Assessment of effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis and caudal epidural injections in managing post lumbar surgery syndrome: 2-year follow-up of a randomized, controlled trial

Background

The literature is replete with evaluations of failed surgery, illustrating a 9.5%–25% reoperation rate. Speculated causes of post lumbar surgery syndrome include epidural fibrosis, acquired stenosis, recurrent disc herniation, sacroiliac joint pain, and facet joint pain among other causes.

Methods

Patients (n = 120) were randomly assigned to two groups with a 2-year follow-up. Group I (control group, n = 60) received caudal epidural injections with catheterization up to S3 with local anesthetic (lidocaine 2%, 5 mL), nonparticulate betamethasone (6 mg, 1 mL), and 6 mL of 0.9% sodium chloride solution. Group II (intervention group, n = 60) received percutaneous adhesiolysis of the targeted area, with targeted delivery of lidocaine 2% (5 mL), 10% hypertonic sodium chloride solution (6 mL), and nonparticulate betamethasone (6 mg). The multiple outcome measures included the Numeric Rating Scale, the Oswestry Disability Index 2.0, employment status, and opioid intake with assessments at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months posttreatment. Primary outcome was defined as 50% improvement in pain and Oswestry Disability Index scores.

Results

Significant improvement with at least 50% relief with pain and improvement in functional status was illustrated in 82% of patients at the 2-year follow-up in the intervention group compared to 5% in the control group receiving caudal epidural injections. The average number of procedures over a period of 2 years in Group II was 6.4 ± 2.35 with overall total relief of approximately 78 weeks out of 104 weeks.

Conclusion

The results of this study show significant improvement in 82% of patients over a period of 2 years with an average of six to seven procedures of 1-day percutaneous adhesiolysis in patients with failed back surgery syndrome.

Epidural steroid injections for lumbar spinal stenosis

Degenerative lumbar stenosis is a common source of pain and disability in the elderly. It presents clinically with a variety of symptoms, though neurogenic claudication is the hallmark. There is a multifactorial pathogenesis to lumbar stenosis and its symptoms, and thus, there are multiple management approaches available. Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are a popular choice in management, however, the literature is vague in definitive support of their use, and providers that utilize injections can use variable techniques to access the spinal canal in order to deposit the steroid at the appropriate site. This article will review degenerative lumbar stenosis in general and focus on the use of ESIs to better define their role in this management process. In addition, the evidence to discern the optimal injection route will be presented.

Major risks and complications of cervical epidural steroid injections: An updated review

Background

Too many patients, with or without significant cervical disease, unnecessarily undergo cervical epidural steroid injections (CESIs). These include interlaminar (ICESI) and transforaminal ESI (TF-CESI) injections that are not Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved, have no documented long-term efficacy, and carry severe risks and complications.

Methods

Here we reviewed recent reports of morbidity and mortality attributed to the various types of CESIS. Major complications included; epidural hematomas, infection (abscess/meningitis), increased neurological deficits due to intramedullary (quadriparesis/quadriplegia), and intravascular injections (e.g., vertebral artery injections leading to cord, brain stem, and cerebellar strokes). The latter injections leading to strokes were typically attributed to the particulate steroid matter (e.g., within the methylprednisolone injection solution) that embolized into the distal arterial branches.

Results

Complications of cervical CESI/TF-CESI injections producing epidural hematoma, new neurological deficits (intramedullary injections), or intravascular injections resulting in strokes to the cord, brain stem, and cerebellum are often underreported. Interestingly, several other cases involving adverse events of CESI/TF-CESI may now be found in the medicolegal literature.

Conclusions

Cervical epidural injecions (e.g., CESI, ICESI, and TF-CESI) which are not FDA approved, provide no long-term benefit, and are being performed for minimal to no indications. They contribute to significant morbidity and mortality, including; epidural hematomas, infection, inadvertent intramedullary cord injections or cord, brain stem, and cerebellar strokes. Furthermore, these injections are increasingly required by insurance carriers prior to granting permission for definitive surgery, thus significantly delaying in some cases necessary operative intervention, while also subjecting patients at the hands of the insurance companies, to the additional hazards of these procedures.

