2012
DOI: 10.3344/kjp.2012.25.1.55
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clinical Experiences of Transforaminal Balloon Decompression for Patients with Spinal Stenosis

Abstract: Lumbar spinal stenosis is a commonly treated with epidural injections of local anesthetics and corticosteroids, however, these therapies may relieve leg pain for weeks to months but do not influence functional status. Furthermore, the majority of patients report no substantial symptom change over the repeated treatment. Utilizing balloon catheters, we successfully treated with three patients who complained persistent symptoms despite repeated conventional steroid injections. Our results suggest that transforam… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our institute previously published several articles about nonsurgical interventions, [ 1 4 ] particularly balloon decompression and adhesiolysis of the lumbar epidural space and neural foramen in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. [ 1 , 2 ] Transforaminal epidural steroid injection was proven to be effective in patients with foraminal stenosis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our institute previously published several articles about nonsurgical interventions, [ 1 4 ] particularly balloon decompression and adhesiolysis of the lumbar epidural space and neural foramen in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. [ 1 , 2 ] Transforaminal epidural steroid injection was proven to be effective in patients with foraminal stenosis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, our present results may be limited. Future studies should examine the correlation between the IAPCSA and conventional quantitative radiological criteria for CLSS [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37]. In spite of these limitations, this is the first study to document the association of IAPCSA with CLSS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Since it was first described in patients with failed back surgery syndrome, percutaneous adhesiolysis has been used to lyse epidural scars [ 7 ], and treat radicular pain in various diseases [ 13 , 14 ]. Conventional epidural adhesiolysis was performed via a caudal approach, and combinations of the following three methods are purportedly used: 1) volumetric: injection of a large volume of normal saline [ 7 , 14 ], 2) mechanical: the use of a specially designed catheter [ 14 , 15 , 16 ], and 3) chemical: the use of hypertonic saline and hyaluronidase [ 13 , 17 , 18 ]. Of these methods, we focused on volumetric adhesiolysis because it can be easily incorporated into a transforaminal approach without additional instrumentation or an increased risk of adverse reactions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For conventional epidural adhesiolysis, high-volume irrigation (60-80 ml of fluid) is typically performed via a caudal approach with or without catheterization [ 5 , 8 ]. There are few reports about transforaminal epidural adhesiolysis [ 13 , 16 , 18 ], and no study is available on a volumetric method alone. A higher volume of saline irrigation would be necessary for a more effective transforaminal approach, and conscious sedation with hypnotics and analgesics may be helpful considering severe paresthesias or radiating pain during a forceful injection.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%