Specificity of diagnostic nerve blocks: a prospective, randomized study of sciatica due to lumbosacral spine disease

[The EAN-NeuPSIG guideline on the diagnosis of neuropathic pain-a summary]

In this joint guideline of the scientific societies and working groups mentioned in the title, evidence-based recommendations for the use of screening questionnaires and diagnostic tests in patients with neuropathic pain were developed. The systematic literature search and meta-analysis yielded the following results: Of the screening questionnaires, Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions (DN4), I‑DN4 (self-administered DN4), and Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) received a strong recommendation, while S‑LANSS (self-administered LANSS) and PainDETECT received weak recommendations for their use in the diagnostic workup of patients with possible neuropathic pain. There was a strong recommendation for the use of skin biopsy and a weak recommendation for quantitative sensory testing and nociceptive evoked potentials. The role of confocal corneal microscopy is still unclear. Functional imaging and peripheral nerve blocks are helpful in elucidating the pathophysiology, but current literature does not support their use in diagnosing neuropathic pain. In selected cases, genetic testing in specialized centers may be considered.

1. Lumbosacral radicular pain

INTRODUCTION

Patients suffering lumbosacral radicular pain report radiating pain in one or more lumbar or sacral dermatomes. In the general population, low back pain with leg pain extending below the knee has an annual prevalence that varies from 9.9% to 25%.

METHODS

The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of lumbosacral radicular pain was reviewed and summarized.

RESULTS

Although a patient's history, the pain distribution pattern, and clinical examination may yield a presumptive diagnosis of lumbosacral radicular pain, additional clinical tests may be required. Medical imaging studies can demonstrate or exclude specific underlying pathologies and identify nerve root irritation, while selective diagnostic nerve root blocks can be used to confirm the affected level(s). In subacute lumbosacral radicular pain, transforaminal corticosteroid administration provides short-term pain relief and improves mobility. In chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment adjacent to the spinal ganglion (DRG) can provide pain relief for a longer period in well-selected patients. In cases of refractory pain, epidural adhesiolysis and spinal cord stimulation can be considered in experienced centers.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of lumbosacral radicular pain is based on a combination of history, clinical examination, and additional investigations. Epidural steroids can be considered for subacute lumbosacral radicular pain. In chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, PRF adjacent to the DRG is recommended. SCS and epidural adhesiolysis can be considered for cases of refractory pain in specialized centers.

Joint European Academy of Neurology-European Pain Federation-Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In these guidelines, we aimed to develop evidence-based recommendations for the use of screening questionnaires and diagnostic tests in patients with neuropathic pain (NeP).

METHODS

We systematically reviewed studies providing information on the sensitivity and specificity of screening questionnaires, and quantitative sensory testing, neurophysiology, skin biopsy, and corneal confocal microscopy. We also analysed how functional neuroimaging, peripheral nerve blocks, and genetic testing might provide useful information in diagnosing NeP.

RESULTS

Of the screening questionnaires, Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions (DN4), I-DN4 (self-administered DN4), and Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) received a strong recommendation, and S-LANSS (self-administered LANSS) and PainDETECT weak recommendations for their use in the diagnostic pathway for patients with possible NeP. We devised a strong recommendation for the use of skin biopsy and a weak recommendation for quantitative sensory testing and nociceptive evoked potentials in the NeP diagnosis. Trigeminal reflex testing received a strong recommendation in diagnosing secondary trigeminal neuralgia. Although many studies support the usefulness of corneal confocal microscopy in diagnosing peripheral neuropathy, no study specifically investigated the diagnostic accuracy of this technique in patients with NeP. Functional neuroimaging and peripheral nerve blocks are helpful in disclosing pathophysiology and/or predicting outcomes, but current literature does not support their use for diagnosing NeP. Genetic testing may be considered at specialist centres, in selected cases.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations provide evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for NeP diagnosis. Due to the poor-to-moderate quality of evidence identified by this review, future large-scale, well-designed, multicentre studies assessing the accuracy of diagnostic tests for NeP are needed.

Formulation of Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) clinical practice guideline for the management of low back pain- the revised 2019 edition

BACKGROUND

The latest clinical guidelines are mandatory for physicians to follow when practicing evidence-based medicine in the treatment of low back pain. Those guidelines should target not only Japanese board-certified orthopaedic surgeons, but also primary physicians, and they should be prepared based entirely on evidence-based medicine. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association Low Back Pain guideline committee decided to update the guideline and launched the formulation committee. The purpose of this study was to describe the formulation we implemented for the revision of the guideline with the latest data of evidence-based medicine.

METHODS

The Japanese Orthopaedic Association Low Back Pain guideline formulation committee revised the previous guideline based on a method for preparing clinical guidelines in Japan proposed by Medical Information Network Distribution Service Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. Two key phrases, "body of evidence" and "benefit and harm balance" were focused on in the revised version. Background and clinical questions were determined, followed by literature search related to each question. Appropriate articles were selected from all the searched literature. Structured abstracts were prepared, and then meta-analyses were performed. The strength of both the body of evidence and the recommendation was decided by the committee members.

