Evaluation of Impar Ganglion Block Effectivity in the Management of Chronic Perineal Pain
Abstract
Objectives: Chronic pain is a cause that negatively affects the quality of life and functional capacity. As with most chronic pain syndromes, perineal
(pelvic) chronic pain requires a multimodal approach. Ganglion impar blockage and neurolysis may be effective in cases that do not respond to
conservative treatments. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated the effect of ganglion impar block in patients with chronic perineal pain.
Materials and Methods: Thirty patients with chronic perineal pain (duration of pain >6 months), who underwent ganglion impar block under
fluoroscopy, were evaluated retrospectively. Neurolysis was performed after diagnostic block in 5 patients with chronic perineal pain associated
with pelvic cancer.
Results: The average age of the patients was 48.6±14.6 (28-75) years, 63.3% (19) were female, 36.7% (11) were male. Significant differences were
observed in visual analogue scale and oswestry disability index values before and after the procedure (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Ganglion impar blockade should be considered as an effective treatment option in the treatment of chronic perineal pain.
Keywords
Pelvic Pain, Nerve Block, Pain Management, Chemical Neurolysis, Fluoroscopy
Ethical Statement
Etik Kurul Onayı: Çalışma için 01.09.2020 tarihli ve İ7-
436-20 sayılı Ankara Üniversitesi Girişimsel Olmayan Klinik
Çalışmalar Etik Kurulu onayı alınmıştır.
Hasta Onayı: Algoloji kliniğimizde girişimsel işlem planlanan
hastalardan bilgilendirilmiş gönüllü onam formu alınmaktadır.
Hakem Değerlendirmesi: Editörler kurulunun dışından olan
kişiler tarafından değerlendirilmiştir.
References
- 1. Andromanakos NP, Kouraklis G, Alkiviadis K. Chronic perineal pain: current pathophysiological aspects, diagnostic approaches and treatment. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;23:2-7.
- 2. Maigne JY, Doursounian L, Chatellier G. Causes and mechanisms of common coccydynia: role of body mass index and coccygeal trauma. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25:3072-3079.
- 3. Nagpal AS, Moody EL. Interventional Management for Pelvic Pain. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2017;28:621-646.
- 4. Raj PP, Erdine S. Interventional Pain Procedures in the Pelvic and Sacral Regions. In: P.P. Raj and S. Erdine, editors. Pain-Relieving Procedures. 1st ed. Chichester, John Wiley&Sons Limited. 2012. pp. 337-383. doi:https://doi. org/10.1002/9781118300480.ch17
- 5. Plancarte R, Amescua C, Patt RB, Allende S. A751 Presacral neurectomy of the ganglion of walther (Ganglion Impar). Anesthesiology. 1990;73:751.
- 6. Laxmaiah M. in: Karina G, Michael L, Vikram BP. ed. Essentials of Interventional Techniques in Managing Chronic Pain. 1st ed. Cham: Springer International Publishing: AG; 2018. s. 582-587.
- 7. Gunduz OH, Sencan S, Kenis-Coskun O. Pain Relief due to Transsacrococcygeal Ganglion Impar Block in Chronic Coccygodynia: A Pilot Study. Pain Med. 2015;16:1278-1281.
- 8. Fogel GR, Cunningham PY. Esses SI. Coccygodynia: evaluation and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2004;12:49-54.
- 9. Pennekamp PH, Kraft CN, Stütz A, et al. Coccygectomy for coccygodynia: does pathogenesis matter? J Trauma. 2005;59:1414-1419.
- 10. Mitra R, Cheung L, Perry P. Efficacy of fluoroscopically guided steroid injections in the management of coccydynia. Pain Physician. 2007;10:775- 778. 11. Buttaci JC, Foye PM, Stitik TP. Coccydynia successfully treated with ganglion impar blocks: A case series. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;84:218.