A novel balloon-inflatable catheter for percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis and decompression

Percutaneous epidural balloon neuroplasty: a narrative review of current evidence

Percutaneous epidural balloon neuroplasty (PEBN) can be used to perform balloon decompression combined with percutaneous epidural neuroplasty (PEN), leading to significant pain relief and functional improvement in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of PEBN and supported its relatively long-term outcomes (at least 6 months, sustained for up to 12 months). Balloon neuroplasty appears to be superior to conventional PEN. Moreover, it has been shown to be effective in patients unresponsive to conventional PEN or in those with post lumbar surgery syndrome. In addition, balloon neuroplasty achieved successful outcomes regardless of the approach used, such as retrodiscal, transforaminal, contralateral interlaminar, or caudal. Chronic lumbar radicular pain without back pain, neurogenic claudication, and minimal neuropathic component were favorable predictors of successful PEBN from a symptomatic perspective. A short duration of pain after lumbar surgery, lumbar foraminal stenosis caused primarily by degenerative disc, mild foraminal stenosis, and perineural adhesion by degenerative discs were associated with successful outcomes of PEBN from pathological aspects. Ballooning ≥ 50% of the target sites and complete contrast dispersion after ballooning seemed to be crucial for successful outcomes from a technical perspective. In addition, PEBN was effective regardless of the accompanying redundant nerve roots or a mild degree of spondylolisthesis. Studies on balloon neuroplasty have reported occasional minor and self-limiting complications; however, no PEBN-related significant complications have been reported. Given the present evidence, balloon neuroplasty appears to be a safe and effective procedure with minimal complications for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Effect of Previous Caudal Block to Predict Successful Outcome after Adhesiolysis using a Steerable Catheter in Lumbar Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Retrospective Study

Adhesiolysis is minimally invasive and commonly used for pain associated with adhesion after lumbar spine surgery. Caudal epidural block may be used for radiating pain due to failed back surgery syndrome. We evaluated the predictive value of response to caudal block performed prior to adhesiolysis in failed back surgery syndrome. Between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2020, 150 patients with failed back surgery syndrome were treated with adhesiolysis using a steerable catheter at the pain clinic of a tertiary hospital after failed conservative treatment (including caudal block). Patient demographics, pain duration, and lumbar magnetic resonance imaging findings were examined. Response to previous caudal block was determined as a binary result (yes or no). Patients were followed up 3 months after adhesiolysis. Successful outcome was defined as a ≥2-point reduction in the numeric rating scale scores for radicular pain 3 months after adhesiolysis, evident in 81/150 (46%) patients. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that caudal block response was an independent predictor of successful adhesiolysis (odds ratio = 4.403; p = 0.015). Response to prior caudal block is a positive predictor of successful adhesiolysis.

Successful electrode insertion for spinal cord stimulation after balloon adhesiolysis in a patient with epidural adhesion - A case report

Background

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can be successfully performed using highly developed implantation techniques. However, anatomical barriers, such as epidural adhesion, may impede placing the electrode for SCS in an adequate position.

Case

A 60-year-old female who had SCS with an electrode at the T9-10 level removed because she had a wound infection at the back incision site. After the wound infection was completely resolved, we tried to re-insert the SCS electrode. However, it was difficult to advance it up to the T11 level due to epidural adhesion. We performed a combined epidural adhesiolysis using balloon decompression with an inflatable balloon catheter. After that, the SCS lead was successfully placed up to the T11 level, and implantation of SCS was performed.

Conclusions

When a patient has epidural adhesion, an epidural adhesiolysis with an inflatable balloon catheter may help the insertion of the SCS electrode in the epidural space.