Epidural Steroid Injections for Low Back Pain: A Narrative Review

Low back pain represents a significant socioeconomic burden. Several nonsurgical medical treatments have been proposed for the treatment of this disabling condition. Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are commonly used to treat lumbosacral radicular pain and to avoid surgery. Even though it is still not clear which type of conservative intervention is superior, several studies have proved that ESIs are able to increase patients' quality of life, relieve lumbosacral radicular pain and finally, reduce or delay more invasive interventions, such as spinal surgery. The aim of this narrative review is to analyze the mechanism of action of ESIs in patients affected by low back pain and investigate their current application in treating this widespread pathology.

Recommendations and Guidance for Steroid Injection Therapy and COVID-19 Vaccine Administration from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN)

To date, COVID-19 has spread to more than 108 million people globally, with a death toll surpassing 2 1/2 million. With the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of two highly effective COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer-BioNtech and Moderna, we now have a novel approach to contain COVID-19 related morbidity and mortality. Chronic pain care has faced unprecedented challenges for patients and providers in this ever-changing climate. With the approval of COVID-19 vaccines, we now face questions relating to the potential effects of pain treatments utilizing steroids on vaccine efficacy. In this analysis, we address these issues and provide guidance for steroid therapies based on available data and expert recommendations.

Point your SmartPhone at the code above. If you have a QR code reader the video abstract will appear. Or use:

https://youtu.be/I045uXVqKQY

Minimally invasive procedures for neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain is "pain arising as a direct consequence of a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system". The prevalence of neuropathic pain ranges from 7 to 11% of the population and minimally invasive procedures have been used to both diagnose and treat neuropathic pain. Diagnostic procedures consist of nerve blocks aimed to isolate the peripheral nerve implicated, whereas therapeutic interventions either modify or destroy nerve function. Procedures that modify how nerves function include epidural steroid injections, peripheral nerve blocks and sympathetic nerve blocks. Neuroablative procedures include radiofrequency ablation, cryoanalgesia and neurectomies. Currently, neuromodulation with peripheral nerve stimulators and spinal cord stimulators are the most evidence-based treatments of neuropathic pain.

Incidence and management of cerebrospinal fluid fistulas in 336 multilevel laminectomies with noninstrumented fusions

Background:

The incidence (e.g., 3–27%) and the types of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) fistulas occurring during multilevel lumbar laminectomy with noninstrumented spinal fusions varies.

Methods:

From 2000 to 2015, we retrospectively evaluated the incidence/etiologies of CSF fistulas occurring for 336 patients undergoing average 4.7 laminectomies with average 1.4 level noninstrumented fusions over a 15 year period. The varied etiologies of CSF leaks included; ossification of the yellow ligament (OYL) extending through the dura, postoperative surgical scar, iatrogenic traumatic leak, epidural steroid injections (ESI), resection of synovial cysts, and the removal of intradural tumors. Techniques for primary repairs included combinations of; 7-0 Gore-Tex (Newark, Delaware, USA) sutures, micro-dural staples, muscle patch/other (e.g., bovine pericardial) grafts, fibrin sealants/glues (e.g., Tisseel; Baxter International Inc., Westlake Village, CA, USA), and Duragen (Integra LifeSciences, Hawthorne, NY, USA) including both the thin and suturable types.

Results:

The etiologies of CSF fistulas in descending order included: Epidural spinal injections (ESI) (7 patients), synovial cysts (6 patients), OYL (5 patients), and equally for postoperative scar and intradural tumors (3 patients). CSF fistulas occurred in 24 (7.14%) of 336 patients; this frequency was reduced to 4.2% when ESI and intradural tumors were excluded.

