Neuromodulation of the median nerve in carpal tunnel syndrome, a single-blind, randomized controlled study.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency applied using transcutaneous electrodes in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Methods: After randomization, the patients received two cycles of noninvasive pulsed radiofrequency (NiPRF), once weekly, or splinting (the control group) for three months. Clinical evaluations were recorded at baseline and weeks 4 and 8. The Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire (BCTQ) was used to determine the functional status and symptom severity. Results: Sixty-two patients were followed up for three months. There was no difference between the groups in the BCTQ scores before and after treatment. The NiPRF group found a significant difference between the BCTQ measurements at all time intervals (paired sample t -test; P < 0.001). In the splint group, there was a significant difference only between the basal-1st month and basal-3rd month (paired samples t -test; P < 0.001). The main effect of the time variable was statistically significant (ANOVA; P < 0.001), but the group variable was not. There was no correlation between the BCTQ results measured at any time and the electroneuromyelogragphy findings in either group. Conclusions: NiPRF effectively improves symptoms and functionality in patients with CTS for up to 3 months. Thus, NiPRF can be considered an easy, safe, and useful alternative treatment modality for CTS.

Parasagittal Interlaminar and Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections for Radicular Low Back Pain; Which is More Comfortable?

Objective: This study aimed to compare parasagittal interlaminar (PS) and transforaminal (TF) epidural steroid injections for unilateral L5 and S1 radicular lower back pain in terms of patient comfort, efficacy, safety, contrast enhancement, and radiation exposure. Methods: This was a prospective randomized single-blind study. A total of 59 participants were included in this study. The visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were obtained. A comfort questionnaire was administered to all participants. The total fluoroscopy time and contrast distribution levels were recorded. Results: Pre- and post-treatment VAS scores were similar between the groups. The ODI scores increased in favor of the PS group at week 2 (P < 0.041); however, there was no difference between the two groups at other times. The VAS and ODI scores improved significantly with treatment in both the groups (P < 0.001). Total fluoroscopy time was shorter in the PS group (P < 0.001). PS application was more comfortable (P < 0.001). While no complications were observed in the PS group, three complications occurred in the TF group. Anterior epidural contrast spread to three or more levels was observed in 57% of the participants in the PS group, whereas no spread to more than two levels was observed in the TF group. Conclusion: The PS epidural approach is superior to the TF approach in terms of a low incidence of side effects, less radiation exposure, better patient comfort, higher epidural contrast spread, and single-level needle access.