Epidural corticosteroid injection in the conservative management of sciatica

Pulsed radiofrequency for radicular pain due to a herniated intervertebral disc--an initial report

Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) has been used for the treatment of radicular pain, due to a herniated intervertebral disc, but so far the data are anecdotal. This is a retrospective study on 13 consecutive patients with this type of pain, at levels L3 to S1. All patients had a diagnosis confirmed by imaging, all had neurological abnormalities, and all were scheduled for surgical intervention. All 12 patients who had a profession had stopped working. Treatment consisted of application of PRF to the dorsal root ganglion of the affected segmental nerve, or in the case of S1 to the segmental nerve at the level of the S1 foramen. One patient underwent disc surgery, and one other patient underwent a spinal fusion 1 year following PRF treatment. He had no leg pain at the time of operation. The remaining patients did not require surgical intervention. The numeric rating scale (NRS) score fell from 7.83 to 2.25 over the first 2 weeks, followed by a gradual further fall to 0.27 at the final follow-up, 15.8 (11 to 23) months after the procedure. Compared with the initial NRS score the data were significant (P < 0.01) from 4 weeks after the procedure. Neurological abnormalities resolved except in one patient, who had decreased sensibility in a small area in the L3 dermatome at the last follow-up. All professionally active patients went back to work after 0.49 months (0.1 to 1). It is concluded that PRF may potentially be a viable alternative for epidural steroid injections in the treatment of acute radicular pain, due to a herniated intervertebral disc, and that further studies, including a control group, should be carried out to establish the value of this method.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interdisciplinary rehabilitation of chronic nonmalignant pain syndrome patients

This is an update to evidence-based practice guidelines for chronic nonmalignant pain syndrome patients first published in 1995 and revised in 1999. The current guidelines recommend interdisciplinary-focused rehabilitation, which is goal-directed and time-limited. Emphasis is placed on educating patients in active self-management techniques that stress maximizing function. Integrated treatment involving medical, psychological/behavioral, physical/occupational therapy, and disability/vocational interventions are recommended on an outpatient basis whenever clinically possible. Patient selection criteria are delineated. Updated references providing evidence-based support for the recommendations are provided, including the use of opioids and sedative-hypnotic medications, injection and block procedures, acupuncture, implantable spinal infusion and stimulation devices, and other invasive spinal surgery procedures such as intradiscal electrothermal therapy. Guideline integration and early detection and intervention with chronic pain syndrome patients are encouraged.

Effectiveness of conservative treatments for the lumbosacral radicular syndrome: a systematic review

Patients with a lumbosacral radicular syndrome are mostly treated conservatively first. The effect of the conservative treatments remains controversial. To assess the effectiveness of conservative treatments of the lumbosacral radicular syndrome (sciatica). Relevant electronic databases and the reference lists of articles up to May 2004 were searched. Randomised clinical trials of all types of conservative treatments for patients with the lumbosacral radicular syndrome selected by two reviewers. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality and the clinical relevance. Because the trials were considered heterogeneous we decided not to perform a meta-analysis but to summarise the results using the rating system of levels of evidence. Thirty trials were included that evaluated injections, traction, physical therapy, bed rest, manipulation, medication, and acupuncture as treatment for the lumbosacral radicular syndrome. Because several trials indicated no evidence of an effect it is not recommended to use corticosteroid injections and traction as treatment option. Whether clinicians should prescribe physical therapy, bed rest, manipulation or medication could not be concluded from this review. At present there is no evidence that one type of treatment is clearly superior to others, including no treatment, for patients with a lumbosacral radicular syndrome.

[Minimally invasive injection therapy for patients with radicular lumbar spine syndrome. First results of an minimally invasive treatment for patients with lumbar radiculopathy]

BACKGROUND

There are few studies on minimally invasive injection therapy (MIT) combined with multimodal conservative therapeutic options. Here, we evaluate the results of MIT in a clinical study.

METHODS

A total of 61 patients with radicular lumbar symptoms treated with MIT were examined before and 14.5 months after treatment. Subjective, objective, clinical and anamnestic parameters were considered.