Conclusion:

CSF fistulas occurred in 7.14% of 336 patients undergoing average 4.7 multilevel laminectomies with average 1.4 level noninstrumented fusions attributed to a lumbar stenosis with mild/moderate instability. The dural repair addressed seven prior ESI, six synovial cysts, five OYL, and operative scarring and intradural tumors (three apiece). Knowing the pathologies contributing to CSF fistulas should help the surgeon to better anticipate and treat these fistulas.

Metabolic and endocrinal effects of epidural glucocorticoid injections

INTRODUCTION

Epidural steroid injections are an integral part of nonsurgical management of radicular pain from lumbar spine disorders. We studied the effect of dexamethasone 8 mg epidural injections on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and serum glucose control of Asian patients.

METHODS

18 patients were recruited: six diabetics and 12 non-diabetics. Each patient received a total of dexamethasone 8 mg mixed with a local anaesthetic solution of lignocaine or bupivacaine, delivered into the epidural space. Levels of plasma cortisol, adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), serum glucose after an overnight fast and two-hour postprandial glucose, as well as weight, body mass index, blood pressure and heart rate were measured within one week prior to the procedure (baseline) and at one, seven and 21 days after the procedure.

RESULTS

Median fasting blood glucose levels were significantly higher on post-procedure Day 1 than at baseline. However, there was no significant change in median two-hour postprandial blood glucose from baseline levels. At seven and 21 days, there was no significant difference in fasting or two-hour postprandial glucose levels. Both ACTH and serum cortisol were significantly reduced on Day 1 compared to baseline in all patients. There was no significant difference in ACTH and serum cortisol levels from baseline at Days 7 and 21.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that epidural steroid injections with dexamethasone have a real, albeit limited, side effect on glucose and cortisol homeostasis in an Asian population presenting with lower back pain or sciatica.

Patient Priority Weighting of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire Does Not Change Results of the Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injections for Spinal Stenosis Trial

STUDY DESIGN

Secondary analysis of lumbar epidural steroid injections for spinal stenosis randomized controlled trial data.

OBJECTIVE

To reevaluate whether outcomes for older adults receiving epidural steroid injections with or without corticosteroid improve after using patient-prioritized Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) items.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Epidural corticosteroid injections are commonly used to treat lumbar spinal stenosis symptoms, despite limited evidence for their effectiveness in clinical trials. It is unclear whether evaluating patient-prioritized outcomes would alter results of a large clinical trial.

METHODS

Outcomes from the trial of lumbar epidural corticosteroid injections for spinal stenosis (LESS) trial were reanalyzed using RDQ, Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) weights assigned to the RDQ items, and patient-prioritized RDQ items. Differences between corticosteroid + lidocaine versus lidocaine-alone groups and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using analysis of covariance with adjustment for baseline values of the RDQ and recruitment site.

RESULTS

At 6 weeks, both the corticosteroid + lidocaine group and the lidocaine-alone group had improvement in the RDQ scores (RDQ, RDQ using SIP weights, patient-prioritized RDQ) as compared with baseline scores (corticosteroid + lidocaine: -4.2 points, -4.1 points, -4.2; lidocaine-alone: -3.1 points, -2.9 points, and -3.1 points, respectively). However, there was no significant between-group difference in the RDQ or patient-prioritized RDQ (average treatment effect -1.0 points, 95% CI -2.1 to 0.1, P = 0.07; -1.0 points, 95% CI -2.0 to 0.1, P = 0.08, respectively). Although the between-group difference of RDQ using SIP weights was statistically significant (average treatment effect -1.1, 95% CI -2.2 to -0.1, P = 0.04), this was not clinically important.