RESULTS

Nine background and nine clinical qvuestions were determined. For each clinical question, outcomes from the literature were collected and meta-analysis was performed. Answers and explanations were described for each clinical question, and the strength of the recommendation was decided. For background questions, the recommendations were described based on previous literature.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2019 clinical practice guideline for the management of low back pain was completed according to the latest evidence-based medicine. We strongly hope that this guideline serves as a benchmark for all physicians, as well as patients, in the management of low back pain.

Diagnostic Roots Radiofrequency Sensory Stimulation Looking for Symptomatic Injured Roots in Multiple Lumbar Stenosis

Objective

We present how to perform radiofrequency sensory stimulation (RFSS) and whether RFSS could be helpful in identifying symptomatic injured roots in multilevel lumbar stenosis.

Methods

Consecutive patients who underwent RFSS from 2010 to 2012 were enrolled. To identify pathologic lesions, RFSS was performed for suspicious roots, as determined using lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The RFSS procedure resembled transforaminal root block. During RFSS of the suspicious root, patients could indicate whether stimulation induced their usual pain and/or sensory changes and could indicate whether the same leg area was affected. The number of possible symptomatic roots on MRI was evaluated before and after RFSS. Based on the RFSS results, we confirmed the presence of symptomatic nerve root(s) and performed surgical decompression. Surgical results, such as numeric rating scale (NRS) scores for low back pain (LBP) and leg pain (LP), and Oswestry disability index (ODI), were evaluated.

Results

Ten patients were enrolled in the study. Their mean age was 70.1±9.7 years. Clinically, NRS-LBP, NRS-LP, and ODI before surgery were 5.1%, 7.5%, and 53.2%, respectively. The mean number of suspicious roots was 2.6±0.8. After RFSS, the mean number of symptomatic roots was 1.6±1.0. On average, 1.4 lumbar segments were decompressed. The follow-up period was 35.3±12.8 months. At the last follow-up, NRS-LBP, NRS-LP, and ODI were 3.1%, 1.5%, and 35.3%, respectively. There was no recurrence or need for further surgical treatment for lumbar stenosis.

Conclusion

RFSS is a potentially helpful diagnostic tool for verifying and localizing symptomatic injured root lesions, particularly in patients with multilevel spinal stenosis.

Invasive Treatments for Low Back Disorders

OBJECTIVE

This abbreviated version of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine's Low Back Disorders guideline reviews the evidence and recommendations developed for invasive treatments used to manage low back disorders.

METHODS

Comprehensive systematic literature reviews were accomplished with article abstraction, critiquing, grading, evidence table compilation, and guideline finalization by a multidisciplinary expert panel and extensive peer-review to develop evidence-based guidance. Consensus recommendations were formulated when evidence was lacking and often relied on analogy to other disorders for which evidence exists. A total of 47 high-quality and 321 moderate-quality trials were identified for invasive management of low back disorders.

RESULTS

Guidance has been developed for the invasive management of acute, subacute, and chronic low back disorders and rehabilitation. This includes 49 specific recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Quality evidence should guide invasive treatment for all phases of managing low back disorders.

Pain and functional outcomes of the sacroiliac joint after platelet-rich plasma injection: a descriptive review

The purpose of this manuscript is to highlight and review the status of literature regarding efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction. A review of the literature on PRP interventions on the SIJ or ligaments was performed. Seven studies had improvements in their respective primary end point and demonstrated a strong safety profile without any serious adverse events. Only five articles demonstrated clinical efficacy of >50% in their primary outcome measures. There appears to be inconsistent and insufficient evidence for a conclusive recommendation for or against SIJ PRP. There is a need for adequately powered well-designed, standardized, double-blinded randomized clinical trials to determine the effectiveness of PRP in SIJ-mediated pain.

Spondyloarthrosis: pathogenesis, clinic, diagnosis and treatment (literature review and own experience)

8590% of the elderly people are diagnosed with spondyloarthrosis There are various synonyms for this disease in the literature: facet syndrome, facet pain syndrome, arthrosis of the intervertebral joints, zygapophysial joint arthrosis and spondyloarthropathy. The article analyzes the pathogenesis, clinical picture and methods of diagnosis of this disease. Modern types of conservative and surgical treatment are presented. The advantages and disadvantages of the surgical methods for the facet syndrome treatment are analyzed: instrumental denervation (radio frequency, laser, etc.), chemical denervaion and intraarticular administration of drugs. The results of our own clinical work are presented. The facet joint denervation appears to be a productive minimally invasive method of treatment of the reflex forms of spondyloarthrosis. In the early and long-term postoperative period, it leads to a persistent decrease in the intensity of pain and improvement of the quality of life with a low risk of perioperative complications.

The utility of diagnostic selective nerve root blocks in the management of patients with lumbar radiculopathy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar radiculopathy (LR) often manifests as pain in the lower back radiating into one leg (sciatica). Unsuccessful back surgery is associated with significant healthcare costs and risks to patients. This review aims to examine the diagnostic accuracy of selective nerve root blocks (SNRBs) to identify patients most likely to benefit from lumbar decompression surgery.

