Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2021; 56(05): 558-566
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1735829
Artigo de Atualização
Coluna

Improvement in Pain Following Ganglion Impar Blocks and Radiofrequency Ablation in Coccygodynia Patients: A Systematic Review[*]

Article in several languages: português | English
Ranjeet Choudhary 
1   Department of Orthopaedics, Instituto de Ciências Médicas da Índia (AIIMS), Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Índia
,
Kishor Kunal 
2   Department of Orthopaedics, Instituto de Ciências Médicas da Índia (AIIMS), Jodhpur, Rajasthan, Índia
,
Dhirendra Kumar 
2   Department of Orthopaedics, Instituto de Ciências Médicas da Índia (AIIMS), Jodhpur, Rajasthan, Índia
,
Venishetty Nagaraju 
1   Department of Orthopaedics, Instituto de Ciências Médicas da Índia (AIIMS), Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Índia
,
Shilp Verma 
1   Department of Orthopaedics, Instituto de Ciências Médicas da Índia (AIIMS), Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Índia
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Nearly 90% of cases of coccydynia can be managed with conservative medical treatment; the remaining 10% need other invasive modalities for pain relief, such as ganglion impar block (GIB) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the ganglion impar. A systematic research was conducted of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar to identify studies reporting pain relief in terms of visual analogue scale (VAS), or its counterparts, following GIB or RFA in coccydynia patients with the purpose to determine the efficacy of GIB and RFA of the ganglion impar in controlling pain in coccydynia patients. Seven studies were delineated, with a total of 189 patients (104 in GIB group and 85 in RFA group). In the GIB group, the mean VAS improved from 7.83 at baseline to 3.11 in the short-term follow-up, 3.55 in the intermediate-term follow-up, and 4.71 in the long-term follow-up. In the RFA group, the mean VAS improved from 6.92 at baseline to 4.25 in the short-term follow-up, and 4.04 in the long-term follow-up. In the GIB group, a 13.92% failure rate (11/79) and a 2.88% complication rate (3/104) were reported, while in the RFA group, a 14.08% failure rate (10/71) and no complications (0%) were reported. Total success rate was > 85% with either modality. Ganglion impar block and RFA of the ganglion impar are reliable and probably excellent methods of pain control in coccydynia patients not responding to conservative medical treatment. However, a demarcation between responders, non-responders, and late non-responders should be considered, and larger studies with a longer follow-up (> 1 year) are needed.

Keywords

Coccyx/diagnostic imaging - Coccyx/injuries - Coccyx/physiopathology - Radiofrequency ablation

* Work developed at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Raipur, India.