An Evidence Based Review of Epidurolysis for the Management of Epidural Adhesions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review presents epidurolysis as a procedure to alleviate pain and disability from epidural adhesions. It reviews novel and groundbreaking evidence, describing the background, indications, benefits and adverse events from this procedure in an effort to provide healthcare experts with the data required to decide on an intervention for their patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Epidural adhesions (EA) or epidural fibrosis (EF) is defined as non-physiologic scar formation secondary to a local inflammatory reaction provoked by tissue trauma in the epidural space. Often, it is a sequelae of surgical spine intervention or instrumentation. The cost associated with chronic post-operative back pain has been reported to be up to nearly $12,500 dollars per year; this, coupled with the increasing prevalence of chronic lower back pain and the subsequent increase in surgical management of back pain, renders EF a significant cost and morbidity in the U.S. Though risk factors leading to the development of EA are not well established, epidural fibrosis has been reported to be the culprit in up to 46% of cases of Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS), a chronic pain condition found in up to 20-54% of patients who receive back surgery. Moreover, EF has also been associated with lumbar radiculopathy after lumbar disc surgery. Epidurolysis is defined as the mechanical dissolution of epidural fibrotic scar tissue for persistent axial spine or radicular pain due to epidural fibrosis that is refractory to conservative therapy Endoscopic lysis of adhesions is a procedural technique which has been shown to improve chronic back pain in one-third to one-half of patients with clinically symptomatic fibrous adhesions. Here we review some of the novel evidence that supports this procedure in EA and FBSS.

SUMMARY

The literature concerning epidurolysis in the management of epidural adhesions is insufficient. Prospective studies, including randomized controlled trials and observational studies, have suggested epidurolysis to be effective in terms of pain reduction, functional improvement, and patient satisfaction scores. Observational studies report epidurolysis as a well-tolerated, safe procedure. Current evidence suggests that epidurolysis may be used as an effective treatment modality for epidural adhesions. Nonetheless, further high quality randomized controlled studies assessing the safety and efficacy of epidurolysis in the management of epidural adhesions is needed.

Transforaminal Epidural Balloon Adhesiolysis via a Contralateral Interlaminar Retrograde Foraminal Approach: A Retrospective Analysis and Technical Considerations

Several treatment modalities have been proposed for foraminal stenosis, but the treatment options remain unsatisfactory. Previous studies have shown that transforaminal balloon adhesiolysis may be effective in patients with refractory lumbar foraminal stenosis. However, in patients with a high iliac crest, balloon catheter insertion may be difficult via a conventional transforaminal approach (particularly targeting the L5–S1 foramen). It has been reported that an epidural catheter can be placed easily by a contralateral interlaminar retrograde foraminal approach. Therefore, we applied this approach to L5–S1 transforaminal balloon adhesiolysis in patients with a high iliac crest. We retrospectively analyzed data from 22 patients who underwent combined epidural adhesiolysis and balloon decompression (balloon adhesiolysis) using the novel foraminal balloon catheter via a contralateral interlaminar retrograde foraminal approach. The pain intensity significantly decreased over the three-month period after balloon adhesiolysis (p < 0.001). There were no complications associated with the balloon procedure. The present study suggests that balloon adhesiolysis for L5-S1 foramen via a contralateral interlaminar retrograde foraminal approach may be an effective alternative for patients with a high iliac crest and refractory lumbar radicular pain due to lumbar foraminal stenosis. In addition, detailed procedural aspects are described here.

Contrast Dispersion on Epidurography May Be Associated with Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Epidural Neuroplasty Using an Inflatable Balloon Catheter

BACKGROUND

Contrast dispersion pattern on epidurography may be associated with clinical improvement after epidural neuroplasty. However, insufficient evidence supports this theory. The current study aims to evaluate the relevance of contrast dispersion and clinical improvement after percutaneous epidural neuroplasty using an inflatable balloon catheter.

METHODS

One hundred patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent combined balloon decompression and epidural adhesiolysis between March 2015 to December 2015 participated in the present study. Participants were divided into two groups by contrast dispersion pattern on postprocedural epidurography: the complete contrast dispersion (CCD) and incomplete contrast dispersion (ICCD) groups. The numeric rating scale (NRS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and global perceived effects (GPE) were each assessed before and one, three, six, nine, and 12 months after the intervention.

RESULTS

After combined balloon decompression and adhesiolysis, significant pain reduction and functional improvement were maintained up to 12 months in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. NRS and GPE in the CCD group were significantly lower than in the ICCD group from six to 12 months after the intervention. The ODI in the CCD group was also significantly lower compared with that in the ICCD group from one to 12 months after the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined balloon decompression and adhesiolysis with the inflatable balloon catheter can provide noteworthy pain reduction and improvement of physical function for a long-term period in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Because CCD showed better clinical improvement compared with ICCD, a contrast dispersion pattern may be associated with an improved clinical outcome.

