Transforaminal epidural clonidine versus corticosteroid for acute lumbosacral radiculopathy due to intervertebral disc herniation

Integrating mechanistic-based and classification-based concepts into perioperative pain management: an educational guide for acute pain physicians

Chronic pain begins with acute pain. Physicians tend to classify pain by duration (acute vs chronic) and mechanism (nociceptive, neuropathic and nociplastic). Although this taxonomy may facilitate diagnosis and documentation, such categories are to some degree arbitrary constructs, with significant overlap in terms of mechanisms and treatments. In clinical practice, there are myriad different definitions for chronic pain and a substantial portion of chronic pain involves mixed phenotypes. Classification of pain based on acuity and mechanisms informs management at all levels and constitutes a critical part of guidelines and treatment for chronic pain care. Yet specialty care is often siloed, with advances in understanding lagging years behind in some areas in which these developments should be at the forefront of clinical practice. For example, in perioperative pain management, enhanced recovery protocols are not standardized and tend to drive treatment without consideration of mechanisms, which in many cases may be incongruent with personalized medicine and mechanism-based treatment. In this educational document, we discuss mechanisms and classification of pain as it pertains to commonly performed surgical procedures. Our goal is to provide a clinical reference for the acute pain physician to facilitate pain management decision-making (both diagnosis and therapy) in the perioperative period.

Comparative-effectiveness study evaluating outcomes for transforaminal epidural steroid injections performed with 3% hypertonic saline or normal saline in lumbosacral radicular pain

BACKGROUND

Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are commonly employed to treat lumbosacral radiculopathy. Despite anti-inflammatory properties, the addition of 3% hypertonic saline has not been studied.

OBJECTIVE

Compare the effectiveness of adding 0.9% NaCl (N-group) vs. 3% NaCl (H-group) in TFESI performed for lumbosacral radiculopathy.

METHODS

This retrospective study compared TFESI performed with lidocaine, triamcinolone and 0.9% NaCl vs. lidocaine, triamcinolone and 3% NaCl. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who experienced a ≥ 30% reduction in pain on a verbal rating scale (VRS; 0-100) at 3 months. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients who improved by at least 30% for pain at 1 and 6 months, and who experienced ≥15% from baseline on the Oswestry disability index (ODI) at follow-up.

RESULTS

The H-group experienced more successful pain outcomes than the N-group at 3 months (59.09% vs. 41.51%; P = .002) but not at 1 month (67.53% vs. 64.78%; P = .61) or 6 months (27.13% vs 21.55%: P = .31). For functional outcome, there was a higher proportion of responders in the H-group than the N-group at 3 months (70.31% vs. 53.46%; P = .002). Female, age ≤ 60 years, and duration of pain ≤ 6 months were associated with superior outcomes at the 3-month endpoint. Although those with a herniated disc experienced better outcomes in general with TFESI, the only difference favoring the H-group was for spondylolisthesis patients.

CONCLUSIONS

3% hypertonic saline is a viable alternative to normal saline as an adjunct for TFESI, with randomized studies needed to compare its effectiveness to steroids as a possible alternative.

REGISTRATION

Thai Clinical Trials Registry ID TCTR 20231110006.

CT-guided Pulsed Radiofrequency Combined with Steroid Injection for Sciatica from Herniated Disk: A Randomized Trial