RESULTS

In most cases, protrusions and prolapses were seen. Radicular pain, sensible and motoric deficits and also functionality of the spine could be rectified after MIT. No major complications were seen during treatment.

CONCLUSION

MIT is an effective approach with few complications for the treatment of patients with radicular syndromes.

Correlation of spinal canal dimensions to efficacy of epidural steroid injection in spinal stenosis

PURPOSE

To determine a critical canal dimension in patients with spinal stenosis that predicts response to epidural steroid injections (ESI).

METHODS

Lumbar spinal stenosis patients with a computed tomography scan before ESI were identified through ICD-9/CPT codes. Using a digital caliper, canal dimensions on axial cuts of each lumbar intervertebral level were recorded: the transverse canal diameter in line with the facets including the soft tissues, TC; the transverse osseous canal diameter, OS; and the mid-sagittal anteroposterior diameter, MS. Minimum and maximum measurements were determined. Patients who improved after ESI and those that required a decompression after ESI were differentiated.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients were included in the study. Fifty required surgical decompression after ESI and 34 patients improved after ESI. There were no statistically significant differences in the demographics between the 2 groups. Mean minimum dimensions in the surgical group were 9.47 mm (TC), 16.53 mm (OS), and 12.40 mm (MS); and 9.75 mm (TC), 16.65 mm (OS), and 12.39 mm (MS) in the nonsurgical group. Mean ratio between the maximum and minimum dimensions in the surgical group was 1.76 (TC), 1.35 (OS), and 1.57 (MS); and 1.86 (TC), 1.47 (OS), and 1.63 (MS) in the nonsurgical group. There was no statistically significant difference in the minimum measurement in any dimension between the surgical and the nonsurgical group. There was also no statistically significant difference in the ratio between the minimum and maximum measurement in any dimension between the surgical and the nonsurgical group.

CONCLUSIONS

Spinal canal dimension is not predictive of success or failure of ESI in patients with spinal stenosis.

The course of high-sensitive C-reactive protein in correlation with pain and clinical function in patients with acute lumbosciatic pain and chronic low back pain - a 6 months prospective longitudinal study

In this prospective longitudinal study with a follow-up of 6 months, the course of serum concentration of C-reactive protein was measured by an ultrasensitive immunoassay in 31 patients with acute lumbosciatic pain and 41 patients with chronic low back pain. High-sensitive CRP (hsCRP), pain and clinical function were assessed at ten fixed time-points during follow-up. The course of hsCRP values was assessed in relation to the course of pain and clinical function adjusting for possible confounding factors. At the beginning of the study, there were no statistically significant differences in mean hsCRP levels in patients with acute lumbosciatic pain (1.49mg/l) compared to the levels obtained in patients with chronic low back pain (1.30mg/l) and those in a control group from the general population (1.26mg/l). In patients with acute lumbosciatic pain, hsCRP declined significantly in the initial period of 3 weeks with a corresponding decrease in pain and improvement in function and clinical evaluation as assessed with the straight leg raising test (SLR), whereas after this period, the course of the hsCRP did not correspond with the clinical parameters. In patients with chronic low back pain, hsCRP remained approximately constant throughout the whole period with no correlation with pain or function. As a conclusion, according to this study levels of hsCRP do not have a major clinical relevance when evaluating the long-term course of patients with acute lumbosciatic pain and chronic low back pain and therefore should not be taken into primary consideration when decisions on therapy are made.

Epidural steroid therapy for back and leg pain: mechanisms of action and efficacy

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Epidural steroid injection (ESI) is one of the most common nonsurgical interventions prescribed for back and leg pain symptoms. Although the use of ESI is widespread, proof of efficacy among the broad population of low back pain patients is lacking and use is predicated to a great extent on the cost and morbidity of the perceived "next step" in many patient's care-surgery.

PURPOSE

To review the relative indications and clinical features that predict success with ESI therapy, and to provide a physiological rationale to guide clinical decision-making.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Review of literature and clinical experience.

