Epidural Steroid Injections and Selective Nerve Root Blocks

A novel simplified sonographic approach with fluoroscopy-controlled L5 transforaminal epidural injections in patients with high iliac crest: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

To explore a novel ultrasound (US) modality for lumbar transforaminal epidural injections (TFEIs) in patients with low back pain (LBP) and L5 radicular pain combined with high iliac crest (HIC).

METHODS

One-hundred and forty-one patients were retrospectively stratified into two groups based on the treatment they received: novel group, receiving US-guided and fluoroscopy (FL)-controlled TFEIs using a sagittal oblique approach between the superior articular process of L5 and S1, and control group, receiving US-guided TFEIs with conventional transverse approach combined with FL confirmation. Accuracy of contrast dispersing into lumbar epidural space was set as the primary endpoint. Radiation dosages, procedure time, numeric rating scale (NRS) scores, Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ) scores, adverse events, and rescue analgesic requirement were also recorded. The generalized liner mixed model (GLMMs) was employed to compare the repeatedly measured variables between groups, taking individual confounding factors as covariance.

RESULTS

The accuracy of TFEIs was 92.8% and 65.2% in novel and control group, with a significant difference of 26.7% (95% CI: 15.4%, 39.8%) between two modalities (p < 0.001). Significant pain relief was observed in novel group as opposed to control group after one injection. Procedure time in novel group (8.4 ± 1.6 min) was shorter than control group (15.8 ± 3.5 min) (p < 0.001) with less radiation dosage (3047 ± 5670 vs. 8808 ± 1039 μGy/m2, p < 0.001). Significantly, lower incidence of L5 paresthesia occurred in novel group. Statistical differences of NRS scores between the novel and control group were reached at 1 week after procedure (1 (IQR: - 1-3) vs. 3 (IQR: - 1-7), p = 0.006), while not reached at both 1- (1 (IQR: 0-2) vs. 1 (IQR: - 1-3), p = 0.086) or 3-month follow-up (0 (IQR: - 1-1) vs. 1 (IQR: 0-2), p = 0.094). Both groups showed similar functional improvement (F = 0.103, p = 0.749) during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel sonographic technique provided superior accuracy needle placement and better pain-relieving effect through one injection as compared to the routine transverse approach. Consequently, in situations where the HIC imposed limitations for TFEIs performance on L5, the novel technique should be recommended to consider increasing accurate puncture, minimizing radiation exposure, consuming procedure time, and reducing the risk of neuraxial injury.

Repeated epidural delivery of Shinbaro2: effects on neural recovery, inflammation, and pain modulation in a rat model of lumbar spinal stenosis

The choice of treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) depends on symptom severity. When severe motor issues with urinary dysfunction are not present, conservative treatment is often considered to be the priority. One such conservative treatment is epidural injection, which is effective in alleviating inflammation and the pain caused by LSS-affected nerves. In this study, Shinbaro2 (Sh2), pharmacopuncture using natural herbal medicines for patients with disc diseases, is introduced as an epidural to treat LSS in a rat model. The treatment of primary sensory neurons from the rats' dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons with Sh2 at various concentrations (0.5, 1, and 2 mg/mL) was found to be safe and non-toxic. Furthermore, it remarkably stimulated axonal outgrowth even under H2O2-treated conditions, indicating its potential for stimulating nerve regeneration. When LSS rats received epidural injections of two different concentrations of Sh2 (1 and 2 mg/kg) once daily for 4 weeks, a significant reduction was seen in ED1+ macrophages surrounding the silicone block used for LSS induction. Moreover, epidural injection of Sh2 in the DRG led to a significant suppression of pain-related factors. Notably, Sh2 treatment resulted in improved locomotor recovery, as evaluated by the Basso, Beattie, and Bresnahan scale and the horizontal ladder test. Additionally, hind paw hypersensitivity, assessed using the Von Frey test, was reduced, and normal gait was restored. Our findings demonstrate that epidural Sh2 injection not only reduced inflammation but also improved locomotor function and pain in LSS model rats. Thus, Sh2 delivery via epidural injection has potential as an effective treatment option for LSS.