CONCLUSION

Results of the LESS trial did not substantively differ based on reanalysis of data using RDQ with SIP weights or patient-prioritized RDQ outcomes. This provides additional evidence that epidural injection of corticosteroid + lidocaine offered minimal or no short-term benefit as compared with epidural injection of lidocaine alone for older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Isolated oculomotor nerve palsy after lumbar epidural steroid injection in a diabetic patient

Background:

In patients with diabetes mellitus, epidural steroid injections (ESI) have been noted to cause significant elevation of blood glucose levels, typically lasting 1–3 days. Here, we describe a previously unreported complication of a diabetic third nerve palsy associated with an ESI.

Case Description:

A 66-year-old man with a history of coronary artery disease, hypertension, and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus presented with low back pain and left lower extremity radiculopathy. The lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed mild spondylosis, most severe at the L4-5 level, accompanied by a broad based disc protrusion resulting in mild central and moderate biforaminal stenosis. The patient underwent a left-sided L4-L5 transforaminal ESI resulting in transient elevation of his blood glucose levels. On post-procedure day 2, he developed a frontal headache and a complete right third nerve palsy with partial pupillary involvement. The MRI and MR angiography (MRA) of the brain revealed no compressive lesions or oculomotor abnormalities. Ophthalmoplegia and pupillary dysfunction resolved spontaneously over 4 months.

Conclusions:

Although rare, a history of a recent ESI should be considered as the etiology of an isolated oculomotor palsy in diabetic patients.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing different epidural steroid injection approaches

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) and lumbosacral radiculopathy are frequent disorders that cause nerve root injury, resulting in a variety of symptoms ranging from loss of sensation to loss of motor function depending on the degree of nerve compression.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of various epidural injection procedures in adult LBP patients.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

SETTING

Egypt.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, and Embase were used to conduct an electronic literature search. We included RCTs, cohorts, case controls, patients 30 years old with a clinical presentation of low back pain, and comprehensive data on the effects of the intervention on patients with lumbosacral radicular pain who got epidural steroid injections via various techniques. Only papers written in English were eligible.

RESULTS

Our analysis showed that parasagittal intralaminar (PIL) was the most effective approach in decreasing VAS (0-10) in the short term (< 6 months) (MD = -1.16 [95% CI -2.04, -0.28]). The next significant approach was transforaminal (TF) (MD = -0.37 [95% CI -1.14, -0.32]) in the long term; TF was the most effective approach (MD = -0.56 [95% CI -1, -0.13]). According to VAS (0-100) in the short term (< 6 months), our analysis showed an insignificant difference among the injection approaches and in the long term; TF was the most effective approach (MD = -24.20 [95% CI -43.80, -4.60]) and the next significant approach was PIL (MD = -23.89 [95% CI -45.78, -1.99]).

LIMITATIONS

The main limitations are the heterogeneity encountered in some of our analyses in addition to studies assessed as high risk of bias in some domains.

CONCLUSION

TF was the most effective steroid injection approach. In decreasing VAS for short-term PIL and TF were the most significant approaches, but TF was the most effective approach in decreasing VAS for the long term. Also, TF was the most effective approach in decreasing ODI for the long term.

Delayed onset paraparesis complicating epidural steroid injection with underlying spinal dural arteriovenous fistula

We report a case of a 48-year-old man with chronic back pain attributed to discogenic lumbar radiculopathy who underwent a fluoroscopy-guided L2-3 interlaminar epidural steroid injection. 4 h later, he developed acute paraparesis, sensory loss below T10 level and urinary retention. MRI of the thoracic spine revealed diffuse abnormal T2/FLAIR signal and extensive vascular flow voids. A spinal dural arteriovenous fistula was confirmed on spinal angiography. Embolization of the spinal dural arteriovenous fistula resulted in significant improvement of symptoms. We review previously reported cases and current understanding of the pathophysiology of this complication. All cases had symptom onset several hours after the procedure. There seems to be a trend toward better outcomes with earlier treatment.

