Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Maranon
Madrid, 28007, Spain
NCT Number: NCT04451252
The main aim of this study is to identify factors that may be associated with a better or worse response to interventional pain management therapies for the treatment of chronic lumbar pain in adult patients. If several predictive factors are to be identified, a predictive model will be developed.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
All sexes
Observational
Madrid, 28007, Spain
Chronic lumbar pain is a common affection in the adult population, and an important source of chronic incapacity and impaired quality of life. There is a wide range of therapeutic options for the treatment of chronic lumbar pain. This study will analyze the response to several interventional pain management techniques and will search for factors that may be associated to a better or worse response to the techniques.
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
While in prone position, lumbar facet joints are identified by fluoroscopy. 18 gauge needles are then advanced aiming to the medial branch of lumbar facet joints. Correct positioning is confirmed by anteroposterior and lateral fluoroscopy. Then, the needles are attached to the radiofrequency device. Correct positioning of the needles is confirmed also by sensitive stimulation (paresthesia evocation) with the following settings: 50 Hz (hertz), 1ms, 0,6V (volts). In order to avoid motor lesion, it is confirmed that no motor response is produced with 2Hz, 2ms (millisecond) and twice the voltage that produced sensitive response. After correct positioning and repositioning the needles if needed, conventional radiofrequency ablation of medial branch nerves is performed using the following settings: 90 seconds, 80º Celsius degrees.
The selection of target facet joints is made based on clinical findings. Some patients receive bilateral while other unilateral facet joint denervation.
While in prone position, lumbar facet joints are identified by fluoroscopy. An anteroposterior image of the lumbar vertebrae is obtained. Then, the fluoroscope is tilted between 10 to 20 degrees to the side to inject. 22 gauge needles are then advanced aiming to the medial branch of lumbar facet joints.
The selection of target facet joints is made based on clinical findings. Some patients receive bilateral while other unilateral facet joint denervation. Correct positioning is confirmed with anteroposterior and lateral fluoroscopy. A mixture of 3 ml of ropivacaine 0,2% + 1 ml (40 mg) of triamcinolone (trigon depot) is prepared. 1 ml of the mixture is injected in each lumbar facet joint through the needles. Four facet joints are selected for therapy. Some patients receive bilateral and other unilateral but contiguous medial branch nerve injection.
With the patient in prone position and guided by fluoroscopy, an epidural needle attached to a syringe filled with saline serum is advanced through the interlaminar approach using a loss of resistance technique for the identification of the lumbar epidural space. When loss of resistance is encountered, 1 ml of iodinated contrast is injected. After fluoroscopical confirmation of epidural spilling, a mixture of 4 ml of ropivacaine 0,1%, 2 ml (12 mg) of betamethasone and 2 ml of saline serum is injected in the epidural space. The lumbar level to which it infiltrates depends on each patient.
With the patient in prone position and guided by fluoroscopy, an epidural needle attached to a syringe filled with saline serum is advanced through the sacral hiatus using a loss of resistance technique for the identification of the epidural space. When loss of resistance is encountered, 2 ml of iodinated contrast is injected. After fluoroscopical confirmation of epidural spilling, a mixture of 7 ml of ropivacaine 0,2%, 2 ml (12 mg) of betamethasone and 7 ml of saline serum is injected in the epidural space.
With the patient in prone position and guided by fluoroscopy, a 18 gauge needle is advanced aiming to the intervertebral foramen. Patient is cautioned about the paresthesia which will be felt. A lateral view was taken occasionally to confirm position. 0.5 ml of iodinated contrast is injected to confirm the position of the needle. Then 1 ml of the combination of 12mg of betamethasone and 1ml of ropivacaine 0.2% is injected over the affected root. Then, the needle is attached to the radiofrequency device. Correct positioning of the needles is confirmed also by sensitive stimulation (paresthesia evocation) with the following settings: 50 Hz, 1ms, 0,6V. In order to avoid motor lesion, it is confirmed that no motor response is produced with 2Hz, 2ms and twice the voltage that produced sensitive response. After correct positioning is confirmed, pulsed radiofrequency ablation of lumbar dorsal root ganglion is performed using the following settings: 4 minutes, 42ºC (degrees Celsius).