Lumbar foraminal neuropathy: an update on non-surgical management

Lumbar foraminal pathology causing entrapment of neurovascular contents and radicular symptoms are commonly associated with foraminal stenosis. Foraminal neuropathy can also be derived from inflammation of the neighboring lateral recess or extraforaminal spaces. Conservative and interventional therapies have been used for the treatment of foraminal inflammation, fibrotic adhesion, and pain. This update reviews the anatomy, pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and current treatment options of foraminal neuropathy.

Relationship of Success Rate for Balloon Adhesiolysis with Clinical Outcomes in Chronic Intractable Lumbar Radicular Pain: A Multicenter Prospective Study

Combined balloon decompression and epidural adhesiolysis has been reported to be effective in refractory lumbar spinal stenosis. Many cases of intractable stenosis have symptom-related multiple target sites for interventional treatment. In this situation it may not be possible to perform balloon adhesiolysis, or even only epidural adhesiolysis, for all target sites. Therefore, this multicenter prospective observational study aimed to evaluate the relationship of successful ballooning rate for multiple target sites with clinical outcome. Based on the ballooning success rate of multiple target sites, the patients were divided into three groups: below 50%, 50–85%, and above 85% ballooning. A greater ballooning success rate for multiple target sites provided a more decreased pain intensity and improved functional status in patients with chronic refractory lumbar spinal stenosis, and the improvement was maintained for 6 months. The estimated proportions of successful responders according to a multidimensional approach in the below 50%, 50–85%, and above 85% balloon success groups at 6 months after the procedure were 0.292, 0.468, and 0.507, respectively (p = 0.038). Our study suggests the more successful balloon adhesiolysis procedures for multiple target lesions are performed, the better clinical outcome can be expected at least 6 months after treatment.

Combined epidural adhesiolysis and balloon decompression can be effective in intractable lumbar spinal stenosis patients unresponsive to previous epidural adhesiolysis

Moderate evidence exists regarding percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis (PEA) being an effective treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Although PEA is successfully performed using balloon-less epidural catheters, many patients with severe adhesions cannot obtain satisfactory results. Combined treatment with balloon-inflatable catheters for PEA and balloon decompression recently demonstrated sufficient pain relief and functional improvement in patients with intractable LSS. We compared the effects of PEA and balloon decompression in patients with intractable LSS who did not undergo PEA and those who were unresponsive to previous PEA with a balloon-less catheter.We examined 315 patients who underwent PEA and balloon decompression with balloon-inflatable catheters. Patients with intractable LSS were divided into those without previous PEA (No-PEA) and those unresponsive to previous PEA using balloon-less catheters (Prev-PEA). The numeric rating scale, Oswestry disability index, and global perceived effect of satisfaction scale were measured at 0, 1, 3, and 6 months after the intervention. Responder analysis was performed based on changes in measured scales and indices.A successful treatment response was observed at 1, 3, and 6 months after the intervention in 56.4%, 42.7%, and 32.9%, respectively, of the No-PEA group and in 48.9%, 37.8%, and 25.6%, respectively, of the Prev-PEA group. No significant between-group differences were detected. Pain intensities and functional status improved and were maintained throughout follow-up after PEA with balloon decompression using balloon-inflatable catheters.This modality may represent a useful alternative to overcome the limitations of preexisting adhesiolysis procedures.

Retrodiscal epidural balloon adhesiolysis through Kambin's triangle in chronic lumbar spinal stenosis: A retrospective analysis and technical considerations

A previous study showed that transforaminal balloon adhesiolysis via the safe triangle was effective in lumbar spinal stenosis. However, retrodiscal pathology is difficult to treat with this method. Therefore we attempted retrodiscal balloon adhesiolysis via Kambin's triangle. The design of our study is a retrospective analysis. The setting of our study is a tertiary, interventional pain management practice, speciality referral center.The primary indication for this procedure is radicular pain arising from ipsilateral retrodiscal pathology. Medical records were reviewed of patients who received retrodiscal decompression with a transforaminal balloon inflatable catheter between January 1, 2016 and July 31, 2017. The intervention was conducted by 2 well-trained pain specialists. The introducer needle was positioned at Kambin's triangle. Adhesiolysis was performed using a balloon filled with radiocontrast media. After balloon adhesiolysis, an agent containing lidocaine and dexamethasone was injected through the introducer sheath. Numeric rating scale pain scores were obtained 1 and 3 months after the procedure.The mean pre-procedure numeric rating scale score was 7.05 ± 1.40. After 1 and 3 months, the mean scores were 3.91 ± 2.20 and 3.77 ± 2.11, respectively. No patient had significant complications. Also, technical considerations were discussed.Chronic pain due to lumbar central stenosis, especially ipsilateral retrodiscal pathology, can be reduced by retrodiscal balloon adhesiolysis through Kambin's triangle. Although this study is limited by its retrospective design, the results suggest that this procedure is a useful treatment due to its ease of performance and cost-effectiveness.