Effect of supraneural transforaminal epidural steroid injection combined with caudal epidural steroid injection with catheter in chronic radicular pain management: Double blinded randomized controlled trial

Background: Epidural steroid injection (ESI) has been used in managing chronic radicular pain. Regarding various techniques of ESI, the synergistic effect of caudal ESI (CESI) on transforaminal ESI (TFESI) in chronic lumbosacral radicular pain in prospective randomized controlled trial has not been determined.  Methods:  A total of 54 eligible patients with lumbosacral radicular pain were randomly allocated to undergo TFESI plus CESI (TC group) or TFESI alone (T group).  The effective response to treatment was predefined by at least a 30% reduced verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS) from baseline between group comparison and the functional outcomes as measured by improved Oswestry Disability Index by least 15 points from baseline. All participants were evaluated using a single blinded outcome assessor before the  procedure and at 1, 3 and 6 months after the procedure. P <0.05 was considered as statistically significant.  Results:  Average VNRS reduced significantly from baseline after receiving procedure at 1, 3 and 6 months in both groups (P-value <0.05). The TC group exhibited more effective and showed significant pain relief compared with the T group at 3 months (P=0.01). However, no statistical difference was observed between sub group analysis in pain relief and insignificant difference between group comparisons of functional outcomes.

Conclusions: A treatment combining TFESI and CESI showed significant pain relief over TFESI alone at 3 months. No effect was found concerning functional evaluation.

Registration: Thai Clinical Trials Registry ID TCTR20171101002 01/11/2017F

Repeat Epidural Injections of SP-102 (Dexamethasone Sodium Phosphate Injectable Gel) in Subjects with Lumbosacral Radiculopathy

Purpose

SP-102 is a novel epidural steroid injection (ESI) formulation of 10 mg dexamethasone sodium phosphate in a viscous gel solution. Repeat dosing of ESIs is possible if required for pain relief, but with consideration of hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis suppression from prolonged systemic exposure. This phase I/II study investigated the effect of initial and repeat SP-102 injections on HPA suppression and analgesia.

Methods

Subjects with lumbosacral radiculopathy received an initial epidural SP-102 injection (T1) on day 1, followed by a repeat injection (T2) on ≥28 days later. To determine HPA suppression, area under the effect curve over 28 days and maximum change from baseline were calculated for cortisol, glucose levels, and white blood cell (WBC) count. Equivalent effect on HPA suppression of T1 relative to T2 was determined if the 90% CIs for ratios of these measures were within 80%–125%. The effect of repeat injections on leg and back pain was also assessed.

Results

Based on the responder analysis, all subjects had achieved a cortisol response by day 3 after initial injection and by day 2 after repeat injection. The repeat injection had similar effects on glucose levels and WBC count to the initial injection. Pain scores decreased after each injection and remained low for the 28-day follow-up, with some evidence of improved analgesic effect of the second dose compared with the first. There were no serious adverse events or discontinuations due to adverse events.

Conclusion

The lack of cumulative effect and rapid resolution of HPA suppression following repeated SP-102 dosing suggests that consideration of HPA pharmacodynamics is not clinically relevant when making decisions regarding repeat dosing. SP-102 ESIs provided prolonged pain relief, with preliminary evidence of greater efficacy after repeat injection. A phase III trial is ongoing.

Clinical Trial Identifier

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03613662.

Fluoroscopic Epidural Steroid Injection: Pain Relief in Discogenic Sciatica Versus Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. A Study on Middle Eastern Patients

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of epidural steroid injections (ESI) in patients with discogenic sciatica (Sci) versus patients with lumbar canal stenosis (LSS), not controlled by conservative treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In our study, 80 patients with Sci and 66 with LSS were included. A single ESI (10 mg dexamethasone in 3 cc 0.25% bupivacaine) was applied under fluoroscopic control: one level above the highest stenotic level, in the posterior epidural space, via interlaminar approach in LSS and at the prolapse level, in the anterior epidural space, via transforaminal route in Sci. Pain intensity was assessed by VAS at baseline and on days 1, 15 and 30 after intervention.