DESIGN

Systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy studies.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Primary research articles using a patient population with low back pain and symptoms in the leg, SNRB administered under radiological guidance as index test, and any reported reference standard for the diagnosis of LR.

INFORMATION SOURCES

MEDLINE (Ovid), MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, Biosis, LILACS, Dissertation abstracts and National Technical Information Service from inception to 2018.

METHODS

Risk of bias and applicability was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. We performed random-effects logistic regression to meta-analyse studies grouped by reference standard.

RESULTS

6 studies (341 patients) were included in this review. All studies were judged at high risk of bias. There was substantial heterogeneity across studies in sensitivity (range 57%-100%) and specificity (10%-86%) estimates. Four studies were diagnostic cohort studies that used either intraoperative findings during surgery (pooled sensitivity: 93.5% [95% CI 84.0 to 97.6]; specificity: 50.0% [16.8 to 83.2]) or 'outcome following surgery' as the reference standard (pooled sensitivity: 90.9% [83.1 to 95.3]; specificity 22.0% [7.4 to 49.9]). Two studies had a within-patient case-control study design, but results were not pooled because different types of control injections were used.

CONCLUSIONS

We found limited evidence which was of low methodological quality indicating that the diagnostic accuracy of SNRB is uncertain and that specificity in particular may be low. SNRB is a safe test with a low risk of clinically significant complications, but it remains unclear whether the additional diagnostic information it provides justifies the cost of the test.

Chronic localized back pain due to entrapment of cutaneous branches of posterior rami of the thoracic nerves (POCNES): a case series on diagnosis and management

Introduction and aim

Chronic back pain (CBP) may be caused by a variety of conditions including dysfunctional muscles, ligaments or intervertebral discs, improper movement of vertebral column joints, or nerve root compression. Recently, CBP was treated successfully in a patient having an entrapment of cutaneous branches of the posterior rami of the thoracic nerves, termed posterior cutaneous nerve entrapment syndrome (POCNES). Our aim is to describe clinical presentation, differential diagnosis, and management of patients with such a neuropathic pain syndrome.

Methods

This study analyzed prospectively obtained data from consecutive patients suspected of having POCNES, presenting to two Dutch hospitals between January 2013 and September 2016. Patients received a diagnostic 2–5 mL 1% lidocaine injection just below the thoracolumbar fascia. Pain was scored using a numerical rating scale (0 = no pain to 10 = worst possible pain). A >50% pain reduction was defined as success. A neurectomy was proposed if pain reduction was temporary or insufficient after one to three injections. Long-term treatment effect was determined using a verbal rating scale (VRS; 1 = very satisfied, no pain, to 5 = pain worse).

Results

Fourteen patients (12 women, median age 26, age range 18–73) were diagnosed with POCNES. Eighty-one percent (n=11) reported a >50% pain drop after injection (NRS pain scores of median 8.0 [IQR 7.0–8.0] to median 3.0 [IQR 1.5–3.5], P<0.001). In one patient, repeated injections were successful long-term (VRS score of 2). Two patients declined surgery, whereas the remaining eleven underwent a neurectomy that was successful in seven (64%). A 57% long-term efficacy (median 29 months follow-up, range 5–48, VRS score 1–2) was attained in the entire study population.

Conclusion

POCNES should be considered in the differential diagnosis of chronic localized back pain. A treatment regimen including injections and neurectomy of the specific cutaneous branch results in long-term pain relief in more than half of these patients.

Lumbar Dorsal Root Ganglion Block as a Prognostic Tool Before Pulsed Radiofrequency: A Randomized, Prospective, and Comparative Study on Cost-Effectiveness

OBJECTIVES

In the study, we discuss the predictive value and cost-effectiveness of dorsal root ganglion (DRG) blocks before using dorsal root ganglion pulsed radiofrequency (DRG-PRF) in the treatment of low back pain.

METHODS

The study comprised 60 patients with low back pain who were randomly assigned into 2 groups. Patients in group 1 were screened using DRG block before DRG-PRF treatment for responders. Patients in group 2 underwent DRG-PRF treatment without DRG block. Successful outcome was defined as patient satisfaction, improvement in numerical rating scale, and medication use reduction.

RESULTS

In group 1 (n = 30), 24 patients demonstrated good response to DRG block, and 20 patients had successful outcome at 6 months after DRG-PRF therapy. In group 2 (n = 30), 25 of the patients had successful outcome at 6 months after DRG-PRF therapy. The mean medical costs were NT$ 19,245 and NT$ 16,375 for each successful case in groups 1 and 2, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this comparative cost-effectiveness study, the application of diagnostic DRG blocks before DRG-PRF did not have a significant impact on patient satisfaction, pain index score, or pain medication reduction. Furthermore, the application of diagnostic DRG blocks resulted in overall greater medical costs. These findings suggest that DRG-PRF without screening by DRG block is more cost-effective and less invasive.

Lumbar facet joint injection in treating low back pain: Radiofrequency denervation versus SHAM procedure. Systematic review

The lumbar facet joints have been implicated as one of the causes of low-back pain syndromes. About 15-40% of patients who presented with chronic low-back pain was attributed to lumbar facet joint pain. The purpose of this study was to analyse whether radiofrequency denervation is better than SHAM procedure in treating chronic low-back pain caused by lumbar zygapophysial joints pathology. From the four identified randomised control trials, there is conflicting evidence at an intermediate 3-6-month stage, however; one study demonstrates statistical significance of radiofrequency denervation at 3 months. Longer-term follow-up is needed to prove the efficacy of radiofrequency denervation technique.

Predictive Factors for Successful Outcome of Pulsed Radiofrequency Treatment in Patients with Intractable Lumbosacral Radicular Pain

BACKGROUND

In a previous prospective study on pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment adjacent to the lumbar dorsal root ganglion (DRG) for patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, we reported success in 55.4% of the patients at 6 months. Identification of predictors for success after PRF may improve outcome. We assessed the predictors of PRF in patients with chronic intractable lumbosacral radicular pain.

METHODS

Patients with monosegmental chronic lumbosacral radicular pain of L5 or S1 first received a selective nerve root block at the corresponding level. Independent of the result of this block a PRF treatment at the same level was performed. At 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months after the procedure the outcome was evaluated.

RESULTS

A positive diagnostic nerve root block and age ≥ 55 were predictive factors for successful outcome at 6 months, while disability was a negative predictor.The use of failed back surgery syndrome, gender, duration of pain, Numerical Rating Scale, level and side of treatment, DN4, and RAND-36 as predictors for success was not supported.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful outcome after PRF adjacent to the DRG, in patients with intractable chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, is more likely in patients ≥ 55 years, with limited disability and after a positive diagnostic nerve root block. A combination of all these factors creates a fair predictive value (AUC: 0.73).

Chronic Pain-related Disability: Current Scientific Rationale and Recommendations for Practice

The present paper concerns the prevention and management of disability due to chronic pain. The problem of disabling chronic pain is presented and the impact on the community is highlighted. The scientific rationale for current approaches to management is discussed and the available empirical evidence reviewed. In particular, the present paper advocates application of the biopsychosocial model for the prevention and management of chronic pain-related disability. As such, the components of the biopsychosocial model are reviewed and recommendations for rehabilitation counselling practice are presented.

Interventional therapies for chronic low back pain

OBJECTIVE

Low back pain (LBP) is a highly prevalent condition and one of the leading causes of lost productivity and health-care costs. The objective of this review is to discuss the role of interventional pain procedures and evidence of their effectiveness in treatment of chronic LBP.

METHODS

This is a narrative review examining published studies on interventional procedures for LBP. The rationales, indications, technique, evidence, and complications for the interventional procedures are discussed.

RESULTS

Interventional pain procedures are used extensively in diagnosis and treatment of chronic pain. LBP is multifactorial, and while significant progress has been made in understanding its pathophysiology, this has not resulted in a proportional improvement of functional outcomes. For certain procedures, such as spinal cord stimulation, medical branch blocks and radiofrequency ablations, and epidural steroid injections for radiculopathy, safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness in treating LBP have been well studied. For others, such as interventions for discogenic pain, treatment successes have been modest at best.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of interventional pain procedures in the treatment framework of LBP has resulted in improvement of pain intensity in at least the short and medium terms, but equivocal results have been observed in functional improvement.

Controlled medial branch anesthetic block in the diagnosis of chronic lumbar facet joint pain: the value of a three-month follow-up

OBJECTIVES

To verify the incidence of facetary and low back pain after a controlled medial branch anesthetic block in a three-month follow-up and to verify the correlation between the positive results and the demographic variables.

METHODS

Patients with chronic lumbar pain underwent a sham blockade (with a saline injection) and then a controlled medial branch block. Their symptoms were evaluated before and after the sham injection and after the real controlled medial branch block; the symptoms were reevaluated after one day and one week, as well as after one, two and three months using the visual analog scale. We searched for an association between the positive results and the demographic characteristics of the patients.

RESULTS

A total of 104 controlled medial branch blocks were performed and 54 patients (52%) demonstrated >50% improvements in pain after the blockade. After three months, lumbar pain returned in only 18 individuals, with visual analogue scale scores >4. Therefore, these patients were diagnosed with chronic facet low back pain. The three-months of follow-up after the controlled medial branch block excluded 36 patients (67%) with false positive results. The results of the controlled medial branch block were not correlated to sex, age, pain duration or work disability but were correlated with patient age (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patient diagnosis with a controlled medial branch block proved to be effective but was not associated with any demographic variables. A three-month follow-up is required to avoid a high number of false positives.