Clinical Effectiveness of Single Lumbar Periradicular Infiltration in Patients with Sciatica

Periradicular therapy (PRT) is a minimally invasive radiological procedurein patients with chronic lumbar pain.The aim of the study is to identify clinical and radiological predictive factors for treatment success after a single PRT treatment in patients with sciatica.The study includes a prospective follow-up of 166 patients treated with PRT. The pain intensity is determined according to the VAS scale and the degree of improvement is presented as excellent (over 75%), good (50-70%), moderate (25-49%), and weak (less than 25%). The follow up of the treated patients was done at 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months. In patients with pain duration up to 3 months, the improvement was excellent in n=32 (58.18%) after 2 weeks, after 3 months n=41 (74.55%) and after 6 months n=41 (74.55%). This stands in contrast to patients with pain over 1 year. The percentage of improvement after 6 months, post-intervention, was highest in patients without nerve root compression (86.25±19.2),and the highest improvement after 6 months was in patients with localization of pain at the L4-L5 level (69.69±29.7), the greatest improvement after six months was in patients with extraforaminal hernia (62.82±34.3), and the lowest in patients with central stenosis (40.21±30.7).Our study results suggest that the shorter a pain duration, low-grade root compression, injection level and type of herniation area predictor the more favourable response patients have to transforaminal epidural steroid injection in patients with sciatica.

Management of patients with neuropathic pain

Background: Neuropathic pain diseases commonly treated with pain medicine are postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPNP), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), and chronic pain after spinal surgery. Diagnosis and treatment of these neuropathic pain diseases is an arduous task, and there is a need to improve the understanding of these entities.Current Concepts: PHN is diagnosed when pain persists for more than 3 months after the healing of herpes zoster rashes, and this disease is commonly encountered in the elderly population. The pathophysiology of DPNP is ischemia of nerve tissue due to microvascular damage. In addition to sensory nerves, DPNP can also result in changes in motor and autonomic nerves. CRPS is a chronic intractable pain disorder, and is classified into types 1 and 2. Type 1 CRPS is diagnosed when there is no evidence of nerve damage while type 2 CRPS shows evidence of nerve damage. However, the signs and symptoms do not differ depending on the type. Chronic pain after spinal surgery is characterized by persistent back pain even after one or more spinal surgeries. This neuropathic pain occurs in the lower back or leg region.Discussion and Conclusion: The most crucial step in the management of patients with neuropathic pain is to suspect and diagnose if the pain has the characteristics of any pain-related disease. Although the etiology and pathophysiology may differ, the treatment of neuropathic pain remains the same and includes both conservative and interventional approaches. Neuropathic pain diseases often become chronic in nature, and thus, it is important to establish a treatment plan which aims at decreasing pain, improving patient’s functionality and attaining an acceptable quality of life.

Gantry-needle-target alignment technique for CT-guided needle approaches to the skull base and cranio-cervical junction

PURPOSE

CT-guided percutaneous procedures involving the skull base and atlanto-axial cervical spine pose particular challenges due to high density of vital vascular and nervous structures and because the ideal needle trajectory often has a cranio-caudal obliquity different from the axial scan plane. We describe how the variable CT gantry tilt, combined with gantry-needle-target alignment technique, is used to obtain precise and safe needle placement in conventional and non-conventional approaches to the skull base and the atlanto-axial spine.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed consecutive CT-guided needle accesses to the skull base and atlanto-axial spine performed for tissue sampling through fine-needle aspirates and core biopsies, cementoplasty of neoplastic lytic lesions of atlanto-axial spine, pain management injections, and dural puncture for cerebro-spinal fluid sampling. All the accesses were performed with the gantry-needle-target alignment technique. Procedural complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine CT-guided procedures were analyzed. Paramaxillary approach was used in 15 cases, postero-lateral in 11, subzygomatic in 3. Nine non-conventional approach were performed: submastoid in 3 cases, suprazygomatic in 2, trans-nasal in 2, trans-mastoid in 1, and trans-auricular in 1. Two peri-procedural complications occurred: one asymptomatic and one resolved within 24 h. All the procedures were successfully completed with successful needle access to the target.

CONCLUSION

The gantry tilt and gantry-needle-target alignment technique allows to obtain double-oblique needle accesses for CT-guided procedures involving the skull base and atlanto-axial cervical spine, minimizing uncertainty of needle trajectory and obtaining safe needle placement in conventional and non-conventional approaches.

Creation of a three-dimensional printed spine model for training in pain procedures

OBJECTIVE

Technological developments have made it possible to create simulation models to educate clinicians on surgical techniques and patient preparation. In this study, we created an inexpensive lumbar spine phantom using patient data and analyzed its usefulness in clinical education.

METHODS

This randomized comparative study used computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging data from a single patient to print a three-dimensional (3D) bone framework and create a mold. The printed bones and structures made from the mold were placed in a simulation model that was used to train residents. The residents were divided into two groups: Group L, which received only an audiovisual lecture, and Group P, which received an additional 1 hour of training using the 3D phantom. The performance of both groups was evaluated using pretest and post-test analyses.