RESULTS

Clinical studies have alternately supported and refuted the efficacy of ESI in the treatment of patients with back and leg pain. Steroid medications do benefit some patients with radicular pain, but the benefit is often limited in duration, making efficacy difficult to prove over time. Steroids appear to speed the rate of recovery and return to function, however, allowing patients to reduce medication levels and increase activity while awaiting the natural improvement expected in most spinal disorders. Fluoroscopic verification of needle placement, with contrast injection, greatly improves steroid delivery while reducing risks. Although it is assumed that the benefit of steroids is related to their effect on inflammation, that remains unproven, and it is possible that benefit is gained through an unrecognized action.

CONCLUSIONS

Randomized, controlled trials are needed to conclusively identify those patients most likely to benefit from ESI, and when and for how long. Until then, epidural steroids provide a reasonable alternative to surgical intervention in selected patients with back and/or leg pain, whose symptoms are functionally limiting. When appropriate goals are established and proper patients are selected, sufficient short-term benefit has been documented to warrant continued use of this tool.

Treatment of herniated lumbar disc by intradiscal and intraforaminal oxygen-ozone (O2-O3) injection

MATERIAL

We report our experience between May 1996 and May 2003 with 2200 patients affected by low back pain or sciatica due to herniated disk treated by intradiscal and intraforaminal oxygen-ozone injection. The patients received medical and physical therapy before treatment for at least 2 months; the patients with conus-cauda syndrome and hyperalgesic sciatica were excluded. We never performed discography before the treatment that was performed under CT guidance or fluoroscopy. CT provided monitoring of gas distribution in the disk and epidural space.

RESULTS

No side effects were recorded at short and long-term follow-up. Clinical results were evaluated with the modified McNab method showing an 80% success rate and 20% failure rate in 1750 patients followed up to 6 months while the success rate dropped down at 75% and failure increased at 25% in 1400 followed up to 18 months. CT showed reduction in the size of the herniated disk in only 63% of the followed patients (420 patients). The failure has been mostly related to: calcified herniated disk; spinal canal stenosis; recurrent herniated disk with epidural fibrosis; small descending herniated disk at the level of the lateral recess.

Factors predicting outcomes of mechanical sciatica: a review of 1092 cases

As an extremely common symptom and major source of lost productivity, mechanical sciatica places a heavy burden on public health.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 1092 medical records to determine the epidemiological, clinical, imaging study, and therapeutic characteristics of mechanical sciatica. We also looked for factors associated with adverse outcomes.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 45.0 +/- 13.3 years, and 61.8% of patients were women. A history of low back pain was noted in 35.2% of cases. A single nerve root was involved in 68% of cases, and L5 was the most commonly affected root. Disk herniation was the cause in 58.4% of patients. First-line conservative treatment provided relief in 75% of cases, and the overall 6-month outcome was favorable in 76.5% of cases.

CONCLUSION

The multivariate analysis conducted in the overall patient population showed that factors associated with adverse 6-month outcomes were heavy labor (odds ratio (OR) = 1.69; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 1.01-2.86; P = 0.049) and obesity (OR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.01-2.47; P = 0.05).

Steroid injections: effect on pain of spinal origin

Pain originating from the spine is a common clinical problem that is often difficult to manage. This chapter considers the evidence supporting the use of corticosteroid injections for pain of spinal origin. Clinical problems considered in this review are radicular pain, zygapophyseal joint pain, discogenic pain and non-specific pain from the cervical, lumbar and thoracic spine. Issues of efficacy and adverse events are considered. No useful data were found concerning the treatment of any type of thoracic pain with corticosteroid injections. In the lumbar spine, there is evidence to support the use of transforaminal injections for radicular pain. Intradiscal and intra-articular injections in both lumbar and cervical spines have not been shown to be effective. Sacroiliitis responds well to intra-articular corticosteroids. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of atlanto-axial or atlanto-occipital joint injections.

Epidural steroids

Although possessing a long history of use, the therapeutic use of epidural steroid injections still needs substantiation. Refinements in our understanding of the pathophysiology of radicular pain and in the techniques used to deliver depo-steroids to the target tissue will lead to improved clinical outcomes and fewer technique and drug-related side effects. Administration of epidural steroids at lumbar spine sites is more common than at cervical spine levels, although the same pain management concepts are applicable. Comparative studies are necessary to clearly define the advantages and disadvantages of the use of fluoroscopy and the transforaminal technique.