Publication History

Received: 27 December 2020

Accepted: 07 April 2021

Article published online:
28 October 2021

© 2021. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Simpson J. Coccygodynia and diseases and deformities of the coccyx. Med Times Gaz 1859; 40 (01) 1-7
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Maigne JY, Doursounian L, Chatellier G. Causes and mechanisms of common coccydynia: role of body mass index and coccygeal trauma. Spine 2000; 25 (23) 3072-3079
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Pennekamp PH, Kraft CN, Stütz A, Wallny T, Schmitt O, Diedrich O. Coccygectomy for coccygodynia: does pathogenesis matter?. J Trauma 2005; 59 (06) 1414-1419
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Kim NH, Suk KS. Clinical and radiological differences between traumatic and idiopathic coccygodynia. Yonsei Med J 1999; 40 (03) 215-220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Maigne JY, Pigeau I, Aguer N, Doursounian L, Chatellier G. Chronic coccydynia in adolescents. A series of 53 patients. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2011; 47 (02) 245-251
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Sagir O, Demir HF, Ugun F, Atik B. Retrospective evaluation of pain in patients with coccydynia who underwent impar ganglion block. BMC Anesthesiol 2020; 20 (01) 110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Capar B, Akpinar N, Kutluay E, Müjde S, Turan A. [Coccygectomy in patients with coccydynia]. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2007; 41 (04) 277-280
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Trollegaard AM, Aarby NS, Hellberg S. Coccygectomy: an effective treatment option for chronic coccydynia: retrospective results in 41 consecutive patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010; 92 (02) 242-245
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Howard PD, Dolan AN, Falco AN, Holland BM, Wilkinson CF, Zink AM. A comparison of conservative interventions and their effectiveness for coccydynia: a systematic review. J Manual Manip Ther 2013; 21 (04) 213-219
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Karadimas EJ, Trypsiannis G, Giannoudis PV. Surgical treatment of coccygodynia: an analytic review of the literature. Eur Spine J 2011; 20 (05) 698-705
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Lim SJ, Park HJ, Lee SH, Moon DE. Ganglion impar block with botulinum toxin type a for chronic perineal pain -a case report-. Korean J Pain 2010; 23 (01) 65-69
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Oh CS, Chung IH, Ji HJ, Yoon DM. Clinical implications of topographic anatomy on the ganglion impar. Anesthesiology 2004; 101 (01) 249-250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Sencan S, Kenis-Coskun O, Demir FGU, Cuce I, Ercalık T, Gunduz OH. Ganglion Impar block improves neuropathic pain in coccygodynia: A preliminary report. Neurol Neurochir Pol 2018; 52 (05) 612-617
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Demircay E, Kabatas S, Cansever T, Yilmaz C, Tuncay C, Altinors N. Radiofrequency thermocoagulation of ganglion impar in the management of coccydynia: preliminary results. Turk Neurosurg 2010; 20 (03) 328-333
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Adas C, Ozdemir U, Toman H, Luleci N, Luleci E, Adas H. Transsacrococcygeal approach to ganglion impar: radiofrequency application for the treatment of chronic intractable coccydynia. J Pain Res 2016; 9: 1173-1177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Bijur PE, Latimer CT, Gallagher EJ. Validation of a verbally administered numerical rating scale of acute pain for use in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 2003; 10 (04) 390-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Gonnade N, Mehta N, Khera PS, Kumar D, Rajagopal R, Sharma PK. Ganglion impar block in patients with chronic coccydynia. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2017; 27 (03) 324-328
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Sir E, Eksert S. Comparison of block and pulsed radiofrequency of the ganglion impar in coccygodynia. Turk J Med Sci 2019; 49 (05) 1555-1559
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Gopal H, Mc Crory C. Coccygodynia treated by pulsed radio frequency treatment to the Ganglion of Impar: a case series. J Back Musculoskeletal Rehabil 2014; 27 (03) 349-354
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Nathan ST, Fisher BE, Roberts CS. Coccydynia: a review of pathoanatomy, aetiology, treatment and outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010; 92 (12) 1622-1627
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 De Andrés J, Chaves S. Coccygodynia: a proposal for an algorithm for treatment. J Pain 2003; 4 (05) 257-266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Reig E, Abejón D, del Pozo C, Insausti J, Contreras R. Thermocoagulation of the ganglion impar or ganglion of Walther: description of a modified approach. Preliminary results in chronic, nononcological pain. Pain Pract 2005; 5 (02) 103-110
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Toshniwal GR, Dureja GP, Prashanth SM. Transsacrococcygeal approach to ganglion impar block for management of chronic perineal pain: a prospective observational study. Pain Physician 2007; 10 (05) 661-666
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Plancarte R, Amescua C, Patt RB. et al. Presacral blockade of the Ganglion of Walther (Ganglion Impar). Anesthesiology 1990; 73: A751
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Wemm Jr K, Saberski L. Modified approach to block the ganglion impar (ganglion of Walther). Reg Anesth 1995; 20 (06) 544-545
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Munir MA, Zhang J, Ahmad M. A modified needle-inside-needle technique for the ganglion impar block. Can J Anaesth 2004; 51 (09) 915-917
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Foye PM. Ganglion impar blocks for chronic pelvic and coccyx pain. Pain Physician 2007; 10 (06) 780-781
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Hong JH, Jang HS. Block of the ganglion impar using a coccygeal joint approach. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2006; 31 (06) 583-584
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Huang JJ. Another modified approach to the ganglion of Walther block (ganglion of impar). J Clin Anesth 2003; 15 (04) 282-283
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Foye PM, Patel SI. Paracoccygeal corkscrew approach to ganglion impar injections for tailbone pain. Pain Pract 2009; 9 (04) 317-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Higuchi Y, Nashold Jr BS, Sluijter M, Cosman E, Pearlstein RD. Exposure of the dorsal root ganglion in rats to pulsed radiofrequency currents activates dorsal horn lamina I and II neurons. Neurosurgery 2002; 50 (04) 850-855
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar