Epidural corticosteroid injections: Still credible?

Musculoskeletal corticosteroid injections: Recommendations of the French Society for Rheumatology (SFR)

Musculoskeletal corticosteroid injections are widely performed, although the exact practice varies greatly due to advances in knowledge and techniques. This justifies updating and drawing up good practice recommendations. Using a consensus model formalized by the French National Authority for Health (HAS) and based on a literature review that resulted in a "white book", 13 recommendations were developed by a group of experts. These recommendations were then sent online to 48 specialists for evaluation, 27 of whom were rheumatologists and 15 of whom were general practitioners. These recommendations were also presented at the 34th annual meeting of the French Society for Rheumatology (SFR) (Paris, December 2021) at a symposium attended by a hundred or so rheumatologists, who voted on these recommendations in person. The results are presented as an overall score out of 10, a median out of 10 and as tertiles. The agreement was excellent for 10 of these 13 recommendations, with mean values of 8.5 to 9.1 out of 10, median values of 9 or 10 out of 10 and agreement of 91.7% to 97.9%, which corresponds to a consensus. The 3 other recommendations were broadly supported but were the subject of more debate. One relates to patient information (mean 7.3/10, median 8/10, upper tertile 72.9%) with discussion about the waiting period. Another related to the summary report (mean 8.4/10, median 9, upper tertile 91.7%) with discussions about its content and the need to specify the lot number of the injected product. The last one related to periprosthetic injections and the need to consult and get approval from a specialist (mean 8.0/10, median 8, upper tertile 83.3%) with mostly the general practitioners having reservations. In all, there is a very strong consensus among the musculoskeletal corticosteroid injection experts and specialists consulted, which justifies them being taken into consideration to improve our daily practice.

Inadequacies of the Lasègue test, and how the Slump and Bowstring tests are useful for the diagnosis of sciatica

Diagnosis of sciatica mainly relies on pain reproduction by stretching of the lumbar roots since neurological examination and medical history are usually not sufficient to guarantee diagnosis. The Lasègue test is the most popular method, which starts with the straight leg-raising test (SLR). However it is not perfect, and is not always well performed or interpreted. Passive ankle dorsiflexion at the end of the SLR (Bragard test) is more sensitive, but can also remain normal in some cases of sciatica. Other stretching tests can help to recognise lumbar root damage in patients with poorly defined pain in a lower extremity: firstly, the Christodoulides test, i.e. reproduction of L5 sciatic pain by a femoral stretch test; secondly, the Slump test, performed on a patient in a sitting position, by slowly extending their painful leg then passively bending their neck (or the opposite); and thirdly, the Bowstring test, which requires, at the end of the Lasègue test, once the knee has been slightly flexed, pressing on the course of the peroneal and/or tibial nerves in the popliteal fossea to try and reproduce the exact pain felt by the patient. The combination of all these tests takes less than 2minutes, and could improve both the sensitivity and specificity of the physical examination for the diagnosis of sciatica. This article is a review of the limitations of the Lasègue/SLR tests and of the efficacy of these other tests for stretching the lumbar roots.