RESULTS

The procedure was successful in 78 Sci and 63 LSS patients. Patients with Sci responded significantly better. At one month, pain reduction over 50% was achieved in 63% (52.3-73.7% at p = 0.95) of Sci but only in 35% (23.2-46.8%) of LSS (p = 0.03). Return to pre-intervention level happened in 47% (34.7-59.3%) of LSS versus 14% (6.3-21.7%) of Sci patients (p = 0.01). In 5 patients the procedure failed, without resulting morbidity.

CONCLUSION

ESI are more effective in patients with Sci than in single level LSS. In multiple level LSS, results are disappointing.

The Benefit of Early Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Acute Sciatica-Associated Lower Back Pain: A Four-Year Case Series in Lebanon

Background Early epidural steroid injections are currently widely used for patients experiencing lumbago. However, there is uncertainty about their efficacy, such as the limitation of continuous drug infusion and the need for well-trained physicians on this technique. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of early epidural steroid injections in treating patients with acute sciatica in the lower back in terms of symptom relief and recurrence rate. Methods A case series was conducted in Lebanon from 2015 to 2019. We recruited 98 patients suffering from sciatica due to disc disease over three-time intervals: two weeks, one, and three months. The immediate results accounted for the intensity of various symptoms (numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain) and the assessment of patient satisfaction (Macnab criteria). Results The clinical results showed at least a three-point pain relief according to Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and a good grade according to MacNab (P <0.001), with only 10.4% of the total population having a positive leg raise test post-injection. The maximum benefit was noted after two weeks from the injection with a 5.7 mean change in NRS (p<0.001) with a good/excellent response in MacNab and a 4.9 change with only a good response after one month. This study noticed a rebound phenomenon where around half of the patients needed two steroid injections after three months (39.6 % after three months and 17.9 % after six months). Conclusion Even though current guidelines worldwide may suggest the use of conservative treatment for low back pain with acute sciatica, our study has demonstrated the effectiveness of epidural steroid injections in the Lebanese population with a significant outcome.

A Comparative Study Between Selective Nerve Root Blocks Versus Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection in the Management of Lumbar Radiculopathy

Lumbar radiculopathy is one of the most common disorders encountered by a spine surgeon. The condition involves back pain, which may radiate to the lower limbs, and neurological symptoms, which involve a specific nerve root. Caudal epidural steroid injections (CESIs) and selective nerve root blocks (SNRBs) are two of the most common interventions, which are used to control the pain and neurological symptoms associated with chronic lumbar radiculopathy. This study compares the two nonsurgical treatment procedures and aims to assist medical professionals dealing with this condition, in making an informed decision regarding which procedure would be better suited for their patients. Our study showed that CESIs better alleviated pain and had a greater improvement in functional impairment at short-term (one month) follow-up. However, both procedures had similar efficacy at three-month follow-up.

Optimizing Cervical Epidural Steroid Injections: A Case Report

Cervical radiculopathy is characterized by pain, numbness, and weakness in the upper limbs. This is typically caused by nerve root compression. While conservative treatments like physical therapy and oral analgesics are often used, they may not be effective in more severe cases. Cervical epidural steroid injections (CESIs), particularly through the interlaminar approach, may be considered when these initial treatments fail. This case report discusses a female patient with severe left upper extremity pain consistent with C5/6 and C6/7 radiculopathy who did not respond to conservative therapies. An interlaminar CESI was initially performed at the C7/T1 level, but the contrast flow was inadequate for effective drug delivery. Repositioning the needle at the C6/C7 interspace improved contrast distribution, successfully targeting the affected levels. The patient experienced a 90% reduction in symptoms three weeks after the procedure, underscoring the importance of accurate contrast flow assessment and needle placement in CESIs. This case highlights the effectiveness of CESI in treating cervical radiculopathy and the critical role of precise technique in achieving positive patient outcomes.