Background Evidence regarding effective nonsurgical management of sciatica remains limited. Purpose To determine a difference in effectiveness between combined pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) treatment versus TFESI alone for sciatic pain due to lumbar disk herniation. Materials and Methods This prospective multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted between February 2017 and September 2019 in participants with sciatica due to lumbar disk herniation lasting 12 weeks or longer that was not responsive to conservative treatment. Study participants were randomly assigned to undergo one CT-guided treatment with combined PRF and TFESI (n = 174) or TFESI alone (n = 177). The primary outcome was leg pain severity, as assessed with the numeric rating scale (NRS) (range, 0-10) at weeks 1 and 52 after treatment. Secondary outcomes included Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score (range, 0-24) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score (range, 0-100). Outcomes were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle via linear regression. Results Mean age of the 351 participants (223 men) was 55 years ± 16 (SD). At baseline, NRS was 8.1 ± 1.1 in the PRF and TFESI group and 7.9 ± 1.1 in the TFESI group. NRS was 3.2 ± 0.2 in the PRF and TFESI group and 5.4 ± 0.2 in the TFESI group (average treatment effect, 2.3; 95% CI: 1.9, 2.8; P < .001) at week 1 and 1.0 ± 0.2 and 3.9 ± 0.2 (average treatment effect, 3.0; 95% CI: 2.4, 3.5; P < .001), respectively, at week 52. At week 52, the average treatment effect was 11.0 (95% CI: 6.4, 15.6; P < .001) for ODI and 2.9 (95% CI: 1.6, 4.3; P < .001) for RMDQ, favoring the combined PRF and TFSEI group. Adverse events were reported in 6% (10 of 167) of participants in the PRF and TFESI group and in 3% (six of 176) of participants in the TFESI group (eight participants did not complete follow-up questionnaires). No severe adverse events occurred. Conclusion In the treatment of sciatica caused by lumbar disk herniation, pulsed radiofrequency combined with transforaminal epidural steroid injection is more effective for pain relief and disability improvement than steroid injection alone. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Jennings in this issue.

Comparative safety review of current treatment options for chronic low back pain and unmet needs: a narrative review

Introduction: The healthcare expenditures in the United States are substantial for the management of refractory, chronic low back pain (CLBP). The objective of this review is to summarize and evaluate the safety profiles of different pharmacological treatment options used in the management of CLBP.Areas covered: The authors conducted a search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the safety profiles of different pharmacological agents used in the management of CLBP. This narrative review covered corticosteroids, opioids, antidepressants, gabapentinoids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, muscle relaxants, anti-nerve growth factor antibodies and topical agents, as monotherapy or in combination.Expert opinion: The risk-benefit ratio of a particular treatment is a subject driving the ongoing development of pharmaceuticals. The most commonly reported AEs across all drug classes are of gastrointestinal nature, followed by neurological and skin-related. These AEs include nausea, dizziness, constipation, arthralgia, headache, dry mouth, pruritus, etc. The majority of the AEs reported are not life-threatening, although they may lower patients' quality of life, thus, affecting their compliance. One of the biggest limitations of our review stems from the paucity of safety assessments in published RCTs. Advances in our understanding of the neurobiology of pain will promote development of new therapeutic strategies.

Invasive Treatments for Low Back Disorders

OBJECTIVE

This abbreviated version of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine's Low Back Disorders guideline reviews the evidence and recommendations developed for invasive treatments used to manage low back disorders.

METHODS

Comprehensive systematic literature reviews were accomplished with article abstraction, critiquing, grading, evidence table compilation, and guideline finalization by a multidisciplinary expert panel and extensive peer-review to develop evidence-based guidance. Consensus recommendations were formulated when evidence was lacking and often relied on analogy to other disorders for which evidence exists. A total of 47 high-quality and 321 moderate-quality trials were identified for invasive management of low back disorders.

RESULTS

Guidance has been developed for the invasive management of acute, subacute, and chronic low back disorders and rehabilitation. This includes 49 specific recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Quality evidence should guide invasive treatment for all phases of managing low back disorders.

Epidural corticosteroid injections for lumbosacral radicular pain

BACKGROUND

Lumbosacral radicular pain (commonly called sciatica) is a syndrome involving patients who report radiating leg pain. Epidural corticosteroid injections deliver a corticosteroid dose into the epidural space, with the aim of reducing the local inflammatory process and, consequently, relieving the symptoms of lumbosacral radicular pain. This Cochrane Review is an update of a review published in Annals of Internal Medicine in 2012. Some placebo-controlled trials have been published recently, which highlights the importance of updating the previous review.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy and safety of epidural corticosteroid injections compared with placebo injection on pain and disability in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases without language limitations up to 25 September 2019: Cochrane Back and Neck group trial register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and two trial registers. We also performed citation tracking of included studies and relevant systematic reviews in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that compared epidural corticosteroid injections of any corticosteroid drug to placebo injections in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain. We accepted all three anatomical approaches (caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal) to delivering corticosteroids into the epidural space. We considered trials that included a placebo treatment as delivery of an inert substance (i.e. one with no pharmacologic activity), an innocuous substance (e.g. normal saline solution), or a pharmacologically active substance but not one considered to provide sustained benefit (e.g. local anaesthetic), either into the epidural space (i.e. to mimic epidural corticosteroid injection) or adjacent spinal tissue (i.e. subcutaneous, intramuscular, or interspinous tissue). We also included trials in which a local anaesthetic with a short duration of action was used as a placebo and injected together with corticosteroid in the intervention group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently performed the screening, data extraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessments. In case of insufficient information, we contacted the authors of the original studies or estimated the data. We grouped the outcome data into four time points of assessment: immediate (≤ 2 weeks), short term (> 2 weeks but ≤ 3 months), intermediate term (> 3 months but < 12 months), and long term (≥ 12 months). We assessed the overall quality of evidence for each outcome and time point using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 clinical trials (from 29 publications) investigating the effects of epidural corticosteroid injections compared to placebo in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain. The included studies provided data for a total of 2470 participants with a mean age ranging from 37.3 to 52.8 years. Seventeen studies included participants with lumbosacral radicular pain with a diagnosis based on clinical assessment and 15 studies included participants with mixed duration of symptoms. The included studies were conducted mainly in North America and Europe. Fifteen studies did not report funding sources, five studies reported not receiving funding, and five reported receiving funding from a non-profit or government source. Eight trials reported data on pain intensity, 12 reported data on disability, and eight studies reported data on adverse events. The duration of the follow-up assessments ranged from 12 hours to 1 year. We considered eight trials to be of high quality because we judged them as having low risk of bias in four out of the five bias domains. We identified one ongoing trial in a trial registry. Epidural corticosteroid injections were probably slightly more effective compared to placebo in reducing leg pain at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) -4.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.77 to -1.09 on a 0 to 100 scale; 8 trials, n = 949; moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias)). For disability, epidural corticosteroid injections were probably slightly more effective compared to placebo in reducing disability at short-term follow-up (MD -4.18, 95% CI -6.04 to -2.17, on a 0 to 100 scale; 12 trials, n = 1367; moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias)). The treatment effects are small, however, and may not be considered clinically important by patients and clinicians (i.e. MD lower than 10%). Most trials provided insufficient information on how or when adverse events were assessed (immediate or short-term follow-up) and only reported adverse drug reactions - that is, adverse events that the trialists attributed to the study treatment. We are very uncertain that epidural corticosteroid injections make no difference compared to placebo injection in the frequency of minor adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 1.14, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.42; 8 trials, n = 877; very low quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision)). Minor adverse events included increased pain during or after the injection, non-specific headache, post-dural puncture headache, irregular periods, accidental dural puncture, thoracic pain, non-local rash, sinusitis, vasovagal response, hypotension, nausea, and tinnitus. One study reported a major drug reaction for one patient on anticoagulant therapy who had a retroperitoneal haematoma as a complication of the corticosteroid injection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This study found that epidural corticosteroid injections probably slightly reduced leg pain and disability at short-term follow-up in people with lumbosacral radicular pain. In addition, no minor or major adverse events were reported at short-term follow-up after epidural corticosteroid injections or placebo injection. Although the current review identified additional clinical trials, the available evidence still provides only limited support for the use of epidural corticosteroid injections in people with lumbosacral radicular pain as the treatment effects are small, mainly evident at short-term follow-up and may not be considered clinically important by patients and clinicians (i.e. mean difference lower than 10%). According to GRADE, the quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate, suggesting that further studies are likely to play an important role in clarifying the efficacy and tolerability of this treatment. We recommend that further trials should attend to methodological features such as appropriate allocation concealment and blinding of care providers to minimise the potential for biased estimates of treatment and harmful effects.

Nonsurgical medical treatment in the management of pain due to lumbar disc prolapse: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evaluate the comparative effectiveness of treatment strategies for patients with pain due to lumbar disc prolapse (LDP).

