Fluoroscopic Guided Interlaminar Epidural Versus Ultrasound Guided Transforaminal Epidural in the… (NCT04475445) | Clinical Trial Compass
UnknownNot Applicable
Fluoroscopic Guided Interlaminar Epidural Versus Ultrasound Guided Transforaminal Epidural in the Treatment of Unilateral Cervicobrachialgia.
Belgium60 participantsStarted 2020-07-30
Plain-language summary
Chronic cervicobrachialgia is a public health problem. Epidural injections of corticosteroids and local anesthesics via transforaminal and interlaminar routes both have shown their potential in its treatment. The interlaminar approach offers the advantage of an epidural injection (i.e., direct contact with the nerve root in the epidural space). However, it requires fluoroscopy and can lead to potentially serious complications (compression of the nerve root, spinal cord injury...). The ultrasound-guided injection of corticosteroids via the transforaminal route, which offers the advantage of selectively targeting the symptomatic nerve root, may have the same therapeutic advantages as the interlaminar approach in decreasing unilateral cervicobrachial pain (i.e. a decrease in pain after infiltration) and reduce its risks.The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of transforaminal vs interlaminar cervical corticosteroid injection.
Who can participate
Age range
18 Years
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Inclusion Criteria:
* American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA) I-III
* Chronic unilateral cervicobrachial pain
* Allowed Steroid infiltration
Exclusion Criteria:
* Pregnancy
* Lactation
* Allergy or intolerance to any of the drugs/materials used in this study,
* Participation in another interventional study
* Systemic anticoagulation,
* Infection at the puncture site
* Patient refusal.
Questions worth asking your doctor
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
1Based on my diagnosis and history, is this trial worth exploring for me — or is there a standard treatment we should try first?
2What does this trial's phase tell us about how much is already known about its safety and benefit?
3What would taking part actually involve for me — visits, tests, time, and travel?
4What are the known and possible risks or side effects I should weigh, and how would they be monitored?
5If this trial isn't the right fit, what other options or trials would you suggest I look into?
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
Questions for the trial coordinator
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
1What does taking part actually involve week to week — how many visits, where, and how long does each one take?
2What costs are covered by the study, and what might I have to pay for myself, including travel, parking, or time off work?
3What happens during screening, and what happens if the study team confirms I don't meet the criteria after those tests?
4Who pays for the scans, blood work, and other tests the trial requires — the study, my insurance, or me?
5How will being in the trial affect my regular care, and will my own doctor stay informed and involved?
6Can I leave the trial at any point if I change my mind, and what would happen to my care if I do?
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
What they're measuring
1
Visual Analogue Score change at 30 minutes post infiltration when compared to baseline
Timeframe: up to 30 minutes
Trial details
NCT IDNCT04475445
SponsorCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Saint Pierre