A Comparison of Genicular Nerve Blockade With Corticosteroids Using Either Classical Anatomical Targets vs Revised Targets for Pain and Function in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

Author:

Fonkoue Loïc123ORCID,Steyaert Arnaud45,Kouame Jean-Eric K1,Bandolo Eric2,Lebleu Julien1,Fossoh Hermann2,Behets Catherine3,Detrembleur Christine1,Cornu Olivier16

Affiliation:

1. Neuro-Musculo-Skeletal pole (NMSK) - Experimental and clinical research institute (IREC), Université catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium

2. Department of Orthopedics and Trauma, Centre Hospitalier Saint Martin De Porres, Yaoundé, Cameroon

3. Department of Morphology—IREC, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium

4. Department of Anesthesia and pain medicine, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium

5. Institute of Neuroscience (IONS), UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium

6. Department of Orthopedics and Trauma, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium

Abstract

Abstract Objective Compare the effectiveness of genicular nerve blockade (GNB) using classical anatomical targets (CT) versus revised targets (RT) in patients suffering from chronic knee osteoarthritis pain. Design Double-blinded randomized controlled trial. Setting Pain medicine center of a teaching hospital. Methods We randomly assigned 55 patients with chronic knee osteoarthritis pain to receive a GNB (using a fluid mixture of 2 mL: lidocaine 1% + 20 mg triamcinolone) with either classical targets (CT-group, n = 28) or revised targets (RT-group, n = 27). Numeric rating pain scale (NRS), Oxford knee score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index score (WOMAC), Quantitative analgesic questionnaire (QAQ) and global perceived effects were assessed at baseline, and at 1-hour, 24-hours, 1, 4, and 12 weeks post-intervention. Results The RT-group showed greater reduction in NRS mean score at 1-hour post-intervention (2.4 ± 2.1 vs 0.4 ± 0.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) [.0–.8] vs [1.6–3.2], P < .001). The proportion of patients achieving more than 50% knee pain reduction was higher in the RT-group at each follow up interval, yet these differences were statistically significant only at 1-hour post intervention (82.1% [95% CI = 63.1–93.9] vs 100% [95% CI = 97.2–100] P = .02). Both protocols resulted in significant pain reduction and joint function improvement up to 12 weeks post-intervention. Conclusions The revised technique allowed more pain relief as well as greater proportion of successful responders at 1-hour post intervention. The large volume injected during therapeutic GNB could have compensated the lack of precision of the classical anatomical targets, mitigating differences in outcomes between both techniques.

Funder

Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Neurology (clinical),General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3