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database were searched through September 2017. Randomized controlled trials on LDP reporting on pain intensity and/or global pain effects which compared included treatments head-to-head, against placebo, and/or against conventional care were included. Study data were independently double-extracted and data on patient traits and outcomes were collected. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Separate Bayesian network meta-analyses were undertaken to synthesize direct and indirect, short-term and long-term outcomes, summarized as odds ratios (OR) or weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% credible intervals (CI) as well as surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values.

RESULTS

58 studies in global effects and 74 studies in pain intensity analysis were included. Thirty-eight (65.5%) of these studies reported a possible elevated risk of bias. Autonomic drugs and transforminal epidural steroid injections (TESIs) had the highest SUCRA scores at short-term follow up (86.7 and 83.5 respectively), while Cytokines/Immunomodulators and TESI had the highest SUCRA values at long-term-follow-up in the global effect's analysis (86.6 and 80.9 respectively). Caudal steroid injections and TESIs had the highest SUCRA scores at short-term follow up (79.4 and 75.9 respectively), while at long-term follow-up biological agents and manipulation had the highest SUCRA scores (86.4 and 68.5 respectively) for pain intensity. Some treatments had few studies and/or no associated placebo-controlled trials. Studies often did not report on co-interventions, systematically differed, and reported an overall elevated risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

No treatment stands out as superior when compared on multiple outcomes and time periods but TESIs show promise as an effective short-term treatment. High quality studies are needed to confirm many nodes of this network meta-analysis.

Transforaminal epidural steroid injection combined with pulsed radio frequency on spinal nerve root for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation

Background

Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common disease in clinical practice. The symptoms recur and are aggravated by time; severe pain and long-term movement disorder cause physiological and psychological problems that affect the quality of life of patients. Therefore, relieving the pain symptoms and promoting functional recovery are the primary goals that have gained increased attention.

Objective

To assess the efficacy of CT-guided transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) combined with pulsed radio frequency (PRF) on spinal nerve root for the treatment of LDH.

Study design

Retrospective comparative study.

Setting

Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University.

Methods

A total of 135 patients with LDH were selected from the Department of Pain Management in the Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University between January 2014 and December 2016. All patients were divided into three groups according to the order of entry (n=45): TFESI (group A); PRF on spinal nerve root (group B); and TFESI combined with PRF on spinal nerve root (group C). The visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and global perceived effect (GPE) before treatment and at different time points after treatment were observed, and patients' satisfaction was assessed.

Results

At every point of observation, the VAS and ODI decreased significantly as compared to that before treatment in all groups (P<0.05). The VAS and ODI in group A at 3 and 6 months after treatment were significantly higher than that in the other two groups (P<0.05). At day 1, day 14, and 1 month after treatment, the VAS and ODI in group C were significantly lower than that in group B (P<0.05). The GPE in group C was high in the early days, while that at day 14 and 1 month after treatment was significantly higher than that in the other two groups (P<0.05); no significant difference was observed in GPE at 3 and 6 months after treatment between groups B and C (P>0.05).

Conclusion

TFESI combined with PRF for the treatment of LDH could effectively and rapidly relieve lumbago and radicular pain and achieve long-term remission. Although the method is widely applicable, the precise selection of patients is imperative.

Effect of transforaminal epidural polydeoxyribonucleotide injections on lumbosacral radiculopathy: A case report

RATIONALE

Transforaminal epidural glucocorticoids administration is widely performed for the management of lumbosacral radiculopathy. However, it may worsen the condition of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). Polydeoxyribonucleotide (PDRN) was recently noted as a substitute for glucocorticoids.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 44-year-old male patient was admitted to our pain clinic with symptoms of low back pain with severe pain and tingling sensation of left posterolateral leg. He had type 2 DM medicated with Glimepiride and Metformin. Blood glucose level was 367 mg/dL. He declined to use glucocorticoid.

DIAGNOSES

He was diagnosed as left foraminal disc protrusion at L4-5, left subarticular disc protrusion at L5-S1.

INTERVENTIONS

Fluoroscopically guided transforaminal epidural PDRN injections were carried out.

OUTCOMES

The patient was followed up for more than 6 months and demonstrated good improvement in lumbosacral radiculopathy without any complications.

LESSONS

This is the first successful report on epidural injection of PDRN.