The effect of sedation on the accuracy and treatment outcomes for diagnostic injections: a randomized, controlled, crossover study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Diagnostic injections are used to diagnose myriad pain conditions, but are characterized by a high false-positive rate. One potential cause of inaccurate diagnostic blocks is the use of sedation. We sought to determine the effect of sedation on the validity of diagnostic injections.

DESIGN

Randomized, crossover study in which 73 patients were allocated to receive a diagnostic sacroiliac joint or sympathetic nerve block performed either with or without sedation using midazolam and fentanyl. Those who obtained equivocal relief, good relief lasting less than 3 months, or who were otherwise deemed good candidates for a repeat injection, received a subsequent crossover injection within 3 months (N = 46).

SETTING AND PATIENTS

A tertiary care teaching hospital and a military treatment facility.

RESULTS

In the primary crossover analysis, blocks performed with sedation resulted in a larger mean reduction in pain diary score than those done without sedation (1.2 [2.6]; P = 0.006), less procedure-related pain (difference in means 2.3 [2.5]; P < 0.0001), and a higher proportion of patients who obtained > 50% pain relief on their pain diaries (70% vs. 54%; P = 0.039). The increased pain reduction was not accompanied by increased satisfaction (sedation mean 3.9 [1.1] vs. 3.7 [1.3]; P = 0.26). Similar findings were observed for the parallel group (N = 73) and omnibus (all sedation vs. no sedation blocks, N = 110) analyses. No differences in outcomes were noted between the use and non-use of sedation at 1-month.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of sedation during diagnostic injections may increase the rate of false-positive blocks and lead to misdiagnoses and unnecessary procedures, but has no effect on satisfaction or outcomes at 1-month.

The role of needle tip position on the accuracy of diagnostic selective nerve root blocks in spinal deformity

PURPOSE

The specificity of a selective nerve root block (SNRB) is dependant on isolating only the required nerve root whilst avoiding injectate flow to traversing nerves. Needle tip position is therefore crucial. Nerve root blocks (SNRBs) in the presence of deformity can be particularly technically challenging to perform. The aims of this study were to document the relationship of needle tip position and SNRB accuracy in patients with and without spinal deformity.

METHODS

Over an 8-month period, all SNRBs performed by one spinal surgeon were included. Patients with radiographic evidence of spinal deformity were analysed separately and their lumbar deformity graded using the Schwab grading system. Needle tip position in relation to the superior pedicle and flow of contrast was documented.

RESULTS

76 patients received 85 injections without deformity, 26 patients with deformity underwent 30 SNRBs. In the normal spinal alignment group, there was on overall accuracy of 70.1% regardless of needle tip position, which improved to 91.8% for a lateral needle tip position (P < 0.001). In patients with deformity, the overall accuracy was significantly lower irrespective of needle tip position 36 versus 70%, respectively (P < 0.0019).

CONCLUSIONS

Selective nerve root blocks are accurate in patients without deformity where a needle tip placement lateral to the middle third of the pedicle is achieved. The presence of spinal deformity significantly reduces the accuracy of SNRBs with a higher chance of epidural infiltration.

Magnetic resonance neurography-guided nerve blocks for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pelvic pain syndrome

Magnetic resonance (MR) neurography - guided nerve blocks and injections describe a techniques for selective percutaneous drug delivery, in which limited MR neurography and interventional MR imaging are used jointly to map and target specific pelvic nerves or muscles, navigate needles to the target, visualize the injected drug and detect spread to confounding structures. The procedures described, specifically include nerve blocks of the obturator nerve, lateral femoral cutaneous nerve, pudendal nerve, posterior femoral cutaneous nerve, sciatic nerve, ganglion impar, sacral spinal nerve, and injection into the piriformis muscle.

Magnetic resonance imaging-guided spine injections

Magnetic resonance (MR)-guided spine injections describe techniques for selective spine injection procedures, in which MR imaging is used to visualize spinal targets and needle placement, monitor the injected drugs, and detect spread to potentially confounding nearby structures. The introduction of clinical high-field wide-bore MR imaging systems has increased the practicability and availability of MR-guided spine injections. The use of 1.5-T field strength, modern coils, and parallel imaging technology increases the MR signal, which can be utilized for faster temporal image acquisition, higher image resolution, better image contrast, or combinations thereof. Magnetic resonance imaging guidance provides excellent osseous and soft-tissue detail of spinal structures and is well suited to avoid radiation exposure. In this article, we discuss the technical background of interventional MR imaging, review the literature, and illustrate interventional MR imaging techniques of commonly performed spinal injection procedures, including sacroiliac joint injections, lumbar facet joint injections, selective spinal nerve root infiltration, and percutaneous drug delivery to the lumbar sympathetic nerves.

False localizing signs in traumatic brain injury

BACKGROUND

Hemiparesis ipsilateral to a mass-occupying lesion can be due to Kernohan-Woltman Notch Phenomenon (KWNP). This syndrome implies a false-localizing sign because clinical findings lead the examiner to an incorrect neuroanatomical diagnosis. The contralateral crus cerebri (pyramidal tract) is pressed against the tentorial incisum and a resultant hemiparesis is found on the same side of the lesion.

