Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Potential Management With Prostaglandin E1 Analogs

ABSTRACT

Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the most commonly diagnosed spinal disorders worldwide and remains a major cause for surgery in older adults. Lumbar spinal stenosis is clinically defined as a progressive degenerative disorder with low back pain and associated neurogenic intermittent claudication. Conservative and surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis has been shown to be minimally effective on its symptoms. A treatment option that has not been investigated in the United States is the utilization of prostaglandin E1 analogs, which have been used primarily in Japan for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis since the 1980s. The vasodilatory and antiplatelet aggregation effects of prostaglandin E1 presumably improve symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis by increasing blood flow to the spinal nerve roots. This brief report examines the potential vascular pathology of lumbar spinal stenosis, reviews evidence on the use of prostaglandin E1 analog limaprost in Japan for lumbar spinal stenosis, and briefly discusses misoprostol as a possible alternative in the United States. The studies summarized in this report suggest that prostaglandin E1 analogs may provide benefit as a conservative treatment option for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. However, higher-quality studies conducted in the United States and comparison with other currently used conservative treatments are required before it can be recommended for routine clinical use.

Is There a Relationship Between Body Mass Index and Fluoroscopy Time During Cervical Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injections?

Background

The challenge of obtaining medical imaging in individuals with higher body mass index (BMI) is described, but there is minimal data regarding the relationship between BMI and fluoroscopy time during cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injection (CIESI).

Objective

To determine the relationship between BMI and fluoroscopy time during CIESI.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent fluoroscopically guided CIESI between January 2014 and February 2015 at an academic pain medicine center. Fluoroscopy time data were collected. Comparisons based on analysis of variance were made between patients with normal (<25.0 kg/m 2 ), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m 2 ), and obese (≥30.0 kg/m 2 ) BMI.

Results

Of 399 procedure encounters, 366 had documented BMI and fluoroscopy time data and were included for analysis. Mean age (± SD) in this cohort was 53 ± 13 years, including 189 females (52%) and 205 first-time injections. Mean fluoroscopy time for all injections was 18 ± 10 seconds. Separated by categorical BMI class, the mean fluoroscopy time was 18 ± 9 seconds for normal weight patients, 17 ± 10 seconds for overweight patients, and 20 ± 11 seconds for obese patients, respectively. Post hoc analysis showed that fluoroscopy time was significantly longer only in obese compared with overweight patients ( P  = 0.02). Trainee involvement and first-time vs repeat injection did not significantly alter fluoroscopy time ( P  = 0.17 and P  = 0.12, respectively).

Conclusions

The findings of this study indicate that BMI does not appear to have a clinically significant impact on fluoroscopy time during cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injection procedures. Future study is needed to directly quantify radiation exposure in patients and practitioners, as well as the associated health risk.

The Impact of Body Mass Index on Fluoroscopy Time During Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injection; A Multicenter Cohort Study

Objective

This study aimed to assess the relationship between BMI and fluoroscopy time during lumbar epidural steroid injections (LESIs) performed for lumbosacral radicular pain.

Design

Multicenter retrospective cohort study.

Setting

Three academic, outpatient pain treatment centers.

Subjects

Patients who underwent fluoroscopically guided LESI.

Methods

Mean and standard deviation (SD) fluoroscopy time were compared between patients with normal (18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥30.0 kg/m2) BMI. Statistical significance was set at P=0.01 due to multiple comparisons.

Results

A total of 2,930 procedure encounters were included, consisting of 598 interlaminar LESIs and 2,332 transforaminal LESIs. Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer in the obese patients compared to normal and overweight patients during interlaminar LESI (P < 0.01). Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer with each increasing BMI category in during transforaminal LESI (P < 0.01). These relationships remained when a trainee was involved (P < 0.01; P<0.01), during repeat injections (P < 0.01; P < 0.01), and during bilateral transforaminal LESIs (P < 0.01). While longer fluoroscopy times were required in high BMI categories during L5-S1 transforaminal LESI (P < 0.01), there was no relationship between fluoroscopy time and BMI during L4-L5 and S1 transforaminal LESI (P = 0.02; P = 0.13). Fluoroscopy time during interlaminar LESI compared to transforaminal LESI was significantly lower within all BMI categories (all P<0.01).

Conclusions

The findings of this study indicate that fluoroscopy time is increased during interlaminar LESIs and during L5-S1 transforaminal LESIs in patients who are obese. These relationships are not affected by injection number, performance of bilateral injections, or trainee involvement. Further study is needed to determine if this increase in fluoroscopy time is indicative of a clinically significant associated increase in radiation dose.