Do Epidural Injections Provide Short- and Long-term Relief for Lumbar Disc Herniation? A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

As part of a comprehensive nonsurgical approach, epidural injections often are used in the management of lumbar disc herniation. Recent guidelines and systematic reviews have reached different conclusions about the efficacy of epidural injections in managing lumbar disc herniation.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In this systematic review, we determined the efficacy (pain relief and functional improvement) of the three anatomic approaches (caudal, lumbar interlaminar, and transforaminal) for epidural injections in the treatment of disc herniation.

METHODS

We performed a literature search from 1966 to June 2013 in PubMed, Cochrane library, US National Guideline Clearinghouse, previous systematic reviews, and cross-references for trials studying all types of epidural injections in managing chronic or chronic and subacute lumbar disc herniation. We wanted only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (either placebo or active controlled) to be included in our analysis, and 66 studies found in our search fulfilled these criteria. We then assessed the methodologic quality of these 66 studies using the Cochrane review criteria for RCTs. Thirty-nine studies were excluded, leaving 23 RCTs of high and moderate methodologic quality for analysis. Evidence for the efficacy of all three approaches for epidural injection under fluoroscopy was strong for short-term (< 6 months) and moderate for long-term (≥ 6 months) based on the Cochrane rating system with five levels of evidence (best evidence synthesis), with strong evidence denoting consistent findings among multiple high-quality RCTs and moderate evidence denoting consistent findings among multiple low-quality RCTs or one high-quality RCT. The primary outcome measure was pain relief, defined as at least 50% improvement in pain or 3-point improvement in pain scores in at least 50% of the patients. The secondary outcome measure was functional improvement, defined as 50% reduction in disability or 30% reduction in the disability scores.

RESULTS

Based on strong evidence for short-term efficacy from multiple high-quality trials and moderate evidence for long-term efficacy from at least one high quality trial, we found that fluoroscopic caudal, lumbar interlaminar, and transforaminal epidural injections were efficacious at managing lumbar disc herniation in terms of pain relief and functional improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that epidural injections performed under fluoroscopy by trained physicians offer improvement in pain and function in well-selected patients with lumbar disc herniation.

CT-guided nucleoplasty with radiofrequency energy for the treatment of lumbar disk herniation

STUDY DESIGN

A clinical randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to compare the clinical effectiveness of CT-guided nucleoplasty, CT-guided nucleoplasty combined with nerve root injection, and CT-guided transforaminal lumbar epidural injections in treating patients with contained lumbar disk herniation and leg pain, which are caused by radicular encroachment.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbar disk herniation is the most common cause of nerve root pain. The conservative treatment is proved to be effective for the majority of these patients, and the remaining patients are not ideal surgical candidates. Studies have found that minimally invasive percutaneous disk procedures may be preferable to open surgery in certain clinical situations. However, nucleoplasty in treating contained lumbar disk herniation and leg pain caused by radicular encroachment is still a controversy.

DESIGN

A total of 97 patients with leg pain and MRI evidence of small-sized or medium-sized herniated disks correlating with the symptoms participated in the study. The patients were randomly allocated into 3 groups: the CT-guided nucleoplasty group (N=33), the CT-guided nucleoplasty with nerve root injection group (N=35), and CT-guided transforaminal lumbar epidural injections group (N=29). Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain score and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) values were applied at pretreatment and 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 12 months at posttreatment.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant decreases (P=0.000) in the NRS and ODI scores for all posttreatment time points when compared with the pretreatment values in all the 3 groups. The average NRS and ODI results for the transforaminal lumbar epidural injections group were significantly higher than those for the other 2 groups at 3 and 12 months posttreatment (P<0.05). The combination of nucleoplasty with nerve root injection produced a significantly greater reduction in the NRS and ODI scores when compared with nucleoplasty at 1 week (P=0.000 for NRS and P=0.004 for ODI) and 1 month (P=0.000 for NRS and P=0.007 for ODI) after the treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that CT-guided nucleoplasty with radiofrequency energy is a relative effective and safe technique for treating leg pain caused by radicular encroachment. Furthermore, nucleoplasty combined with nerve root injection had achieved a significant greater improvement in pain management and functional level in short term (within 1 mo) after treatment than nucleoplasty alone.