REVIEW

A detailed literature search of false-localizing signs is presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Not infrequently, patients presenting to a physiatrist may have incomplete records. The existence of false localizing signs may point the physician towards the wrong underlying pathology.

11. Lumbosacral radicular pain

Lumbosacral radicular pain is characterized by a radiating pain in one or more lumbar or sacral dermatomes; it may or may not be accompanied by other radicular irritation symptoms and/or symptoms of decreased function. The annual prevalence in the general population, described as low back pain with leg pain traveling below the knee, varied from 9.9% to 25%, which means that it is presumably the most commonly occurring form of neuropathic pain. The patient's history may give a suggestion of lumbosacral radicular pain. The best known clinical investigation is the straight-leg raising test. Final diagnosis is made based on a combination of clinical examination and potentially additional tests. Medical imaging studies are indicated to exclude possible serious pathologies and to confirm the affected level in patients suffering lumbosacral radicular pain for longer than 3 months. Magnetic resonance imaging is preferred. Selective diagnostic blocks help confirming the affected level. There is controversy concerning the effectiveness of conservative management (physical therapy, exercise) and pharmacological treatment. When conservative treatment fails, in subacute lumbosacral radicular pain under the level L3 as the result of a contained herniation, transforaminal corticosteroid administration is recommended (2 B+). In chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, (pulsed) radiofrequency treatment adjacent to the spinal ganglion (DRG) can be considered (2 C+). For refractory lumbosacral radicular pain, adhesiolysis and epiduroscopy can be considered (2 B+/-), preferentially study-related. In patients with a therapy-resistant radicular pain in the context of a Failed Back Surgery Syndrome, spinal cord stimulation is recommended (2 A+). This treatment should be performed in specialized centers.

Efeitos do ultrassom terapêutico em modelo experimental de ciatalgia

A ciática possui grande prevalência geral e seu tratamento tende a resolver as causas de compressão nervosa. A fisioterapia objetiva reduzir os sintomas causados pela compressão. O presente estudo teve como objetivo avaliar a eficácia do ultrassom terapêutico sobre a dor, em animais submetidos a modelo experimental de ciatalgia. Foram usados 18 ratos neste estudo, divididos em três grupos: GS (n = 4), submetido a modelo de ciatalgia e tratados com ultrassom desligado; GUP (n = 7), submetido à ciatalgia e tratados com ultrassom pulsado 2W/cm² (SATP; 0,4 - SATA); e grupo GUC (n = 7), submetido à ciática e ultrassom contínuo (0,4W/cm²). O nervo ciático do membro posterior direito foi exposto à compressão com fio categute em quatro pontos. No 3º dia pós-operatório (PO), iniciou-se tratamento indireto por quatro dias. No 9º dia PO, o tratamento direto começou sobre a área do procedimento cirúrgico, por cinco dias consecutivos. O tempo de elevação da pata, durante a marcha, foi avaliado antes e após a ciatalgia, no 3º, 6º, 9º e 13º PO. Os resultados demonstraram que a aplicação do ultrassom reduziu a dor com ambos os tratamentos efetivos e tendeu a ser mais eficaz na forma pulsada.

[Non-specific lower back pain: In search of the origin of pain]

Lower back pain is a condition considered benign and with a specific cause determined only in 15% of patients. In the past years this concept has varied, because many papers have described no benign condition leading to back pain, citing their capacity to cause disability. Through many different diagnostic techniques it is possible to identify the structures capable of producing back pain. This identification, and the level of evidence of the interventional techniques, is the aim of this paper.

Piriformis and related entrapment syndromes: diagnosis & management

Highly reliable evidence for piriformis syndrome and other pelvic sciatic syndromes arises from three major categories of data: magnetic resonance neurography diagnostic imaging, open magnetic resonance-guided injection studies, and patient treatment outcome studies. This article reviews the evidence in each category. This is part of a Point-Counterpoint discussion with Dr. Robert Tiel's presentation of "Myth and Fallacy".

Sources of sacroiliac region pain: insights gained from a study comparing standard intra-articular injection with a technique combining intra- and peri-articular injection

OBJECTIVES

To present evidence supporting the existence of extra-articular sources for sacroiliac region pain and to present evidence that intra-articular anesthetic blockade may underestimate the true prevalence of sacroiliac region pain.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of 2 large case series comparing patient responses to intra-articular injection versus combined intra-articular and peri-articular injection of anesthetic and corticosteroid.

SETTING

Private practice chronic pain clinic set in a hospital outpatient clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients (N=120) sequentially enrolled from practice billing records. Inclusion criteria included pain in the low back below L4 and in the buttock, thigh, groin, or lower leg. If disk herniation, lumbar stenosis, or facet syndrome was previously treated with appropriately chosen injections, response to treatment had to be negative. Patients failed to respond to treatment with physical therapy. Exclusion criteria included records with an incomplete database, patients increasing pain medication use greater than 15% for pain not related to the sacroiliac region, severe psychiatric illness, and nonspecific anesthetic blockade. One hundred sixty-seven records were reviewed to obtain the 120 study subjects.