RESULTS

Both the checklist and global rating scores increased after training in both groups. However, some variables improved significantly only in Group P. The overall satisfaction score was also higher in Group P than in Group L.

CONCLUSIONS

We have described a method by which medical doctors can create a spine simulation phantom and have demonstrated its efficiency for procedural education.

Image-guided spinal injection for pain management

Radiculopathy and spinal pain are debilitating conditions affecting millions of people worldwide each year. While most cases can be managed conservatively with physiotherapy and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications, minimally invasive corticosteroid injections are the mainstay intervention for those not responsive to conservative treatment. Historically, spinal injections were performed in the absence of imaging guidance; however, imaging modalities, in particular fluoroscopy and computer tomography (CT), have become the standard of care in performing most of these procedures. Under imaging guidance, operators can accurately confirm needle placement and safely target localised pathologies.

Retrospective lumbosacral CT analysis and prospective observational study of the ipsilateral tunnel view technique for fluoroscopy-guided selective S1 transforaminal epidural injection

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively observe the anatomic relationship between dorsal S1 foramen (DS1F) and ventral S1 foramen (VS1F) through computed tomography (CT) analysis and to prospectively determine the optimal angle of ipsilateral tunnel view technique for performing S1 transforaminal epidural steroid injection (S1-TFESI).

METHODS

The axial lumbosacral CTs taken between in 208 consecutive patients and the following measurements were obtained on both sides: (1) the α-angle was defined as an angle between a sagittal line passing through the center of the sacrum and an imaginary line passing through the center of DS1F, (2) the largest diameter of DS1F and VS1F. The fluoroscopy was adjusted to show the largest L5/S1 intervertebral disc space, which was defined as the cephalad angle, and tilted to the ipsilateral oblique side until the entrance of DS1F had a well-defined, round shape, which defined as the β-angle in 40 humans.

RESULTS

CT measurements showed that the α-angle was 26.3 ± 3.3 degrees (15-38 degrees) and the diameter of DS1F was 7.1 ± 0.7 mm (4-10.9 mm), which was significantly smaller than the diameter of VS1F, 10.1 ± 1.0 mm (7.2-13.8 mm). The β-angle was 24 ± 4.6 degrees, which was not much different from the α-angle and the cephalad angle was 23 ± 4.6 degrees. The success rate of S1-TFESI was 100% and there were no procedure-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The entrance of DS1F is easily identified with an ipsilateral 25 degrees-tunnel view technique while performing S1-TFESI, and it is a clinically applicable approach.

Successful Treatment of Lumbar Radicular Pain with Selective Nerve Root Injection Using a Racz Catheter: A Case Report

PURPOSE

Lumbar transforaminal selective nerve root injection (SNRI) is effective for controlling radicular pain. However, when a patient occasionally experiences severe foraminal stenosis, osteophytes cover the outside opening of the neural foramen, preventing clinicians from inserting a needle tip within the neural foramen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An 81-year-old man complained of left L5 radicular pain (left thigh and calf) due to severe left L5-S1 foraminal stenosis. After failure of conventional transforaminal SNRI in the left L5 due to severe degenerative change in the lumbar spine, SNRI was performed using a Racz catheter. After inserting a 16-gauge cannula via the sacral hiatus, the Racz catheter was inserted. The tip of the catheter was positioned near the left L5 nerve root. After confirming the location of the needle tip using a contrast dye, 20 mg (40 mg/mL) of triamcinolone with 0.5 mL of 1% lidocaine and 2 mL of normal saline was injected.

RESULTS

Immediately after the procedure, the patient's pain completely disappeared. During the 1- and 2-month follow-ups, the patient reported only slight pain in the thigh and calf.

CONCLUSION

When it is not possible to perform a conventional transforaminal SNRI, SNRI using a Racz catheter can be an effective treatment option for controlling lumbar radicular pain.

Accurate location and minimally invasive treatment of lumbar lateral recess stenosis with combined SNRB and PTED

OBJECTIVE

To establish a management strategy for multi-segment lumbar lateral recess stenosis.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed in patients in whom suspected responsible nerve roots underwent sequential selective nerve root block (SNRB). Based on pain remission rate after blocking, the contribution of nerve root compression to symptoms was classified as absolutely (≥70%) or relatively (30-70%) responsible or non-responsible (<30%). Conservative treatment was continued if visual analogue scale (VAS) at 3 days after blocking a single nerve root or VAS at 3 days after blocking multiple nerve roots was ≥50%; otherwise, percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) was performed. Pain and functional scores were evaluated on day 3, 6 months and 1 year after SNRB or PTED.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven of 80 patients had a single absolutely responsible root, 20 had 2 responsible roots, and 3 had 3 responsible roots. Among them, 41, 10, and 1 patient underwent PTED, respectively. Both the PTED and conservative groups improved significantly in VAS remission rate and functional scores compared with admission. Moreover, the PTED group had a better VAS remission rate compared with the conservative group.