Optimal Cut-Off Value of the Superior Articular Process Area as a Morphological Parameter to Predict Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis

Background. We devised a new morphological parameter called the superior articular process area (SAPA) to evaluate the connection between lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS) and the superior articular process. Objective. We hypothesized that the SAPA is an important morphologic parameter in the diagnosis of LFS. Methods. All patients over 60 years of age were included. Data regarding the SAPA were collected from 137 patients with LFS. A total of 167 control subjects underwent lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as part of a routine medical examination. We analyzed the cross-sectional area of the bone margin of the superior articular process at the level of L4-L5 facet joint in the axial plane. Results. The average SAPA was 96.3 ± 13.6 mm² in the control group and 128.1 ± 17.2 mm² in the LFS group. The LFS group was found to have significantly higher levels of SAPA (p < 0.001) in comparison to the control group. In the LFS group, the optimal cut-off value was 112.1 mm², with 84.4% sensitivity, 83.9% specificity, and AUC of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91-0.96). Conclusions. Higher SAPA values were associated with a higher possibility of LFS. These results are important in the evaluation of patients with LFS.

Factors for Predicting Favorable Outcome of Percutaneous Epidural Adhesiolysis for Lumbar Disc Herniation

Background. Lower back pain is a common reason for disability and the most common cause is lumbar disc herniation. Percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis has been applied to relieve pain and increase the functional capacity of patients who present this condition. Objectives. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated the factors which predict the outcome of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis in patients who were diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation. Methods. Electronic medical records of patients diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation who have received percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis treatment were reviewed. The primary outcome was the factors that were associated with substantial response of ≥4 points or ≥50% of pain relief in the numerical rating scale pain score 12 months after the treatment. Results. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the presence of high-intensity zone (HIZ) at magnetic resonance imaging was a predictor of substantial response to percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis for 12 months (P = 0.007). The presence of a condition involving the vertebral foramen was a predictor for unsuccessful response after 12 months (P = 0.02). Discussion and Conclusion. The presence of HIZ was a predictor of favorable long-term outcome after percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis for the treatment of lower back pain with radicular pain caused by lumbar disc herniation.

Comparative effectiveness of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis for different sacrum types in patients with chronic pain due to lumbar disc herniation: A propensity score matching analysis

For percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis (PEA) in patients with chronic low back and/or leg pain, comparative efficacy of lumbar PEA between the sacral types has not yet been investigated. This study aimed to determine the comparative efficacy of lumbar PEA between the sacral types in chronic pain with lumbosacral herniated intervertebral disc (L-HIVD).A total of 1158 chronic low back and/or leg pain patients who diagnosed with L-HIVD and underwent PEA between February 2011 and March 2015 were retrospectively examined. All enrolled patients were divided into 2 types: dome-sacral type and flat type. To avoid confounding bias, propensity score analysis was used. Numeric rating scales (NRS) and Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) were compared between the 2 types at baseline and at 3 months post-PEA.After conducting a propensity score matching analysis, 114 patients were included in each type. The mean sacral angle significantly differed between the flat-sacral and dome-sacral types (P < 0.001). A linear mixed effect model analysis showed that the adjusted NRS score at baseline was 7.58 [95% confidence interval (CI): 7.40-7.76] for the flat-sacral type and 7.47 (95% CI: 7.29-7.64) for the dome-sacral type. The adjusted NRS score after 3 months post-PEA was 4.27 (95% CI: 3.77-4.77) for the flat-sacral type and 3.71 (95% CI: 3.21-4.21) for the dome-sacral type. We detected no significant differences in NRS at baseline (P = 0.371) and after 3 months (P = 0.121) between the 2 groups. No significant differences were observed in terms of the NRS score between the 2 groups during the 3 months follow-up (omnibus P = 0.223). There were no significant differences in PGIC between flat-sacral and dome-sacral types at 3 months after the follow-up period (4.40 ± 2.17 and 4.67 ± 1.88, respectively, P = 0.431).PEA provides sufficient pain relief for chronic pain due to L-HIVD at 3 months postprocedure. The sacral type might not affect the outcome of lumbar PEA in chronic pain associated lumbar HIVD.