Delivery systems for the treatment of degenerated intervertebral discs

The intervertebral disc (IVD) is the most avascular and acellular tissue in the body and therefore prone to degeneration. During IVD degeneration, the balance between anabolic and catabolic processes in the disc is deregulated, amongst others leading to alteration of extracellular matrix production, abnormal enzyme activities and production of pro-inflammatory substances like cytokines. The established treatment strategy for IVD degeneration consists of physiotherapy, pain medication by drug therapy and if necessary surgery. This approach, however, has shown limited success. Alternative strategies to increase and prolong the effects of bioactive agents and to reverse the process of IVD degeneration include the use of delivery systems for drugs, proteins, cells and genes. In view of the specific anatomy and physiology of the IVD and depending on the strategy of the therapy, different delivery systems have been developed which are reviewed in this article.

A comparison of the analgesic efficacy of transforaminal methylprednisolone alone and with low doses of clonidine in lumbo-sacral radiculopathy

Background:

Although transforaminal epidural steroid injections under fluoroscopic guidance have become a common mode of treatment of lumbosacral radiculopathy due to herniated disc, the efficacy of steroid with low doses of clonidine has not been compared yet.

Objectives:

Comparison of the analgesic efficacy of methylprednisolone alone and with low doses of clonidine for transforaminal injection in lumbosacral radiculopathy.

Study Design:

A randomized, double-blind trial.

Setting:

This study was performed at the Pain Clinic under the Department of Anaesthesiology, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College Hospital, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India.

Methods:

One hundred and eighty ASA grade I and II patients aged between 18 and 55 years were allocated into groups I, II and III to receive methylprednisolone 60 mg alone or methylprednisolone 60 mg with or without low doses of clonidine (0.5 mcg/kg or 1 mcg/kg) as transforaminal epidural injection. Pain relief and patient's satisfaction were evaluated with the global pain scale. Follow-up visits were advised at 1, 2, 4, 6 and 12 weeks and then at 6 months after injection. Associated complications were recorded.

Results:

Maximum pain relief was observed at 2 weeks after injection in all the three groups, with no difference in complication rate among the three groups. The most common complication observed was paresthesia in the nerve distribution. Greater than 60% improvement in pain scores was seen in 40% of the patients in group I, 50% of the patients in group II and 75% of the patients in group III.

Limitations:

This study is limited by the lack of a placebo group.

Conclusion:

Adding 1 mcg/kg clonidine to 60 mg methylprednisolone in transforaminal epidural injections provided better pain relief than 60 mg methylprednisolone with 0.5 mcg/kg clonidine or 60 mg methylprednisolone alone in patients suffering from lumbosacral radiculopathy, with practically no significant side-effects.

Relationship between bone mineral density and the frequent administration of epidural steroid injections in postmenopausal women with low back pain

BACKGROUND

Epidural steroid injection (ESI) is one of the most common nonsurgical treatments for low back pain. In general, corticosteroid therapy often results in bone loss and osteoporosis. In previous studies, bone mineral density (BMD) was evaluated after epidural injections of relatively small numbers and relatively low total doses of corticosteroids. However, the relationship between BMD and multiple ESIs remains to be elucidated.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the relationship between BMD and multiple ESIs in postmenopausal women with low back pain.

METHODS

Medical records of postmenopausal women with low back pain treated with or without ESIs were reviewed. BMD was measured in the lumbar spine, femoral neck and total femur after the treatments. A total of 71 patients were divided into two groups: group 1 included patients who had received non-ESI medications; and group 2 included those who had received ESIs >10 times, with a cumulative administered triamcinolone dose >200 mg.

RESULTS

Patients in group 2 showed lower BMD in the femoral neck and total femur. However, no significant intergroup differences in the BMD of the lumbar spine were observed. The prevalences of osteoporosis and osteopenia in the lumbar spine and femoral neck were significantly higher in group 2; these patients also had lower femoral neck BMD Z-scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple ESIs (approximately 14 injections with a cumulative triamcinolone dose of approximately 400 mg) can reduce BMD in postmenopausal women with low back pain.

