an "indirect" cervical nerve root injection technique with a dorsal approach that should carry less inherent risk than the "direct" cervical transforaminal injection approach, and to compare the immediate post-injection results of the two procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The indirect and direct cervical nerve root injection procedures are described in detail. Fifty-three consecutive patients receiving the indirect nerve root injections during 2009-2010 were age- and gender-matched to 53 patients who underwent direct transforaminal nerve root injections performed in 2006. Pain level data were collected immediately before and 20-30 min after each procedure. The percentages of pain change in the two groups were compared using the unpaired Student's t test. RESULTS: Fifty-two men (mean age 49) and 54 women (mean age 55) were included. The mean percentage of pain reduction for patients receiving indirect nerve root injections was 38.4% and for those undergoing the direct nerve root injections approach it was 43.2%. This was not significantly different (P = 0.455). No immediate or late adverse effects were reported after either injection procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The indirect cervical nerve root injection procedure is a potentially safer alternative to direct cervical transforaminal nerve root injections. The short-term pain reduction is similar using the two injection methods.
Authors: Graham C Scanlon; Tobias Moeller-Bertram; Shawn M Romanowsky; Mark S Wallace Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2007-05-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Gbolahan O Okubadejo; Michael R Talcott; Robert E Schmidt; Aseem Sharma; Alpesh A Patel; R Brian Mackey; Anthony H Guarino; Christopher J Moran; K Daniel Riew Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 5.284