A description and outcome evaluation of sacrococcygeal joint radiofrequency neurotomy for treatment of chronic coccydynia – A dorsal approach
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Coccydynia is a condition characterized by pain and tenderness in the coccyx region of the spine. Chronic coccydynia (≥3-months) management remains a clinical challenge. Radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) targeting the sacrococcygeal joint (SCJ) and/or 1st intercoccygeal joint (ICJ) margins has emerged as an alternative, minimally invasive intervention for refractory coccydynia. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of an RFN technique targeting the dorsal aspect of SCJ and/or 1st ICJ for treatment of patients with chronic coccydynia. Methods: Retrospective analysis of prospective outcomes for patients with chronic coccydynia (≥3-months) who underwent RFN to dorsal SCJ and/or 1st ICJ between 2009 - 2023. RFN technique was a dorsal approach targeting the distal sacrum and proximal coccyx, which form the SCJ or 1st ICJ margins. Numerical rating scale (NRS) and Pain Disability Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Spine (PDQQ-S) scores were completed pre- and 3-months post-RFN. Successful RFN was defined as ≥50% reduction or minimal clinical important difference (MCID) in PDQQ-S and NRS pain scores. The primary outcome measures were the proportion of patients achieving ≥50% reduction in NRS pain and PDDQ-S scores following primary and repeat RFN to SCJ and/or 1st ICJ. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving MCID on NRS pain and PDQQ-S scores following RFN, as well as mean NRS and PDQQ-S scores pre- and 3-months post-RFN, and magnitude of improvement for patients following successful RFN procedures. Results: A total of 52 RFN procedures (n = 30 primary, and n = 22 repeat procedures) were performed on 30 patients (female = 25, male = 5, mean age 55.1 ± 13.0yrs). Ten patients (33.3%; 95% CI = 17.3-52.8) reported ≥50% pain reduction as measured by NRS pain and PDQQ-S scores following primary SCJ and/or 1st ICJ RFN at 3-months follow-up. Fifteen patients (50%; 95% CI = 31.3-68.7) reported MCID NRS pain reduction and 12 patients (40.0%; 95% CI = 22.7-59.4) reported MCID PDQQ-S scores at 3-months following primary RFN. The mean magnitude of improvement for patients with primary successful RFN, as defined as ≥50% reduction in either NRS pain or PDQQ-S scores, was 77.4% (±SD 21.4%) and 74.9% (±SD = 19.9%), respectively. Similarly, the mean magnitude of improvement for patients with successful RFN, as defined by MCID reduction in NRS pain or PDQQ-S scores, was 62.6% (±SD = 28.2%) and 69.3% (±SD = 22.3%), respectively. At 3-months follow-up, 14 patients (63.6%; 95% CI = 40.7-82.8) reported ≥50% pain reduction as measured by either NRS pain and PDQQ-S scores following repeat RFN. Nineteen patients (86.4%; 95% CI = 65.1-97.1) reported MCID NRS pain reduction and 16 patients (72.7%; 95% CI = 49.8-89.3) reported MCID PDQQ-S scores at 3-months following repeat RFN. Statistically significant differences were observed between pre- and post-RFN NRS pain and PDQQ-S scores (p < 0.005) in both primary and repeat procedures. Discussion/conclusion: This study represents an introductory step in evaluating the efficacy of a dorsal approach RFN technique targeting the SCJ and/or 1st ICJ as a treatment option for chronic coccydynia. Primary RFN demonstrated pain reduction and improvement in function at 3-months in 33.3% of patients. Several limitations remain, including heterogeneity in patient population, small sample size, and no control groups. Future detailed investigations include cadaveric studies to clarify sensory innervation and enhance reliability of our targets during RFN. Larger prospective studies of long-term outcomes, including comparison with control groups, are required to further evaluate the efficacy of our dorsal RFN approach.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».