Outcome of transforaminal epidural steroid injection for lumbar radiculopathy: initial three-year experience at Upendra Devkota Memorial-National Institute of Neurological and Allied Sciences, Nepal

Specific back pain - effective diagnosis and treatment from the radiologist's point of view

The diagnosis and treatment of specific back pain is important in radiology. Due to the high number of patients suffering from back pain, it is important to provide excellent diagnostic and therapeutic support.Based on a recent literature search and considering the relevant guidelines as well as expert opinions, the aspects of specific back pain important for radiologists in terms of pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment are presented.Clinical examination in combination with the medical history provides a valid suspected diagnosis. This should subsequently be verified radiologically. MRI is the most effective cross-sectional diagnostic method for investigating specific back pain. A conventional X-ray on two planes in a standing position can be a useful addition if postural causes are suspected. If the clinical symptoms match the morphological findings, radiological treatment can be carried out for nerve root involvement as well as for inflammatory changes of the facet joints. The improvement in symptoms after radiological therapy is considered good overall; at least a short-term improvement in symptoms can generally be achieved, but no reliable data is available regarding the long-term outcome. Using preparations containing triamcinolone, low dosages should be selected in accordance with the guidelines. Embedding in a multimodal pain therapy treatment concept should be considered.Radiology provides essential diagnostic findings regarding specific back pain. Interventional pain therapy is an effective and safe method of treating proven specific back pain. · First examine clinically, then confirm the suspected diagnosis radiologically.. · MRI is usually the method of choice.. · Interventional pain therapy should show success after a maximum of 2 interventions.. · The anti-inflammatory drug dose should be kept as low as possible.. · The individual course determines the number of interventions.. · Stueckle CA, Haage P. Specific back pain - effective diagnosis and treatment from the radiologist's point of view. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2024; DOI 10.1055/a-2371-1752.

Deep Learning Algorithm Trained on Cervical Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Predict Outcomes of Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection for Radicular Pain from Cervical Foraminal Stenosis

Purpose

A convolutional neural network (CNN) is one of the representative deep learning (DL) model that is especially useful for image recognition and classification. In the current study, using cervical axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data obtained prior to transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI), we developed a CNN model to predict the therapeutic outcome of cervical TFESI in patients with cervical foraminal stenosis.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively recruited 288 patients with cervical foraminal stenosis who received cervical TFESI due to cervical radicular pain. We collected single T2-axial spine MR image obtained from each patient. The image showing narrowest width of the neural foramen in the level at which TFESI was performed was used for input data. A "favor outcome" was defined as a ≥ 50% reduction in the NRS score at 2 months post-TFESI vs the pretreatment NRS score. A "poor outcome" was defined as a < 50% reduction in the NRS score at 2 months post-TFESI vs the pretreatment score.

Results

The area under the curve of our developed model for predicting therapeutic outcome of cervical TFESI in patients with cervical spinal stenosis was 0.801.

Conclusion

We showed that a CNN model trained using cervical axial MRI could be helpful for predicting therapeutic outcome after cervical TFESI in patients with cervical foraminal stenosis.

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain

Introduction

Painful lumbar spinal disorders represent a leading cause of disability in the US and worldwide. Interventional treatments for lumbar disorders are an effective treatment for the pain and disability from low back pain. Although many established and emerging interventional procedures are currently available, there exists a need for a defined guideline for their appropriateness, effectiveness, and safety.

Objective

The ASPN Back Guideline was developed to provide clinicians the most comprehensive review of interventional treatments for lower back disorders. Clinicians should utilize the ASPN Back Guideline to evaluate the quality of the literature, safety, and efficacy of interventional treatments for lower back disorders.

Methods

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified an educational need for a comprehensive clinical guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations. Experts from the fields of Anesthesiology, Physiatry, Neurology, Neurosurgery, Radiology, and Pain Psychology developed the ASPN Back Guideline. The world literature in English was searched using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Scopus, and meeting abstracts to identify and compile the evidence (per section) for back-related pain. Search words were selected based upon the section represented. Identified peer-reviewed literature was critiqued using United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria and consensus points are presented.

Results

After a comprehensive review and analysis of the available evidence, the ASPN Back Guideline group was able to rate the literature and provide therapy grades to each of the most commonly available interventional treatments for low back pain.

Conclusion

The ASPN Back Guideline represents the first comprehensive analysis and grading of the existing and emerging interventional treatments available for low back pain. This will be a living document which will be periodically updated to the current standard of care based on the available evidence within peer-reviewed literature.

Intervention Effect of Lumbar Transforaminal Epidural Block on the Treatment for Low Back Pain with Radicular Pain

Lumbar transforaminal epidural block (LTEB) is a minimally invasive interventional method, and the interventional effect of LTEB on the treatment of low back pain with radicular pain is not yet clear; therefore, a total of 100 patients with low back pain with radicular pain treated in our hospital from January 2021 to December 2021 were included in this study, and they were divided into two groups of 50 each using a digital double-blind method. The control group was treated conservatively, and the study group was treated with LTEB. Patients' pain was assessed using the numerical rating scale (NRS), and the degree of functional impairment was assessed using the Oswestry disability index (ODI). The results of the study showed comparable differences in NRS scores for low back pain, NRS scores for lower extremities, and ODI scores of patients before treatment (t = 0.071, 0.035, 0.007, P > 0.05). After treatment, patients in the control group had a low back pain NRS score (4.00 ± 0.85), lower extremity NRS score (3.87 ± 0.78), ODI score (58.25 ± 2.53), and low back pain NRS score (2.00 ± 0.54), while the study group had a lower extremity NRS score (2.00 ± 0.50) and ODI score (58.25 ± 2.53) that were statistical significance (t = 0.071, 0.035, 24.218, P < 0.001). In conclusion, treatment with LTEB can effectively reduce the pain and improve the functional impairment of patients with low back pain with radicular pain, which is clinically important.

Efficacy of transforaminal epidural magnesium administration when combined with a local anaesthetic and steroid in the management of lower limb radicular pain

BACKGROUND

Lower limb radicular pain resulting from a herniated intervertebral disc is a cause of functional disability and could lead to increased consumption of opioids. We evaluated the efficacy of epidural magnesium combined with a local anaesthetic and steroid in the management of this pain.

METHODS

This was a prospective, case-control, randomized, double-blind study. Fifty patients each received 2 ml bupivacaine, 1 ml (40 mg) methylprednisolone and 1 ml saline (0.9%) (group C) or magnesium (200 mg) instead of saline (group M). The primary outcome measure was the improvement in the pain score (assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS)), and the secondary outcome was the improvement in the functional ability (assessed using the Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ)). The VAS and MODQ scores were assessed before and at 1 day, 1 week, 1 month and 3 months post-intervention.

RESULTS

The VAS and MODQ scores were significantly better in group M compared to those in group C at all times post-injection (p-value < 0.001). Comparisons within the same group showed that the VAS and MODQ scores were significantly better at all post-injection time points compared to the pre-injection scores in both group C and group M (p-values < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Adding magnesium to a local anaesthetic and steroid to be injected in the transforaminal epidural space could improve the pain and the quality of life in patients suffering from lower limb radicular pain due to lumbo-sacral disc herniation, and this improvement could last for up to 3 months.

SIGNIFICANCE

Magnesium is efficient when added to local anaesthetics and steroids for management of lower limb radicular pain.