Accuracy and safety of dry needle placement in the piriformis muscle in cadavers

A human donor (cadaveric) observation study of three needle placements in the piriformis muscle

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and accuracy of three dry needling locations in the piriformis muscle using human donors.

DESIGN

Observational dissection study of embalmed human donors.

METHODS

A licensed physical therapist of 17 years clinical experience and 5 years teaching dry needling placed three needles in a medial, midpoint, and lateral location of 14 piriformis muscles of seven embalmed human donors. Block dissection allowed for observation of tissues the needles traversed and recording of the structures that the needles pierced.

RESULTS

The lateral needle pierced piriformis in 3/14 trials, and contacted sciatic nerve in 0/14 trials. The medial needle pierced both piriformis and sciatic nerve in 11/14 trials. The midpoint needle pierced the piriformis in 11/14 trials, and contacted sciatic nerve in 3/14 trials. Fisher's Exact test (p < 0.001) found a nonrandom association between dry needle placement, and dry needle contact.

CONCLUSIONS

When dry needling the piriformis, a lateral approach can avoid the sciatic nerve, but cannot accurately pierce the piriformis tendon. Furthermore, while a midpoint and medial approach finds the piriformis muscle with the same accuracy, the midpoint location avoided the sciatic nerve more often.

Influence of clinical experience on accuracy and safety of obliquus capitus inferior dry needling in unembalmed cadavers

Background: Suboccipital myofascial trigger points are common in tension-type headaches.Objectives: Compare the influence of clinical experience on the accuracy and safety of dry needle placement on the C2 laminar arch using a cranial-medial and caudal-medial technique to target obliquus capitus inferior in unembalmed cadavers.Methods: Three physical therapists inserted three 50 mm dry needles, per technique, individually toward the C2 laminar arch targeting the obliquus capitus inferior. Ultrasound video of each trial was recorded, and an investigator trained in ultrasound interpretation and blinded to experience level recorded needling accuracy.Results: The novice, experienced and expert clinicians were accurate on 73.8%, 59.5% and 71.4% of caudal-medial trials, and 14.3%, 16.7% and 66.7% of cranial-medial trials, respectively, with each clinician striking the spinal cord at least once. The expert clinician was 10 times more likely to accurately reach the C2 laminar arch using the cranial-medial direction than the experienced and novice clinicians.Conclusion: Increased clinical experience improved accuracy reaching the C2 laminar arch, with all investigators being more accurate with the caudal-medial technique. Greater experience did not eliminate risk as all investigators recorded at least one incident of striking the spinal cord. Fewer spinal cord strikes occurred with the cranial-medial than the caudal-medial technique.

Safety of dry needling to the upper lumbar spine: a pilot cadaver study

Objective: When inserting a dry needle laterally into the upper lumbar spine (L1-L3) there is an increased risk of piercing the kidney; therefore, the objective of this study was to determine a zone of safety for practitioners to needle in the upper lumbar spine.Methods: Ten cadavers were screened for inclusion. L1 spinous process was identified and confirmed with ultrasound imaging. A digital caliper was used to measure laterally at 1.5 cm, 2.0 cm, and 2.5 cm. Dry needles were inserted maximally at each point and a binary decision, yes or no, was made to determine if bony contact was made. Needle depth and abdominal width measurements were also recorded. Safety of the dry needling procedure was interpreted as such if bony contact was made by the needle. If bony contact was made, then it was assumed that the needle cannot advance further into pleura or kidney.Results: Forty-four percent of needles did not make bony contact at 2.5 cm lateral of the L1 spinous process, whereas 22% did not make bony contact at 1.5 cm and 2.0 cm. There was a weak to moderate negative correlation between abdominal width measurements and needle depth at 1.5 cm (-0.48) and 2.0 cm (-0.45), and at 2.5 cm (-0.39).Conclusion: A safety zone of needling less than 2.5 cm is likely safe, but needs to be confirmed with future study. Dry needling 2.5 cm lateral appears more risky due to the higher frequency of not contacting a bony backdrop.

Ultrasound-guided dry needling decreases pain in patients with piriformis syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Piriformis muscle syndrome (PMS) is a disorder that can lead to symptoms of buttock pain and limited hip-joint mobility, and may have an impact on quality of life.

METHODS

Thirty-two patients with PMS were randomized to the treatment group, which included three sessions of ultrasound-guided dry needling (DN) of the piriformis muscle (n = 16), or a waitlist control group (n = 16). The primary outcome was pain intensity measured on the visual analog scale recorded at baseline and then at 72 hours and 1 week after treatment.

RESULTS

At 1-week follow-up, pain intensity was significantly less in the DN group than in the waitlist control group (-2.16 [-1.01 to -3.32], P = .007) by an amount consistent with clinically meaningful improvement.

DISCUSSION

The findings suggest that DN resulted in clinically meaningful short-term improvement in pain intensity of patients with PMS.

New perspectives on dry needling following a medical model: are we screening our patients sufficiently?

Myofascial trigger points are not an isolated neuromusculoskeletal phenomenon and have been implicated in systemic, visceral, and metabolic pathology, as a side effect of some medications and in the presence of psychological risk factors. This complexity can complicate adequate screening of patients prior to choosing dry needling as a treatment intervention. Regardless of whether clinicians practice in a direct access setting, they should be cognizant of medical conditions, comorbidities, and risk factors that will influence clinical decisions for dry-needling appropriateness, technique chosen, and potential adverse responses to treatment. Of primary concern are conditions that can either manifest with myalgia and/or myopathy or masquerade as a more common musculoskeletal condition. This clinical commentary reviews system-specific considerations and other common disorders that should be screened for and discusses not only whether dry needling is appropriate but comments on technique and dosage considerations when initiating dry needling.