Access routes and reported decision criteria for lumbar epidural drug injections: a systematic literature review

PURPOSE

To review lumbar epidural drug injection routes in relation to current practice and the reported criteria used for selecting a given approach.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a HIPPA-compliant study. Employing a systematic search strategy, the MEDLINE and EMBASE databank as well as the Cochrane Library were searched for studies on epidural drug injections. The following data were noted: access route, level of injection, use of image guidance, and types and doses of injected drugs. Justifications for the use of a particular route were also noted. Data were presented using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 1,211 scientific studies were identified, of which 91 were finally included (7.5%). The interlaminar access route was used in 44 of 91 studies (48.4%), the transforaminal in 37 of 91 studies (40.7%), and the caudal pathway in 26 of 91 studies (28.6%). The caudal pathway was favored in the older studies whereas the transforaminal route was favored in recent studies. Decision criteria related to correct needle placement, concentration of injected drug at lesion site, technical complexity, costs, and potential complications. Injection was usually performed on the level of the lesion using local anesthetics (71 of 91 studies, 78.0%), steroids (all studies) and image guidance (71 of 91 studies, 78%).

CONCLUSIONS

The most commonly used access routes for epidural drug injection are the interlaminar and transforaminal pathways at the level of the pathology. Transforaminal routes are being performed with increasing frequency in recent years.

Epidural steroid injection therapy for low back pain: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to systematically assess the long-term (≥ 6 months) benefits of epidural steroid injection therapies for patients with low back pain.

METHODS

We identified randomized controlled trials by database searches up to October 2011 and by additional hand searches without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials on the effects of epidurals for low back pain with follow-up for at least 6 months were included. Outcomes considered were pain relief, functional improvement in 6 to 12 months after epidural steroid injection treatment and the number of patients who underwent subsequent surgery. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine articles were selected. The meta-analysis suggested that a significant treatment effect on pain was noted at 6 months of follow-up (weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.41; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], -0.66 to -0.16), but was no longer statistically significant after adjusting for the baseline pain score (WMD, -0.19; 95 percent CI, -0.61 to 0.24). Epidural steroid injection did not improve back-specific disability more than a placebo or other procedure. Epidural steroid injection did not significantly decrease the number of patients who underwent subsequent surgery compared with a placebo or other treatments (relative risk, 1.02; 95 percent CI, 0.83 to 1.24).

CONCLUSIONS

A long-term benefit of epidural steroid injections for low back pain was not suggested at 6 months or longer. Introduction of selection bias in the majority of injection studies seems apparent. Baseline adjustment is essential when we evaluate pain as a main outcome of injection therapy.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of biological treatments targeting tumour necrosis factor α for sciatica

PURPOSE

Systematic review comparing biological agents, targeting tumour necrosis factor α, for sciatica with placebo and alternative interventions.

METHODS

We searched 21 electronic databases and bibliographies of included studies. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and controlled observational studies of adults who had sciatica treated by biological agents compared with placebo or alternative interventions.

RESULTS

We pooled the results of six studies (five RCTs and one non-RCT) in meta-analyses. Compared with placebo biological agents had: better global effects in the short-term odds ratio (OR) 2.0 (95 % CI 0.7-6.0), medium-term OR 2.7 (95 % CI 1.0-7.1) and long-term OR 2.3 [95 % CI 0.5 to 9.7); improved leg pain intensity in the short-term weighted mean difference (WMD) -13.6 (95 % CI -26.8 to -0.4), medium-term WMD -7.0 (95 % CI -15.4 to 1.5), but not long-term WMD 0.2 (95 % CI -20.3 to 20.8); improved Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) in the short-term WMD -5.2 (95 % CI -14.1 to 3.7), medium-term WMD -8.2 (95 % CI -14.4 to -2.0), and long-term WMD -5.0 (95 % CI -11.8 to 1.8). There was heterogeneity in the leg pain intensity and ODI results and improvements were no longer statistically significant when studies were restricted to RCTs. There was a reduction in the need for discectomy, which was not statistically significant, and no difference in the number of adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to recommend these agents when treating sciatica, but sufficient evidence to suggest that larger RCTs are needed.