CONCLUSION

A combination of SNRB with PTED was effective for diagnosing and treating multi-segment lumbar lateral recess stenosis.

The efficacy of selective nerve root block for the long-term outcome of postherpetic neuralgia

Background

Several nerve blocks can reduce the incidence of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) as well as relieve acute zoster-related pain, but the long-term outcome of PHN has not been clearly determined. This study investigated the efficacy of selective nerve root block (SNRB) for herpes zoster (HZ) on the long-term outcome of PHN.

Methods

We prospectively conducted an interview of patients who had undergone an SNRB for HZ from January 2006 to December 2016 to evaluate their long-term PHN status. The relationship between the time from HZ onset to the first SNRB and the long-term outcome of PHN was investigated.

Results

The data of 67 patients were collected. The patients were allocated to acute (SNRB ≤ 14 days, n = 16) or subacute (SNRB > 14 days, n = 51) groups. The proportions of cured patients were 62.5% and 25.5% in the acute and subacute groups (P = 0.007), respectively. In logistic regression, an SNRB >14 days was the significant predictor of PHN (adjusted odd ratio, 3.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-14.93; P = 0.047). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that time from the SNRB to the cure of PHN was significantly shorter in the acute group (2.4 ± 0.7 yr) than in the subacute group (5.0 ± 0.4 yr; P = 0.003).

Conclusions

An early SNRB during the acute stage of HZ (within 14 days) appears to decrease the incidence and shorten the duration of PHN, with a median of 5.0 years of follow-up.

Interventional Anesthetic Methods for Pain in Hematology/Oncology Patients

This article reviews anesthetic interventional approaches to the management of pain in hematology and oncology patients. It includes a discussion of single interventions including peripheral nerve blocks, plexus injections, and sympathetic nerve neurolysis, and continuous infusion therapy through implantable devices, such as intrathecal pumps, epidural port-a-caths, and tunneled catheters. The primary objective is to inform members of hematology and oncology care teams regarding the variety of interventional options for patients with cancer-related pain for whom medical pain management methods have not been effective.

Effect of needle type on intravascular injection in transforaminal epidural injection: a meta-analysis

Background

Lumbosacral transforaminal epidural injection (TFEI) is an effective treatment for spinal disease. However, TFEI may have several types of complications, some of which can be attributed to intravascular injection. We reviewed studies to compare the intravascular injection rate among different needle types.

Methods

We searched the literature for articles on the intravascular injection rate among different needle types used in TFEI. The search was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science.

Results

A total of six studies comprising 2359 patients were identified. Compared with the Quincke needle, the Whitacre needle reduced the intravascular injection rate (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = [0.44-0.73], P < 0.001). However, compared with the Quincke needle, the Chiba needle did not reduce the intravascular injection rate (OR = 0.80, 95% CI = [0.44-1.45], P = 0.46). In one study, the intravascular injection rate using a blunt-tip needle was lower than that using a sharp needle. In another study, the Whitacre and the blunt-tip needle have similar intravascular injection rates, while, the catheter-extension needle showed a reduced intravascular injection rate.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis showed that the Whitacre needle reduced the intravascular injection rate as compared with the Quincke needle, but failed to establish that the Chiba needle can decrease the intravascular injection rate in TFEI. Moreover, the blunt-tip needle can reduce the intravascular injection rate compared with the Quincke needle, and the catheter-extension needle can reduce the intravascular injection rate compared with the Whitacre and the blunt-tip needle.

Assessment of Anteroposterior Subpedicular Approach and Oblique Scotty Dog Subpedicular Approach for Selective Nerve Root Block

Background

The technique used to administer a selective nerve root block (SNRB) varies depending on individual expertise. Both the anteroposterior (AP) subpedicular approach and oblique Scotty dog subpedicular approach are widely practiced. However, the literature does not provide a clear consensus regarding which approach is more suitable. Hence, we decided to analyse the procedural parameters and clinical outcomes following SNRBs using these two approaches.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with a single lumbar herniated intervertebral disc (HIVD) refractory to conservative management but not willing for immediate surgery were selected for a prospective nonrandomized comparative study. An SNRB was administered as a therapeutic alternative using the AP subpedicular approach in one group (n = 25; mean age, 45 ± 5.4 years) and the oblique Scotty dog subpedicular approach in the other group (n = 22; mean age, 43.8 ± 4.7 years). Results were compared in terms of the duration of the procedure, the number of C-arm exposures, accuracy, pain relief, functional outcome and the duration of relief.

Results

Our results suggest that the oblique Scotty dog subpedicular approach took a significantly longer duration (p = 0.02) and a greater number of C-arm exposures (p = 0.001). But, its accuracy of needle placement was 95.5% compared to only 72% using the AP subpedicular approach (p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in terms of clinical outcomes between these approaches.

Conclusions

The AP subpedicular approach was simple and facile, but the oblique Scotty dog subpedicular approach was more accurate. However, a brief window period of pain relief was achieved irrespective of the approaching technique used.

Selective nerve root blocks vs. caudal epidural injection for single level prolapsed lumbar intervertebral disc - A prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND

Chronic lumbar radiculopathy has a lifetime prevalence of 5.3% in men and 3.7% in women. It usually resolves spontaneously, but up to 30% cases will have pronounced symptoms even after one year.

AIMS

A prospective randomized single-blind study was conducted to compare the efficacy of caudal epidural steroid injection and selective nerve root block in management of pain and disability in cases of lumbar disc herniation.

METHODS

Eighty patients with confirmed single-level lumbar disc herniation were equally divided in two groups: (a) caudal epidural and (b) selective nerve root block group, by a computer-generated random allocation method. The caudal group received three injections of steroid mixed with local anesthetics while selective nerve root block group received single injection of steroid mixed with local anesthetic agent. Patients were assessed for pain relief and reduction in disability.

RESULTS

In SNRB group, pain reduced by more than 50% up till 6 months, while in caudal group more than 50% reduction of pain was maintained till 1 year. The reduction in ODI in SNRB group was 52.8% till 3 months, 48.6% till 6 months, and 46.7% at 1 year, while in caudal group the improvement was 59.6%, 64.6%, 65.1%, and 65.4% at corresponding follow-up periods, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Caudal epidural block is an easy and safe method with better pain relief and improvement in functional disability than selective nerve root block. Selective nerve root block injection is technically more demanding and has to be given by a skilled anesthetist.

The Prognostic Value of Enhanced-MRI and Fluoroscopic Factors for Predicting the Effects of Transforaminal Steroid Injections on Lumbosacral Radiating Pain

Objective

To investigate the predictive value of enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and fluoroscopic factors regarding the effects of transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) in low back pain (LBP) patients with lumbosacral radiating pain.

Methods

A total of 51 patients who had LBP with radiating pain were recruited between January 2011 and December 2012. The patient data were classified into the two groups ‘favorable group’ and ‘non-favorable group’ after 2 weeks of follow-up results. The favorable group was defined as those with a 50%, or more, reduction of pain severity according to the visual analogue scale (VAS) for back or leg pain. The clinical and radiological data were collected for univariate and multivariate analyses to determine the predictors of the effectiveness of TFESIs between the two groups.

Results

According to the back or the leg favorable-VAS group, the univariate analysis revealed that the corticosteroid approach for the enhanced nerve root, the proportion of the proximal flow, and the contrast dispersion of epidurography are respectively statistically significant relative to the other factors. Lastly, the multiple logistic regression analysis showed a significant association between the corticosteroid approach and the enhanced nerve root in the favorable VAS group.

Conclusion

Among the variables, MRI showed that the corticosteroid approach for the enhanced target root is the most important prognostic factor in the predicting of the clinical parameters of the favorable TFESIs group.

The Role of Invasive Pain Management Modalities in the Treatment of Chronic Pain

Invasive analgesic therapies provide an alternative to medical management of chronic pain. With the increasing incidence of chronic pain not only in the United States but worldwide, more therapies have evolved to address the growing need for pain relief options. These therapies include spinal injections, nerve blocks, radiofrequency ablation, neurostimulation, and intrathecal drug delivery.

Epidural steroids: a comprehensive, evidence-based review

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are the most widely utilized pain management procedure in the world, their use supported by more than 45 placebo-controlled studies and dozens of systematic reviews. Despite the extensive literature on the subject, there continues to be considerable controversy surrounding their safety and efficacy. The results of clinical trials and review articles are heavily influenced by specialty, with those done by interventional pain physicians more likely to yield positive findings. Overall, more than half of controlled studies have demonstrated positive findings, suggesting a modest effect size lasting less than 3 months in well-selected individuals. Transforaminal injections are more likely to yield positive results than interlaminar or caudal injections, and subgroup analyses indicate a slightly greater likelihood for a positive response for lumbar herniated disk, compared with spinal stenosis or axial spinal pain. Other factors that may increase the likelihood of a positive outcome in clinical trials include the use of a nonepidural (eg, intramuscular) control group, higher volumes in the treatment group, and the use of depo-steroid. Serious complications are rare following ESIs, provided proper precautions are taken. Although there are no clinical trials comparing different numbers of injections, guidelines suggest that the number of injections should be tailored to individual response, rather than a set series. Most subgroup analyses of controlled studies show no difference in surgical rates between ESI and control patients; however, randomized studies conducted by spine surgeons, in surgically amenable patients with standardized operative criteria, indicate that in some patients the strategic use of ESI may prevent surgery.

Epidural Injections for Spinal Pain

Background:

Epidural steroid injection is the most frequently performed pain procedure. This study of epidural steroid “control” injections aimed to determine whether epidural nonsteroid injections constitute a treatment or true placebo in comparison with nonepidural injections for back and neck pain treatment.

Methods:

This systematic review with direct and indirect meta-analyses used PubMed and EMBASE searches from inception through October 2012 without language restrictions. Study selection included randomized controlled trials with a treatment group receiving epidural injections of corticosteroids or another analgesic and study control groups receiving either an epidural injection devoid of treatment drug or a nonepidural injection. Two reviewers independently extracted data including short-term (up to 12 weeks) pain scores and pain outcomes. All reviewers evaluated studies for eligibility and quality.

Results:

A total of 3,641 patients from 43 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Indirect comparisons suggested epidural nonsteroid were more likely than nonepidural injections to achieve positive outcomes (risk ratio, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.87–2.53) and provide greater pain score reduction (mean difference, −0.15; 95% CI, −0.55 to 0.25). In the very limited direct comparisons, no significant differences were noted between epidural nonsteroid and nonepidural injections for either outcome (risk ratio [95% CI], 1.05 [0.88–1.25]; mean difference [95% CI], 0.22 [−0.50 to 0.94]).

Conclusion:

Epidural nonsteroid injections may provide improved benefit compared with nonepidural injections on some measures, though few, low-quality studies directly compared controlled treatments, and only short-term outcomes (≤12 weeks) were examined.

Lumbar nerve root injections: a prospective cohort outcomes study comparing age- and gender-matched patients who returned an outcomes-based postal questionnaire with patients who did not return the postal questionnaire

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to investigate if relying on postal questionnaires returned by patients provides an accurate representation of reported outcomes from patients receiving imaging-guided lumbar nerve root injections (NRIs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who received imaging-guided transforaminal lumbar NRIs were given short questionnaires inquiring about pain level [numerical rating scale (NRS)] and overall improvement [Patient's Global Impression of Change (PGIC)]. Those who did not return the questionnaires (non-responders) were telephoned and asked about pain level and overall change in condition. Age and gender matching of responders and non-responders resulted in 97 patients in each group. The proportion of patients reporting clinically relevant "improvement" or "worsening" in each group was calculated and the Chi-square test was used to detect differences. NRS and PGIC scores for responders and non-responders were compared using Student's t test and the Mann-Whitney U test, respectively.

RESULTS

A higher proportion of non-responders reported clinically relevant improvement (53.6 %) compared to responders (42.6 %) and responders reported significantly higher levels of worsening of condition (p = 0.01). Both responders and non-responders had significant (p ≤ 0.05) improvement on the 20-30-min and 1-month NRS scores compared to their pre-injection baseline scores. Non-responders had significantly higher baseline NRS scores but no significant difference at the 20-30-min and 1-month NRS scores compared to responders.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients returning postal questionnaires reported less favorable outcomes compared to those who did not return their questionnaires.

Transforaminal epidural steroid injections prevent the need for surgery in patients with sciatica secondary to lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective case series

BACKGROUND

The median orthopedic surgery wait time in Canada is 33.7 weeks, thus alternative treatments for pathologies such as lumbar disc herniations (LDH) are needed. We sought to determine whether transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) alleviate or merely delay the need for surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the charts of patients with LDH who received TFESIs between September 2006 and July 2008. Patient demographics, level and side of pathology, workers' compensation status, levels injected, treatment outcome and time from referral to treatment were evaluated. The primary outcome measure was the need for versus the avoidance of surgery.

RESULTS

We included 91 patients in our analysis. Time from family physician referral to injection was 123 (standard deviation [SD] 88) days; no significant differences in wait times were found between TFESI patients and those requiring surgery. In all, 51 patients (22 women, 29 men) with a mean age of 45.8 (SD 10.2) years avoided surgery following TFESI, whereas 40 patients (16 women, 24 mean) with a mean age of 43.1 (SD 12.0) years proceeded to surgery within 189 (SD 125) days postinjection. In all, 15 patients received multiple injections, and of these, 9 did not require surgical intervention. Age, sex and level/side of pathology did not influence the treatment outcome. Workers' compensation status influenced outcome significantly; these patients demonstrated less benefit from TFESI.