Clinical Evaluation of Percutaneous Caudal Epidural Adhesiolysis With the Racz Technique for Low Back Pain Due to Contained Disc Herniation

Objectives

The authors evaluated the effectiveness of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis (PEA) in patients with low back pain due to contained disc herniation.

Patients and Methods

Twenty patients with low back pain due to contained disc herniation underwent PEA treatment with the Racz technique. The patients were evaluated for pain score, medication intake, significant pain relief, and complications.

Results

At three days, one month, three months, and six months after PEA compared to pre-PEA evaluations, the pain scores and medication intake were significantly decreased. Significant pain relief declined from 95% at three days to 75% at six months.

Conclusions

PEA for low back pain due to contained disc herniation is a safe and effective procedure. Therefore, it may be considered as an option for treatment before invasive operations are performed.

Efficacy of Percutaneous Adhesiolysis in the Treatment of Lumbar Post Surgery Syndrome

Context

Lumbar post-surgery syndrome is common and often results in chronic, persistent pain and disability, which can lead to multiple interventions. After failure of conservative treatment, either surgical treatment or a nonsurgical modality of treatment such as epidural injections, percutaneous adhesiolysis is often contemplated in managing lumbar post surgery syndrome. Recent guidelines and systematic reviews have reached different conclusions about the level of evidence for the efficacy of epidural injections and percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing lumbar post surgery syndrome. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy of all 3 percutaneous adhesiolysis anatomical approaches (caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal) in treating lumbar post-surgery syndrome.

Evidence Acquisition

Data Sources: A literature search was performed from 1966 through October 2014 utilizing multiple databases. Study Selection: A systematic review of randomized trials published from 1966 through October 2014 of all types of epidural injections and percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing lumbar post-surgery syndrome was performed including methodological quality assessment utilizing Cochrane review criteria, Interventional Pain Management Techniques–Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM–QRB), and grading of evidence using 5 levels of evidence ranging from Level I to Level V. Data Extraction: The search strategy emphasized post-surgery syndrome and related pathologies treated with percutaneous adhesiolysis procedures.

Results

The search criteria yielded 16 manuscripts on percutaneous adhesiolysis assessing post-surgery syndrome. Of these, only 4 randomized trials met inclusion criteria for methodological quality assessment, 3 of them were of high quality; and the fourth manuscript was of low quality. Based on these 3 randomized controlled trials, 2 of them with one-day procedure and one with a 3-day procedure, the level of evidence for the efficacy of percutaneous adhesiolysis is Level II based on best evidence synthesis.

Conclusions

Based on this systematic review, percutaneous adhesiolysis is effective in managing patients with lumbar post-surgery syndrome after the failure of conservative management including fluoroscopically directed epidural injections.

Effectiveness and Factors Associated with Epidural Decompression and Adhesiolysis Using a Balloon-Inflatable Catheter in Chronic Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: 1-Year Follow-Up

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of the combined balloon decompression with a balloon-inflatable catheter (ZiNeu) in addition to conventional epidural adhesiolysis, and to identify factors that predict patient responses.

STUDY DESIGN

An institutional single-armed prospective observational study.

SUBJECTS

Chronic refractory lumbar spinal stenosis.

METHODS

This study was performed in 61 patients with spinal stenosis who suffered from chronic (at least 3 months) lumbar radicular pain with or without lower back pain. Patients had failed to maintain improvement for more than 1 month with conventional epidural injection. The numeric rating scale (NRS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were each measured at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis and balloon decompression with a ZiNeu catheter.

RESULTS

The percentage of successful responders was 72.1%, 60.7%, 57.4%, and 36.1% of patients at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. A single combined treatment of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis and balloon decompression with a ZiNeu catheter provided sufficient pain relief and functional improvement in patients with chronic refractory lumbar spinal stenosis, and the improvement was maintained for 12 months (P < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that absence of diabetes independently predicted successful response at 12 months after percutaneous epidural decompression and adhesiolysis with the balloon catheter (Odds ratio = 0.080; 95% confidence interval = 0.009-0.676; P = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

The combined epidural adhesiolysis and balloon decompression with a ZiNeu catheter led to significant pain relief and functional improvement in a subset of patients with refractory spinal stenosis.