A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of long-acting dexamethasone viscous gel delivered by transforaminal injection for lumbosacral radicular pain

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03372161.

Radicular Pain Management Using Ultrasound-Guided Versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Epidural Steroid Injections: A Systematic Scoping Review of Comparative Studies

Back pain is the leading cause of disability globally and results in a substantial medical and economic burden. Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) have been widely used as a treatment for back pain with radiculopathy of various etiologies. Ultrasound guidance (UG) for delivering ESIs can reduce costs and facilitate the procedure in resource-limited settings compared to the current standard technique of using fluoroscopic guidance (FG). This scoping review aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between UG and FG ESIs in the treatment of radicular pain. Systematic searches of Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), CDSR (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), and ClinicalTrials.gov were conducted in accordance with PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews) guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies investigating the outcomes between UG and FG ESIs in the treatment of radicular pain were included. The risk of bias for included RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool. From 1,659 potentially relevant publications, eight studies (five RCTs and three retrospective comparative studies) were included. Five of the studies were conducted in the Republic of Korea, one in China, one in India, and one in Egypt. All studies reported no significant difference between UG and FG ESIs in success rate, pain index, and postoperative disability (p > 0.05). One study reported increased intravascular injections in the FG group, but this did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.05). One study reported decreased needle-placement time in the UG group (p < 0.001). One study reported decreased total operation time in the UG group (p < 0.05). Overall, treatment outcomes and adverse events profile are comparable between UG and FG ESIs for radicular pain. UG ESIs reduce costs, minimize radiation exposure, facilitate vessel identification, prevent injury, and potentially save intraoperative time while offering the same benefits as FG injections. Future studies should focus on long-term outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and the impact of UG ESIs on patient satisfaction and quality of life.

Effects of implementing evidence-based appropriateness guidelines for epidural steroid injection in chronic low back pain: the EAGER (Esi Appropriateness GuidElines pRotocol) study

Objective

Chronic low back pain is very common and often treated with epidural steroid injections (ESIs). As ESI referrals had been rapidly increasing at our Veterans’ Administration hospital, we were concerned that they were supplanting more comprehensive care. The objective was to determine how referral patterns and multidisciplinary care might change with the implementation of evidence-based guidelines.

Methods

In this retrospective observational study, multidisciplinary evidence-based guidelines were implemented in 2014 (EAGER: Esi Appropriateness GuidElines pRotocol) as part of the ordering process for an ESI. Time series analysis was performed to assess the primary outcome of subspecialty referral pattern, that is, the number of patients receiving referrals to ancillary services which might serve to provide a more comprehensive approach to their back pain. Secondary outcomes included patient-level changes (ie, body mass index, number of injections, opioid use), which were compared before and after protocol implementation.

Results

Comparing preimplementation and postimplementation protocol periods, referrals to physical medicine/rehabilitation increased 11.7% (p=0.003) per year and integrative health increased 2.1% (p<0.001) per year among the 2294 individual patients who received ESI through the neurointerventional radiology service. Of 100 randomly selected patients for patient-level analysis, the median body mass index decreased from 31.57 to 30.22 (p=<0.001) and the mean number of injections decreased from 1.76 to 0.73 (p<0.001). The percentage of patients using oral opioid analgesics decreased from 72% to 49% (p=<0.001).

Conclusion

Implementation of evidence-based guidelines for ESI referral helps guide patients into a more comprehensive care pathway for chronic low back pain and is correlated with patient-level changes such as decreased body mass index and decreased opioid usage.

Treatment With Opioids Is Not Associated With Poor Outcomes Among Older Adults With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Receiving Epidural Injections

STUDY DESIGN

Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE

To assess how baseline treatment with opioids is associated with pain and function in older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis who receive epidural injections.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Data were obtained from the Lumbar Epidural Steroid injections for Spinal Stenosis trial, a double-blind, multisite, randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Baseline treatment with opioids was assessed from electronic medical record prescription pharmacy data or from health utilization records collected from patients. We calculated adjusted changes in back pain numerical rating scale, leg pain numerical rating scale, and back-related disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire scores) from baseline to three weeks and to six weeks among patients treated and not treated with opioids at baseline using generalized linear regression.

