New ultrasound-guided techniques in chronic pain management: an update

Overcoming Barriers: A Comprehensive Review of Chronic Pain Management and Accessibility Challenges in Rural America

In the United States (U.S.), chronic pain poses substantial challenges in rural areas where access to effective pain management can be limited. Our literature review examines chronic pain management in rural U.S. settings, identifying key issues and disparities. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar identified high-quality studies published between 2000 and 2024 on chronic pain management in the rural U.S. Data were categorized into thematic areas, including epidemiology, management challenges, current strategies, research gaps, and future directions. Key findings reveal that rural populations have a significantly higher prevalence of chronic pain and are more likely to experience severe pain. Economic and systemic barriers include a shortage of pain specialists, limited access to nonpharmacologic treatments, and inadequate insurance coverage. Rural patients are also less likely to engage in beneficial modalities like physical therapy and psychological support due to geographic isolation. Additionally, rural healthcare providers more often fulfill multiple medical roles, leading to burnout and decreased quality of care. Innovative approaches such as telehealth and integrated care models show the potential to improve access and outcomes. Our review highlights the need for increased telehealth utilization, enhanced provider education, and targeted interventions to address the specific pain needs of rural populations.

Bridging Old and New in Pain Medicine: An Historical Review

Pain is both one of the oldest complaints known to medicine and a field for some of medicine's latest breakthroughs and innovations. Pharmacologic treatment of pain is one of the oldest remedies, and opioids have been used since ancient times as an effective pain reliever but with certain specific risks for abuse. Greater knowledge of opioids led to a more thorough understanding of the complexities of pain, which may have any number of mechanisms. A greater understanding of nerve fibers and pain signaling led to the development of more drugs and the more targeted delivery of analgesics using the hollow needle. The hollow needle changed pain treatment and led to percutaneous injections and what would later become interventional pain medicine with regional anesthesia and nerve blocks. Today, imaging can be combined with interventional techniques for more precise localization of nerves for diagnosis and treatment. The role of artificial intelligence in interventional pain medicine, especially in imaging for interventional procedures, remains unknown but will likely become extremely beneficial.

Ultrasound-guided transforaminal epidural injection with fluoroscopy confirmation for the treatment of unilateral lumbar radiculopathy: A randomized controlled non-inferiority study

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound (US)-guided injections for chronic pain has multiple advantages over traditional radiologic method. The study was performed to exam the clinical outcomes of lumbar transforaminal epidural injection (LTFEI) between US and fluoroscopy (FL) guidance for lumbar radiculopathy (LRP).

METHODS

A total of 164 patients with LRP were randomly assigned into US and FL group to receive LTFEI in a 1:1 ratio. Pain relief and functional disability were assessed by numeric rating scale (NRS) and Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ) scores before treatment, 1 month and 3 months post-intervention. Contrast spread pattern, fluoroscopic image number and complications were also recorded. The primary outcome was accurate rate of contrast dispersing into lumbar epidural space, and non-inferiority margin was predefined at -15 %.

RESULTS

The accuracy of LTFEI was 90.2 % and 91.5 % in US and FL group, and the lower limit of the 95 %CI of mean difference between two modalities (-4.9 % (95 %CI: -12.8 %, 3.1 %)) was above the non-inferiority margin. Procedure time in US group (531.90 ± 67.12 s) was shorter than FL group (904.20 ± 120.20 s) (p < 0.05), while radiation dosage in the US group was lower than in the FL group (3047.20 ± 569.53 vs. 8807.50 ± 1039.10 μGy m², p < 0.001). Both groups didn't differ in pain reduction (F = 1.050, p = 0.306) and functional improvement (F = 0.103, p = 0.749) during follow-up period. No severe complications occurred in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

US-guided LTFEI confirmed by FL was not inferior to conventional FL method in terms of accurate rate of lumbar epidural contrast dispersion. Effective pain relief and functional ability improvement were comparable between two modalities, and US technique had advantages of less radiation exposure and possible facilitation of avoiding critical vessels around intervertebral foramen.