An evaluation of contrast medium spread on caudal epidurography with the needle positioned toward the affected side in patients with unilateral lumbosacral radiculopathy

Combined Ultrasound and Fluoroscopy versus Ultrasound versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection for the Treatment of Unilateral Lower Lumbar Radicular Pain: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Background and Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the mid-term effectiveness and safety of a combined ultrasound (US) and fluoroscopy (FL)-guided approach in comparison to US-guided and FL-guided caudal epidural steroid injections (CESI) for treating unilateral lower lumbar radicular pain. Materials and Methods: A total of 154 patients who underwent CESI between 2018 and 2022 were included. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the guidance method: combined US and FL (n = 51), US-guided (n = 51), and FL-guided (n = 52). The study design was retrospective case-controlled, utilizing patient charts and standardized forms to assess clinical outcomes, adverse events, complications during the procedures. Results: In all groups, Oswestry Disability Index and Verbal Numeric Scale scores improved at 1, 3, and 6 months after the last injection, with no significant differences between groups (p < 0.05). The treatment success rate at all time points was also similar among the groups. Logistic regression analysis showed that injection method, cause, sex, age, number of injections, and pain duration did not independently predict treatment success. Blood was aspirated before injection in 2% (n = 1), 13.5% (n = 7), and 4% (n = 2) of patients in the combined US and FL groups, FL-guided groups, and US-guided groups, respectively. Intravascular contrast spread was detected in one patient in the combined method groups and seven in the FL-guided groups. Conclusions: When comparing pain reduction and functional improvement, there was no significant difference between the three methods. The combined method took less time compared to using FL alone. The combined approach also showed a lower occurrence of intravascular injection compared to using FL alone. Moreover, blood vessels at the injection site can be identified with an ultrasound using the combined method. Given these advantages, it might be advisable to prioritize the combined US- and FL-guided therapy when administering CESI for patients with unilateral lumbar radicular pain.

Evaluation of Contrast Flow Patterns with Cervical Interlaminar Epidural Injection: Comparison of Midline and Paramedian Approaches

Background and objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare and to analyze contrast spread patterns between the paramedian and midline approaches to cervical interlaminar epidural injection (CIEI). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 84 CIEI cases that had been performed for unilateral cervical spinal pain from April 2019 to April 2020. After 3 mL of contrast had been injected into the epidural space, fluoroscopic images were obtained. The CIEI was divided into a midline (Group M, n = 42) and a paramedian (Group P, n = 42) approach by anteroposterior imaging. The P Group was classified into a more medial (Group Pm, n = 26) and a more lateral (Group Pl, n = 16) group. Using ImageJ on an anteroposterior image, we assessed the grayscale brightness ratio of the ipsilateral or contralateral side of the vertebral body as well as the intervertebral disc space one level just above the needle location. We identified the dispersion of contrast into the ventral epidural space. Results: The grayscale brightness ratio was significantly higher in Group P than in Group M (p < 0.001). The incidence of ventral epidural spread in Group M was 57.1% versus 88.1% in Group P, which was significantly different (p = 0.001). Conclusions: The fluoroscopic CIEI finding in the paramedian approach predominantly showed an excellent delivery of the injectate to the ipsilateral side in comparison to the contralateral side. This showed a greater advantage in delivery toward ventral epidural space as compared to the midline approach.

Fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block

Caudal block has limited injectate distribution to the desired lumbar level due to the relatively long distance from the injection site and reduction in the volume of injectate due to leakage into the sacral foramen. The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of needle gauge on fluoroscopic epidural spread and to assess the correlation between the spread level and analgesic efficacy in patients undergoing caudal block. We retrospectively analyzed data from 80 patients who received caudal block for lower back and radicular pain. We categorized patients based on the epidural needle gauge used into group A (23 gauge), group B (20 gauge), and group C (17 gauge). Fluoroscopic image of the final level of contrast injected through the caudal needle and pain scores before the block and 30 minutes after the block recorded using a numerical rating scale, were evaluated. Of the 80 patients assessed for eligibility, 7 were excluded. Thus, a total of 73 patients were finally analyzed. Age, sex, body mass index, diagnosis, lesion level, lesion severity, and duration of pain did not differ among the 3 groups. All patients showed cephalic spread of contrast. Contrast spread beyond L5 was seen in 26.9% of patients in group A, 41.7% in group B, 39.1% in group C, and 35.6% overall; there was no significant difference among the groups (P = .517). Analgesic efficacy was not significantly different among the groups (P = .336). The needle gauge did not influence the level of epidural spread or analgesic efficacy in caudal block.

Needle Tip Position and Bevel Direction Have No Effect in the Fluoroscopic Epidural Spreading Pattern in Caudal Epidural Injections: A Randomized Trial

Background. Caudal epidural steroid injections (CESIs) are an effective treatment for pain. If the injection spreads in a specific pattern depending on the needle position or bevel direction, it would be possible to inject the agent into a specific and desired area. Objectives. We conducted a prospective randomized trial to determine if the needle position and bevel direction have any effect on the epidural spreading pattern in CESI. Methods. Demographic data of the patient were collected. During CESI, the needle position (middle or lateral) and direction (ventral or dorsal) were randomly allocated. Following fluoroscope-guided injection of 4 mL contrast media and 10 mL of injectates, the epidural spreading patterns (ventral or dorsal, bilateral or lateral) were imaged. Results. In the 210 CESIs performed, the needle tip position and bevel direction did not influence the epidural spreading patterns at L4-5 and L5-S1 disc levels. A history of Lumbar spine surgery was associated with a significantly limited spread to each disc level. A midline needle tip position was more effective than the lateral position in spreading to the distant disc levels. Conclusions. Neither the needle tip position nor the bevel direction affected the epidural drug spreading pattern during CESI.

Ultrasound-Guided Versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection for the Treatment of Unilateral Lower Lumbar Radicular Pain: Case-Controlled, Retrospective, Comparative Study

The aim of the article is to investigate the efficacy of ultrasound (US)-guided Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection (CESI) compared with fluoroscopy (FL)-guided CESI in patients with unilateral lower lumbar radicular pain. This case-controlled, retrospective, comparative study was done at the university hospital. A total of 110 patients treated with US- or FL-guided CESI were administered a mixture of 20 cc (0.5% lidocaine 18.0  mL + dexamethason 10  mg 2  mL). Outcome measurement was assessed by Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), verbal numeric pain scale (VNS) before injections and at 3, 6, and 12 months after the last injections. Successful outcome was defined as measured by >50% improvement in the VNS score and >40% improvement in the ODI. ODI and VNS showed improvement at 3, 6, and 12 months after the last injection in both groups. No statistical differences in ODI, VNS were observed between groups (P < 0.05). No significant differences in the proportion of patients with successful treatment were observed between the groups from the 3-month to 6-month to 12-month outcomes. US-guided CESI is deserving of consideration in conservative management of unilateral lower lumbar radicular pain.