To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Ultrasound-Guided vs Computed Tomography Fluoroscopy-Assisted Transforaminal Steroid Injections

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
April 2023

Ultrasound-Guided vs Computed Tomography Fluoroscopy-Assisted Transforaminal Steroid Injections

Vol: 303| Issue: 4| Number:15| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Ultrasound-guided Versus Computed Tomography Fluoroscopy-assisted Cervical Transforaminal Steroid Injection for the Treatment of Radicular Pain in the Lower Cervical Spine: A Randomized Single-blind Controlled Noninferiority Study.

Clin J Pain . 2023 Feb 1;39(2):68-75.

Contributing Authors:
L Yue S Zheng L Hua H Li Y Yang J Li L He

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

Four hundred and thirty patients with cervical radicular pain were randomized to receive either an ultrasound-guided (US) transforaminal steroid injection (n=215) or computed tomography (CT) fluoroscopy-assisted cervical transforaminal steroid injection (n=215). Outcomes of interest were contrast spread pattern, the incidence of satisfactory contrast dispersion, pain on a Numerical Rating Scale (N...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue