Expert Opinion #4

Epidural, Inadvertent Subdural, and Combined Epidural-Subdural Anesthesia in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis

This study aimed to categorize contrast media images associated with epidural, subdural, and combined epidural-subdural anesthesia in patients who had undergone fluoroscopy-guided epidural anesthesia using contrast media combined with monitored anesthesia care (MAC) targeted at deep sedation, incorporating capnography over 5 years. Additionally, a correlation was established between the anesthetic effects and radiographic findings according to the categorized imaging appearances. This study included 628 patients who underwent endoscopic, open, or fusion surgery under epidural anesthesia at Nanoori Hospital in Gangnam between March 2018 and September 2023. Fluoroscopy-guided epidural anesthesia using contrast media combined with MAC and capnography was used. The dataset included detailed radiographic imaging, nursing, and anesthesia records. Distinct patterns of anesthesia administration were observed, with 49%, 19.6%, and 31% of patients receiving epidural, subdural, and combined epidural-subdural anesthesia, respectively. The incidence and duration of motor block were significantly different among the three groups. Additionally, subdural anesthesia displayed a higher incidence of motor block and a prolonged motor deficit duration than epidural anesthesia. Fluoroscopic guidance using a contrast medium for epidural and subdural anesthesia ensures precise space identification and prevents serious anesthetic complications. Our findings suggest the potential to achieve stable anesthesia, particularly using subdural and combined epidural-subdural anesthesia.

Lumbar Epidural Contrast Spread Patterns for the Interlaminar Approach: Three-Dimensional Analysis Using Antero-Posterior, Lateral, and Contralateral Oblique Views

OBJECTIVE

To describe and analyze lumbar epidural contrast spread patterns in antero-posterior (AP), lateral, and contralateral oblique (CLO) views.

METHODS

Lumbar epidural contrast spread patterns after interlaminar injection were prospectively collected in AP, lateral, and several CLO views and analyzed for multiple variables; three-dimensional mapping was also performed.

RESULTS

Epidural contrast patterns were prospectively analyzed in 28 subjects. The median volume of contrast injected was 2 mL; the AP view was more sensitive than the lateral view to detect foraminal uptake (13/28, 46%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 27-66%, vs 7/28, 25%, 95% CI = 11-45% subjects). CLO view demonstrated the most consistent location for epidural contrast spread, with contrast contacting the ventral laminar margin in 28/28 (100%, 95% CI = 87-100%) patients. The most common location of contrast spread in the lateral view was at the facet joint lucency, with only 8/28 (29%, 95% CI = 13%-49%) subjects showing contrast contacting the spinolaminar junction. Lateral view was more sensitive than the CLO view in ventral epidural contrast spread detection. The extent and distribution of the spread did not bear any relationship to the volume injected or to the needle location in AP view.

CONCLUSIONS

CLO view provides the most consistent landmark for lumbar epidural contrast spread, and lateral view is most suited to confirming ventral epidural spread. The AP view may be the most optimal for determining target access when considering access to the dorsal root ganglia; in an individual patient, the volume injected and needle location in AP view do not reliably predict target access. The volume to be injected and the need to re-access or obtain multisite access must be prospectively determined, based upon observation of the spread.

Cross-sectional CT Assessment of the Extent of Injectate Spread at CT Fluoroscopy-guided Cervical Epidural Interlaminar Steroid Injections

Background Previous studies analyzed contrast agent spread during cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections (CILESIs) by using planar fluoroscopy and reported wide variance of the rate of spread to the ventral epidural space (VES). Cross-sectional CT allows for direct viewing of contrast agent in the VES, providing improved spread assessment and thereby informing needle placement decisions when targeting pain generators. Purpose To determine the extent of injectate spread at CT fluoroscopy-guided CILESI, with particular attention to the VES and bilateral neuroforamina, by using cross-sectional CT. Materials and Methods This study reviewed 83 consecutive CT fluoroscopy-guided CILESIs at which a postprocedural cervical spine CT was performed (June 2016 to December 2017). All procedures used the same injectate (2 mL corticosteroid, 3 mL contrast agent). Postprocedural CT scans were reviewed for the presence of contrast within the VES, dorsal epidural space, ipsilateral neuroforamen, and contralateral neuroforamen in every cervical interlaminar level. Descriptive data are presented as frequencies or means. McNemar tests or hierarchical logistic models were used to assess associations between covariates and contrast agent spread to particular locations. Results The study cohort included 73 individual patients (59% women; 43 of 73) (mean patient age, 57.6 years ± 11.5 [standard deviation]). Mean number of levels of cranial spread were 0.6 level for VES, 1.9 levels for contralateral neuroforamen, 2.1 levels for ipsilateral neuroforamen, and 3 levels for dorsal epidural space. No VES spread in any level was found with 35% (29 of 83) of injections. VES spread was more likely to occur in the level of needle placement (43%; 36 of 83) than in other interlaminar levels (19.5%; 97 of 498; P < .001). Spread was more likely to occur in the neuroforamen ipsilateral to the needle approach compared with contralateral (P < .001). Conclusion Cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections have injectate spreads with a mean of less than one level cranially in the ventral epidural space (VES) and approximately two levels in the neuroforamen. VES spread occurs more frequently at the level of needle placement and within the ipsilateral neuroforamen. © RSNA, 2019.