INTERVENTIONS

Intra-articular injection was done according to the standard technique described by Fortin. Peri-articular injection was done by a slight modification of the procedure described by Yin.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Percentage change in visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at 3 weeks and 3 months postinjection; patients' self reported activities of daily living (ADLs) improvement at 3 weeks and 3 months postinjection; and percentage change in VAS pain score within 1 hour of injection.

RESULTS

For intra-articular injection alone, the rate of positive response at 3 months was 12.50% versus 31.25% for the combined injection (P=.025). Positive response was defined as greater than 50% drop in VAS pain score or patients describing ADLs as "greatly improved." Anesthetic response rates were higher in the combined injection group (62.5% vs 42.5%; P=.037).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant extra-articular sources of sacroiliac region pain exist. Intra-articular diagnostic blocks underestimate the prevalence of sacroiliac region pain.

Spinal injection procedures: a review of concepts, controversies, and complications

The field of spinal injection procedures is growing at a tremendous rate. Many disciplines are involved, including radiology, anesthesiology, orthopedics, physiatry and rehabilitation medicine, as well as other specialties. However, there remains tremendous variability in the assessment of patients receiving these therapies, methods for evaluation of outcome, and in the understanding of where these procedures belong in the triaging of those who require surgery. In this article, we attempt to highlight the biologic concepts on which these therapies are based, controversies that have arisen with their increasing use, and a description of complications that have been reported.

Randomized placebo-controlled study evaluating lateral branch radiofrequency denervation for sacroiliac joint pain

BACKGROUND

Sacroiliac joint pain is a challenging condition accounting for approximately 20% of cases of chronic low back pain. Currently, there are no effective long-term treatment options for sacroiliac joint pain.

METHODS

A randomized placebo-controlled study was conducted in 28 patients with injection-diagnosed sacroiliac joint pain. Fourteen patients received L4-L5 primary dorsal rami and S1-S3 lateral branch radiofrequency denervation using cooling-probe technology after a local anesthetic block, and 14 patients received the local anesthetic block followed by placebo denervation. Patients who did not respond to placebo injections crossed over and were treated with radiofrequency denervation using conventional technology.

RESULTS

One, 3, and 6 months after the procedure, 11 (79%), 9 (64%), and 8 (57%) radiofrequency-treated patients experienced pain relief of 50% or greater and significant functional improvement. In contrast, only 2 patients (14%) in the placebo group experienced significant improvement at their 1-month follow-up, and none experienced benefit 3 months after the procedure. In the crossover group (n = 11), 7 (64%), 6 (55%), and 4 (36%) experienced improvement 1, 3, and 6 months after the procedure. One year after treatment, only 2 patients (14%) in the treatment group continued to demonstrate persistent pain relief.

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide preliminary evidence that L4 and L5 primary dorsal rami and S1-S3 lateral branch radiofrequency denervation may provide intermediate-term pain relief and functional benefit in selected patients with suspected sacroiliac joint pain. Larger studies are needed to confirm these results and to determine the optimal candidates and treatment parameters for this poorly understood disorder.

Lumbar zygapophysial (facet) joint radiofrequency denervation success as a function of pain relief during diagnostic medial branch blocks: a multicenter analysis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The publication of several recent studies showing minimal benefit for radiofrequency (RF) lumbar zygapophysial (l-z) joint denervation have led many investigators to reevaluate selection criteria. One controversial explanation for these findings is that the most commonly used cutoff value for selecting patients for l-z (facet) joint RF denervation, greater than 50% pain relief after diagnostic blocks, is too low and hence responsible for the high failure rate.

PURPOSE

To compare l-z joint RF denervation success rates between the conventional greater than or equal to 50% pain relief threshold and the more stringently proposed greater than or equal to 80% cutoff for diagnostic medial branch blocks (MBB).

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Multicenter, retrospective clinical data analysis.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Two hundred and sixty-two patients with chronic low back pain who underwent l-z RF denervation at three pain clinics.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcome measures were greater than 50% pain relief based on visual analog scale or numerical pain rating score after RF denervation persisting at least 6 months postprocedure, and global perceived effect (GPE), which considered pain relief, satisfaction and functional improvement.

METHODS

Data were garnered at three centers on 262 patients who underwent l-z RF denervation after obtaining greater than or equal to 50% pain relief after diagnostic MBB. Subjects were separated into those who received partial (greater than or equal to 50% but less than 80%) and near-complete (greater than or equal to 80%) pain relief from the MBB. Outcomes between groups were compared with multivariate analysis after controlling for 14 demographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-five patients obtained greater than or equal to 50% but less than 80% pain relief after diagnostic MBB, and 117 patients obtained greater than or equal to 80% relief. In the greater than or equal to 50% group, success rates were 52% and 67% based on pain relief and GPE, respectively. Among patients who experienced greater than 80% relief from diagnostic blocks, 56% obtained greater than or equal to 50% relief from RF denervation and 66% had a positive GPE.