RESULTS

Baseline treatment with opioids was not significantly associated with back pain intensity (adjusted difference in means at three weeks of follow-up between patients treated with opioids at baseline versus not [±95% CI, 0.1 (-0.7, 0.7)], leg pain intensity [-0.2 (-0.9, 0.4)], or back-related function [-0.8 (-2.1, 0.4)]. We found similar results at six weeks of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Among older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis who are receiving epidural injections, those treated with opioids at baseline had similar outcomes to those who were not.

Enhanced Pain Relief with Catheter-Guided Caudal Epidural Steroid Injections: A Case Series of Patients with Unilateral Lumbar Radicular Pain

Background

Caudal epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are a common intervention for lumbar radicular pain, but responses can be variable. When initial injections provide suboptimal relief, targeted approaches using an epidural catheter may enhance efficacy.

Case Series

We describe three patients with unilateral lumbar radicular pain who underwent caudal ESIs using a 22-gauge spinal needle. Each patient experienced suboptimal pain relief following the initial injection. Patient 1 reported only 30% improvement at the 2-week follow-up. Patient 2 initially experienced 80% pain relief, but this improvement lasted only 3 days, returning to baseline by the 2-week follow-up. Patient 3 reported 40% improvement at the 2-week follow-up. Given their limited response, all three patients underwent a repeat caudal ESI using an epidural catheter advanced toward the symptomatic side and area of interest. After the catheter-guided injection, Patient 1 experienced 70% pain relief, Patient 2 achieved 60% relief, and Patient 3 reported 100% relief, all assessed at the 2-week follow-up.

Conclusion

This case series highlights the potential benefit of catheter-guided caudal ESIs in patients with suboptimal responses to single-shot caudal injections. The improved outcomes suggest that targeted epidural drug delivery may enhance pain relief in select cases of unilateral lumbar radicular pain. Further research is needed to evaluate this approach's long-term efficacy and optimal patient selection.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Epidural Steroid Injections in Relieving Pain in a Single-Center Retrospective Cohort

Background Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are a common conservative treatment for mitigating radicular pain and are often used to relieve pain, increase function, and improve mobility. However, their efficacy and duration of pain relief are relatively unclear because of the variability in clinical indications, injection techniques, injection mixtures, the number of allowable injections, and the lack of standard and objective outcome measures in the literature. Objectives This study aimed to characterize the effectiveness of ESIs in improving pain, measured with numerical rating scale (NRS) scores, and their relationship with subsequent lumbar spine surgery within a one-year period. Methods Patients who received a lumbar ESI from January 2018 to March 2022 in the Keck Medical Center of the University of Southern California were identified. Only patients with a one-year follow-up and no traumatic injuries were included. Exclusion criteria included a prior lumbar ESI within five years prior to January 2018. Demographics, comorbidities, injection information, and NRS scores were extracted. NRS score comparisons were analyzed with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Significance was defined at p ≤ 0.05. Results A total of 143 ESI patients were identified. The patient population consisted of 62 (43.36%) male, 81 (56.64%) female, and a median age of 63 years (IQR: 51,73). Patients who were one- and five-months post-ESI had the greatest median change in NRS of -3 (IQR: -7,0) (p < 0.05 for all). At one year post-ESI, there was a median decrease in NRS scores by 2 (IQR: 0,5). Of the cohort, only 28 (27.20%) patients went on to have lumbar spine surgery within a year. Conclusion The data suggests ESIs may be effective at relieving pain for at least one year. The data provides some evidence that ESIs are most reliable at relieving pain up to the five-month mark, after which their efficacy decreases.