↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the effectiveness of ‘pulse radiofrequency treatment of dorsal root ganglion’ in patients with chronic lumbar radicular pain: study protocol for a randomized control trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessing the effectiveness of ‘pulse radiofrequency treatment of dorsal root ganglion’ in patients with chronic lumbar radicular pain: study protocol for a randomized control trial
Published in
Trials, April 2012
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-13-52
Pubmed ID
Authors

Harsha Shanthanna, Philip Chan, James McChesney, James Paul, Lehana Thabane

Abstract

Chronic lumbar radicular pain can be described as neuropathic pain along the distribution of a particular nerve root. The dorsal root ganglion has been implicated in its pathogenesis by giving rise to abnormal impulse generation as a result of irritation, direct compression and sensitization. Chronic lumbar radicular pain is commonly treated with medications, physiotherapy and epidural steroid injections. Epidural steroid injections are associated with several common and rarer side effects such as spinal cord infarction and death. It is essential and advantageous to look for alternate interventions which could be effective with fewer side effects. Pulse radio frequency is a relatively new technique and is less destructive then conventional radiofrequency. Safety and effectiveness of pulse radio frequency in neuropathic pain has been demonstrated in animal and humans studies. Although its effects on dorsal root ganglion have been studied in animals there is only one randomized control trial in literature demonstrating its effectiveness in cervical radicular pain and none in lumbar radicular pain. Our primary objective is to study the feasibility of a larger trial in terms of recruitment and methodology. Secondary objectives are to compare the treatment effects and side effects.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 98 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Master 12 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Other 10 10%
Researcher 9 9%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 28 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 13%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 32 32%