CONCLUSIONS

Using more stringent pain relief criteria when selecting patients for l-z joint RF denervation is unlikely to improve success rates, and may lead to misdiagnosis and withholding a potentially valuable treatment from good candidates.

Uso do laser, 670 nm, no quadro álgico de ratos submetidos à modelo experimental de ciatalgia

A ciatalgia deve-se a compressão do nervo isquiático em algum ponto de seu trajeto, e seu tratamento consiste em solucionar a causa da compressão nervosa, seja por tratamento cirúrgico ou conservador. Alguns recursos fisioterapêuticos atuam basicamente na redução dos sintomas ocasionados por este distúrbio. O objetivo deste estudo foi verificar a eficácia do laser 670 nm, em duas diferentes densidades de energia, na redução do quadro álgico, em ratos submetidos a modelo experimental de ciatalgia. Foram utilizados 18 ratos, divididos em 3 grupos: G1 (n=6) submetidos à ciatalgia e simulado o tratamento (grupo placebo), G2 (n=6) submetido à ciatalgia e tratados com laser 2 J/cm², G3 (n=6) submetidos à ciatalgia e irradiados com laser 4 J/cm². O nervo isquiático do membro posterior direito dos animais foi exposto e compressão com fio catgut em 4 pontos ao redor do nervo foi realizada. No 3° dia pós-operatório, iniciou-se o tratamento com laser na região do procedimento cirúrgico do membro posterior direito durante 10 dias consecutivos. Verificou-se por meio da marcha, o tempo em que o membro permanecia no ar nos períodos: anterior à ciatalgia, pré e pós-tratamento. Os resultados demonstraram que o laser não foi eficaz na redução do quadro álgico, porém com 4 J/cm² houve efeito positivo, sem restabelecimento completo da funcionalidade.

Value of diagnostic lumbar selective nerve root block: a prospective controlled study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Although diagnostic lumbar selective nerve root blocks are often used to confirm the pain-generating nerve root level, the reported accuracy of these blocks has been variable and their usefulness is controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of diagnostic lumbar selective nerve root blocks to analyze potential causes of false results in a prospective, controlled, single-blinded manner.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 105 block anesthetics were performed under fluoroscopic guidance in 47 consecutive patients with pure radiculopathy from a single confirmed level: 47 blocks were performed at the symptomatic level, and 58 were performed at the adjacent asymptomatic "control" level. Contrast and local anesthetics were injected, and spot radiographs were taken in all cases. We calculated the diagnostic value of the block anesthetics using concordance with the injected level. We analyzed the potential causes of false results using spot radiographs.

RESULTS

On the basis of a definition of a positive block as 70% pain relief, determined by receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) analysis, diagnostic lumbar selective nerve root block anesthetics had a sensitivity of 57%, a specificity of 86%, an accuracy of 73%, a positive predictive value of 77%, and a negative predictive value of 71%. False-negatives were due to the following causes identifiable on spot radiographs: insufficient infiltration, insufficient passage of the injectate, and intraepineural injections. On the other hand, false-positives resulted from overflow of the injectate from the injected asymptomatic level into either the epidural space or symptomatic level.

CONCLUSION

The accuracy of diagnostic lumbar selective nerve root blocks is only moderate. To improve the accuracy, great care should be taken to avoid inadequate blocks and overflow, and to precisely interpret spot radiographs.

Management of chronic low back pain: rationales, principles, and targets of imaging-guided spinal injections

If low back pain does not improve with conservative management, the cause of the pain must be determined before further therapy is initiated. Information obtained from the patient's medical history, physical examination, and imaging may suffice to rule out many common causes of chronic pain (eg, fracture, malignancy, visceral or metabolic abnormality, deformity, inflammation, and infection). However, in most cases, the initial clinical and imaging findings have a low predictive value for the identification of specific pain-producing spinal structures. Diagnostic spinal injections performed in conjunction with imaging may be necessary to test the hypothesis that a particular structure is the source of pain. To ensure a valid test result, diagnostic injection procedures should be monitored with fluoroscopy, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging. The use of controlled and comparative injections helps maximize the reliability of the test results. After a symptomatic structure has been identified, therapeutic spinal injections may be administered as an adjunct to conservative management, especially in patients with inoperable conditions. Therapeutic injections also may help hasten the recovery of patients with persistent or recurrent pain after spinal surgery.

Interventional approaches to pain management

This article reviews the evidence for several common interventional techniques for the treatment of chronic pain, including: intraspinal delivery of analgesics, reversible blockade with local anesthetics, augmentation with spinal cord stimulation, and ablation with radiofrequency energy or neurolytic agents. The role of these techniques is defined within the framework of a multidisciplinary approach to the neurobehavioral syndrome of chronic pain. Challenges to the study of the analgesic efficacy of procedural interventions are explored, as are the practical issues raised by their clinical implementation, with the aim of helping nonspecialist physicians identify the patients most likely to benefit from these approaches.