CONCLUSION

Transforaminal epidural steroid injections are an important treatment tool, preventing the need for surgery in 56% of patients with LDH.

Symptomatic magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed lumbar disk herniation patients: a comparative effectiveness prospective observational study of 2 age- and sex-matched cohorts treated with either high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulative therapy or imaging-guided lumbar nerve root injections

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare self-reported pain and "improvement" of patients with symptomatic, magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed, lumbar disk herniations treated with either high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) or nerve root injections (NRI).

METHODS

This prospective cohort comparative effectiveness study included 102 age- and sex-matched patients treated with either NRI or SMT. Numerical rating scale (NRS) pain data were collected before treatment. One month after treatment, current NRS pain levels and overall improvement assessed using the Patient Global Impression of Change scale were recorded. The proportion of patients, "improved" or "worse," was calculated for each treatment. Comparison of pretreatment and 1-month NRS scores used the paired t test. Numerical rating scale and NRS change scores for the 2 groups were compared using the unpaired t test. The groups were also compared for "improvement" using the χ(2) test. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Average direct procedure costs for each treatment were calculated.

RESULTS

No significant differences for self-reported pain or improvement were found between the 2 groups. "Improvement" was reported in 76.5% of SMT patients and in 62.7% of the NRI group. Both groups reported significantly reduced NRS scores at 1 month (P = .0001). Average cost for treatment with SMT was Swiss Francs 533.77 (US $558.75) and Swiss Francs 697 (US $729.61) for NRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Most SMT and NRI patients with radicular low back pain and magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed disk herniation matching symptomatic presentation reported significant and clinically relevant reduction in self-reported pain level and increased global perception of improvement. There were no significant differences in outcomes between NRI and SMT. When considering direct procedure costs, the average cost of SMT was slightly less expensive.

[Imaging-guided injection techniques of the lumbar spine]

Spinal injections are an important treatment option in the conservative management of many spinal disorders. A large number of imaging techniques are available to achieve a precise and safe needle placement in interventional procedures. Fluoroscopy-guided injections are safe, cost effective and available in most institutions. The following article presents an overview of common fluoroscopy-guided spinal injection therapy of the lumbar spine.

Percutaneous transforaminal epidural injection method in an experimental rat: minimally invasive drug delivery method to spinal epidural space

OBJECTIVE

To compare a newly developed minimally-invasive method for percutaneous transforaminal epidural injection (INJ group) with the existing method for lumbar epidural catheterization (CATH group).

METHOD

Through anatomical review of experimental rats, the cephalic one fourth of the neural foramen was selected as the target point for drug delivery. After the rats had undergone lumbar epidural catheterization, lidocaine, and 1% methylene blue were injected through the unilateral or bilateral L5/6 neural foramen in the INJ group, and through an epidural catheter in the CATH group. Measurement of body weight and the mechanical allodynia test before and after injection of lidocaine, and fine dissection after injection were performed.

RESULTS

Results of the mechanical allodynia test of 1.0% lidocaine 50 µl injection in the CATH group were statistically similar to those of 0.5% lidocaine 100 µl injection in the INJ group. The results of 2.0% lidocaine 50 µl injection in the CATH group were statistically similar to those of 1.0% lidocaine 100 µl injection in the INJ group. After dissection, only one distal partial spinal nerve was stained by methylene blue 50 µl through the transforaminal pathway. However, the dorsal root ganglion, nerve root, and adjacent hemi-partial spinal cord were stained by methylene blue 100 µl through the transforaminal pathway.

CONCLUSION

The percutaneous transforaminal epidural injection is practical, easy, and safe, and, in particular, does not cause significant pain compared to the existing lumbar epidural catheterization. We expect this method to be effective in an animal study showing that drug delivery to the spinal epidural space is necessary.

Technique for CT fluoroscopy-guided cervical interlaminar steroid injections

OBJECTIVE

We describe the use of CT fluoroscopy as a guidance tool for performing interlaminar epidural steroid injections in the cervical spine.

CONCLUSION

CT fluoroscopy is an alternative method to perform cervical interlaminar steroid injections that allows precise needle placement in the epidural space.

CT fluoroscopy-guided cervical interlaminar steroid injections: safety, technique, and radiation dose parameters

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Cervical epidural steroid injections are approached with trepidation because of concerns over safety, including direct spinal cord injury. CT fluoroscopy is an alternative to conventional fluoroscopy that could potentially help reduce the risk of injury by providing improved localization of the needle tip. We sought to determine rates of technical success and risk of complications in our initial cohort of patients treated with cervical interlaminar ESI performed under CTF guidance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective case series, we reviewed procedural details and CTF images of 53 consecutive cervical interlaminar ESIs performed on 50 patients over a period of 8 months. Rates of technical success, incidence of complications, procedure times, and factors that influence radiation exposure were examined.

RESULTS

No symptomatic procedural complications were observed. A single case of intrathecal contrast injection was observed, from which the patient was asymptomatic. The remaining injections were all technically successful. Injections were performed at every cervical level, as high as C1-C2. Total procedure times averaged less than 20 minutes. Average CT fluoroscopic time was 24 seconds and median tube current was 70 mA.

CONCLUSIONS

CTF-guided cervical interlaminar ESI can be performed at all levels in the cervical spine with a low rate of procedural complications. Short total procedure times, CT-fluoroscopy times, and reduced tube current make this procedure a practical alternative to cervical ESI performed under conventional fluoroscopy.

On total disc replacement

Low back pain consumes a large part of the community's resources dedicated to health care and sick leave. Back disorders also negatively affect the individual leading to pain suffering, decreased quality-of-life and disability. Chronic low back pain (CLBP) due to degenerative disc disease (DDD) is today often treated with fusion when conservative treatment has failed and symptoms are severe. This treatment is as successful as arthroplasty is for hip arthritis in restoring the patient's quality of life and reducing disability. Even so, there are some problems with this treatment, one of these being recurrent CLBP from an adjacent segment (ASD) after primarily successful surgery. This has led to the development of alternative surgical treatments and devices that maintain or restore mobility, in order to reduce the risk for ASD. Of these new devices, the most frequently used are the disc prostheses used in Total Disc Replacement (TDR). This thesis is based on four studies comparing total disc replacement with posterior fusion. The studies are all based on a material of 152 patients with DDD in one or two segments, aged 20-55 years that were randomly treated with either posterior fusion or TDR. The first study concerned clinical outcome and complications. Follow-up was 100% at both one and two years. It revealed that both treatment groups had a clear benefit from treatment and that patients with TDR were better in almost all outcome scores at one-year follow-up. Fusion patients continued to improve during the second year. At two-year follow-up there was a remaining difference in favour of TDR for back pain. 73% in the TDR group and 63% in the fusion group were much better or totally pain-free (n.s.), while twice as many patients in the TDR group were totally pain free (30%) compared to the fusion group (15%). Time of surgery and total time in hospital were shorter in the TDR group. There was no difference in complications and reoperations, except that seventeen of the patients in the fusion group were re-operated for removal of their implants. The second study concerned sex life and sexual function. TDR is performed via an anterior approach, an approach that has been used for a long time for various procedures on the lumbar spine. A frequent complication reported in males when this approach is used is persistent retrograde ejaculation. The TDR group in this material was operated via an extra-peritoneal approach to the retroperitoneal space, and there were no cases of persistent retrograde ejaculation. There was a surprisingly high frequency of men in the fusion group reporting deterioration in ability to have an orgasm postoperatively. Preoperative sex life was severely hampered in the majority of patients in the entire material, but sex life underwent a marked improvement in both treatment groups by the two-year follow-up that correlated with reduction in back pain. The third study was on mobility in the lumbar spinal segments, where X-rays were taken in full extension and flexion prior to surgery and at two-year follow-up. Analysis of the films showed that 78% of the patients in the fusion group reached the surgical goal (non-mobility) and that 89% of the TDR patients maintained mobility. Preoperative disc height was lower than in a normative database in both groups, and remained lower in the fusion group, while it became higher in the TDR group. Mobility in the operated segment increased in the TDR group postoperatively. Mobility at the rest of the lumbar spine increased in both treatment groups. Mobility in adjacent segments was within the norm postoperatively, but slightly larger in the fusion group. In the fourth study the health economics of TDR vs Fusion was analysed. The hospital costs for the procedure were higher for patients in the fusion group compared to the TDR group, and the TDR patients were on sick-leave two months less. In all, these studies showed that the results in the TDR group were as good as in the fusion group. Patients are more likely to be totally pain-free when treated with TDR compared to fusion. Treatment with this new procedure seems justified in selected patients at least in the short-term perspective. Long-term follow-up is underway and results will be published in due course.

Neuropathic pain: mind-body considerations

Emerging research in neuroscience is bridging the gap between mind and body. Thought is brain based and influences brain function. The continuum and bidirectionality of mind and body, thought and brain, emotions and physiology forms the basis of understanding neuropathic pain, a neuropsychiatric condition with myriad clinical manifestations.