With the patient in prone position and guided by fluoroscopy, a 22 french needle is then advanced aiming to the intervertebral foramen. Patient is cautioned about the paresthesia which will be felt along the course of the lumbar root when the needle touches the nerve. A lateral view was taken occasionally to confirm position. 0.5 ml of iodinated contrast is injected to confirm the position of the needle. Then 1 ml of the combination of 12mg of betamethasone and 1ml of ropivacaine 0.2% is injected over the affected root.
Time frame: Baseline (prior to the Interventional Pain Management Therapy); Week 4 after IPMT
Clinical response after 4 week follow-up is going to be defined as composite outcomes:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 4 weeks follow-up after the IPMT.
14 candidate variables will be analyzed for association to no response to the IPMT at 4 weeks (NR-4W). All the variables are qualitative, dichotomic, yes/no:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 4 weeks follow-up.
14 candidate variables will be analyzed for association to PSR-4W or PMR-4W to the IPMT at 4 weeks. All the variables are qualitative, dichotomic, yes/no:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 24 weeks follow-up after the IPMT.
Clinical response after 24 week follow-up is going to be defined as composite outcomes:
Time frame: The factors will be recorded at baseline; the response will be measured at after 24 weeks follow-up.
14 candidate variables will be analyzed for association to no response to the IPMT at 24 weeks (NR-24W). All the variables are qualitative, dichotomic, yes/no:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 24 weeks follow-up after the IPMT.
14 candidate variables will be analyzed for association to PSR-4W or PMR-4W to the IPMT at 24 weeks. All the variables are qualitative, dichotomic, yes/no:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 4 weeks follow-up after the IPMT.
In case that several predictive variables are identified, a predictive model will be developed, either for predicting good and/or bad response.
Time frame: Response will be measured after 24 weeks follow-up after the IPMT.
In case that several predictive variables are identified, a predictive model will be developed, either for predicting good and/or bad response.
Time frame: Response will be measured after 4 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Other variables recorded in the Data Collection Logbook of our study will be analyzed looking for other associations:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 24 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Other variables recorded in the Data Collection Logbook of our study will be analyzed looking for other associations:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 4 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
The therapies that will be analyzed are:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 24 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
The therapies that will be analyzed are:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 4 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Main clinical diagnosis, response to therapy and IPMT performed are described separately as outcomes.
Time frame: Response will be measured after 24 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Main clinical diagnosis, response to therapy and IPMT performed are described separately as outcomes.
Time frame: Satisfaction will be measured after 24 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Patient satisfaction will be assessed as two separate YES/NO questions:
Time frame: Satisfaction will be measured after 4 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Patient satisfaction will be assessed as two separate YES/NO questions:
Patient satisfaction will be assessed as two separate YES/NO questions:
Time frame: Response and satisfaction will be measured after 4 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Patient satisfaction will be assessed as two separate YES/NO questions:
Time frame: Response and satisfaction will be measured after 24 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Patient satisfaction will be assessed as two separate YES/NO questions:
Time frame: Drug therapy will be recorded at baseline
Variable #1. Qualitative; is the patient taking any of the following medications (YES/NO for each treatment) at visit 0?:
Variable #2. Quantitative. 24 hour dose of each pharmacologic treatment the patient is taking at visit 0.
Time frame: Drug therapy will be recorded at baseline; change in therapy will be recorded vs 4 weeks and vs 24 weeks.
Variable #3. Qualitative. Is the patient taking any pharmacological treatment belonging to any of the following cathegories?:
Variable #4. Qualitative. Has it been any change in pharmacological treatment in the follow-up (baseline vs 4 weeks and vs 24 weeks) ; related to each pharmacological treatment)?:
Variable #5. Qualitative. Why was the pharmacological treatment changed (baseline vs 4 weeks and vs 24 weeks) ?:
Time frame: Potential adverse reactions will be measured at the end of follow-up (after 24 weeks of the IPMT)
Several cathegories:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 4 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Several cathegories or radiological findings:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 24 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Several cathegories or radiological findings:
Time frame: Response will be measured after 24 weeks follow-up after the IPMT
Several cathegories:
Clinical findings are:
Clinical diagnosis are defined as another outcome measure.
Time frame: Comorbidites will be recorded at baseline
Comorbities that will be analyzed are:
Time frame: Demographical data will be obtained at baseline
Age, sex, marital status, working status at ethnic group and Medical Specialty that derivated the patient to our unit will be recorded at base line.
Time frame: the response will be measured at +4weeks, +8weeks and +24 weeks
Positive strong response, both strong (PSR) and moderate (PMR), as defined in "Primary outcomes" will be measured both at baseline vs 4 weeks follow-up, baseline vs 24 weeks follow-up and baseline vs 8 weeks follow-up.
The evolution of the pain response will be studied; response and satisfaction will be measured at 4 different moments:
Time frame: Calculated at baseline
Charlson comorbidity index will be calculated at baseline.
Time frame: Pain syndrome is diagnosed at baseline
Variable 1: presence of any of the following diagnosis:
Variable n3: number of pain syndromes present in the patient, of all the above.
Time frame: Measured 4 weeks after IPMT is performed
Two cathegories:
Time frame: Measured at baseline
Variables n1 and n 2 are qualitative. Measured at visit 0.
Variable n 1: the patient has undergone any of these treatments:
Variable n 2: subjective satisfaction of the patient:
Time frame: baseline
The 11-point numerical pain rating scale (NRS) is a measure of pain in which patients rate their pain ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). Validated in Childs JD, Piva SR, Fritz JM. Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine 2005;30:1331-4.
Time frame: 4 weeks after the IPMT is performed
The 11-point numerical pain rating scale (NRS) is a measure of pain in which patients rate their pain ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). Validated in Childs JD, Piva SR, Fritz JM. Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine 2005;30:1331-4.
Time frame: 8 weeks after the IPMT is performed
The 11-point numerical pain rating scale (NRS) is a measure of pain in which patients rate their pain ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). Validated in Childs JD, Piva SR, Fritz JM. Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine 2005;30:1331-4.
Time frame: 24 weeks after the IPMT is performed
The 11-point numerical pain rating scale (NRS) is a measure of pain in which patients rate their pain ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). Validated in Childs JD, Piva SR, Fritz JM. Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine 2005;30:1331-4.
Time frame: baseline
Original version 1 (1980), translated and adapted to Spanish (1995), validated.
Time frame: 4 weeks after the IPMT is performed
Original version 1 (1980), translated and adapted to Spanish (1995), validated.
Time frame: 8 weeks after the IPMT is performed
Original version 1 (1980), translated and adapted to Spanish (1995), validated.
Time frame: 24 weeks after the IPMT is performed
Original version 1 (1980), translated and adapted to Spanish (1995), validated.
Time frame: Obtained at baseline
As described by Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, Bergman H, Hogan DB, McDowell I et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ 2005;173:489-95.
Time frame: Mesured at baseline
Variables n1 and n 2 are qualitative. Measured at visit 0.
Variable n 1: the patient has undergone any of these treatments:
Variable n 2: subjective satisfaction of the patient:
Time frame: Baseline
Several cathegories:
Time frame: Measured 4 weeks after the IPMT
Several cathegories:
Time frame: Baseline
Qualitative:
Santiago Garcia-Hernandez
Other
Observational Prospective Single Centre Study of the Response to Interventional Pain Management Techniques in Chronic Low Back Pain in Adults. 1 and 6 Months Follow-up. Multivariate Analysis of Predictors of Response. Predictive Model.
Acronym: PReTI-Back
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT06835439
Back Pain, Chronic Pain
San Diego, California, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05257356
Back Pain, Chronic Pain
Zurich, Canton of Zurich, Switzerland
View Trial DetailsNCT06218407
Back Pain, Chronic Pain
Washington D.C., District of Columbia, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT04208659
Back Pain, Chronic Pain
Chillicothe, Ohio, United States
View Trial Details