• J Altern Complement Med · Dec 2010

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study

    A randomized controlled trial of intra-articular prolotherapy versus steroid injection for sacroiliac joint pain.

    • Woong Mo Kim, Hyung Gon Lee, Cheol Won Jeong, Chang Mo Kim, and Myung Ha Yoon.
    • Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Chonnam National University Hospital, Gwang-Ju, Korea.
    • J Altern Complement Med. 2010 Dec 1; 16 (12): 1285-90.

    ObjectivesControversy exists regarding the efficacy of ligament prolotherapy in alleviating sacroiliac joint pain. The inconsistent success rates reported in previous studies may be attributed to variability in patient selection and techniques between studies. It was hypothesized that intra-articular prolotherapy for patients with a positive response to diagnostic block may mitigate the drawbacks of ligament prolotherapy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and long-term effectiveness of intra-articular prolotherapy in relieving sacroiliac joint pain, compared with intra-articular steroid injection.DesignThis was a prospective, randomized, controlled trial.Settings/LocationThe study was conducted at an outpatient pain medicine clinic at Chonnam National University Hospital in Gwang-ju, Korea.SubjectsThe study included patients with sacroiliac joint pain, confirmed by ≥50% improvement in response to local anesthetic block, lasting 3 months or longer, and who failed medical treatment.InterventionsThe treatment involved intra-articular dextrose water prolotherapy or triamcinolone acetonide injection using fluoroscopic guidance, with a biweekly schedule and maximum of three injections.Outcome MeasuresPain and disability scores were assessed at baseline, 2 weeks, and monthly after completion of treatment.ResultsThe numbers of recruited patients were 23 and 25 for the prolotherapy and steroid groups, respectively. The pain and disability scores were significantly improved from baseline in both groups at the 2-week follow-up, with no significant difference between them. The cumulative incidence of ≥50% pain relief at 15 months was 58.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 37.9%-79.5%) in the prolotherapy group and 10.2% (95% CI 6.7%-27.1%) in the steroid group, as determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis; there was a statistically significant difference between the groups (log-rank p < 0.005).ConclusionsIntra-articular prolotherapy provided significant relief of sacroiliac joint pain, and its effects lasted longer than those of steroid injections. Further studies are needed to confirm the safety of the procedure and to validate an appropriate injection protocol.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…