Long-Term Clinical Outcomes After Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Retrolaminar Block in Patients with Cervical...

Background/Objectives: Cervical radiculopathy is a frequent cause of pain, often leading to disability, reduced quality of life, and significant healthcare utilization. Cervical epidural steroid injections are widely used, though safety concerns have been reported. Ultrasound-guided cervical retrolaminar block (RLCB) is a potential alternative. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical trajectory after ultrasound-guided cervical retrolaminar block, including pain outcomes, patient-reported improvement, and the rate of subsequent cervical spine surgery. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort analysis that was conducted at the Pain and Spine Surgery units in a single center. We included 121 patients with cervical radiculopathy treated between January 2020 and September 2022 (mean age 49.4 ± 11.1 years; 51.2% male). All patients underwent RLCB. s: Primary outcome measures were subsequent cervical decompressive surgery and composite pain response (≥2-point absolute and ≥50% relative NRS reduction). Secondary outcome measures included recurrence, analgesic use, global rating of change (GRC), satisfaction, willingness to repeat, and safety. Baseline data was extracted from records; structured follow-up interviews were conducted at two years. Results: At two years, 9.1% required surgery, and 57.9% achieved composite pain response; 74.4% reported ≥2-point NRS reduction. GRC scores showed improvement (mean 5.0 ± 3.4), with 37% reporting "very much better." Satisfaction was high, with 70.2% willing to repeat. Pain recurred in 71.1% but persisted in 28.9%. No major complications occurred; minor events were reported in 6.6%. Outcomes were less favorable in patients with pre-injection pain duration ≥1 year. Conclusions: In this retrospective cohort, cervical RLCB was associated with sustained patient-reported improvement, high satisfaction, and a 9.1% observed subsequent surgery rate at two years. These findings are hypothesis-generating and require confirmation in prospective controlled studies.