Clinical study on treatment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (Qi stagnation and blood stasis syndrome) with Gao's nape needle and Shentong Zhuyu decoction.

BACKGROUND: Cervical spondylotic radiculopathy is currently one of the common orthopedic diseases, mainly characterized by neck pain, stiffness, limited mobility, and related symptoms of nerve root compression, which seriously troubles people's work and life. METHODS: Ninety cases of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (Qi stagnation and blood stasis syndrome) were randomly divided into treatment group and control group, 45 cases in each group. The control group was treated with western medicine (nerve nutrition, pain relief, and circulation improvement drugs), and the treatment group was treated with Gao's nape needle combined with modified Shentong Zhuyu decoction on the basis of the control group. Before and after 2 weeks, TCM syndrome score, TCM curative effect, visual analogue scale score, numbness score, neck disability index score, related serum inflammatory factors (interleukin-10 [IL-10], interleukin-6 [IL-6], tumor necrosis factor-α [TNF-α]), related hemorheological indexes (plasma viscosity, high shear whole blood viscosity, low shear whole blood viscosity level) were used as evaluation indexes to evaluate the effect. RESULTS: After treatment, the total effective rate of the treatment group was 91.11%, which was better than that of the control group (78.78%), and the TCM syndrome scores of the 2 groups were decreased, the treatment group was better than that of the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P < .05). After treatment, the visual analogue scale score, numbness score, and neck disability index score were decreased in both groups, and the decrease in the treatment group was more significant than that in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P < .05). After treatment, the related serum inflammatory factors (IL-10, IL-6, TNF-α) and related hemorheological indexes (plasma viscosity, high-shear whole blood viscosity, low-shear whole blood viscosity) were decreased in both groups, and the decrease in the treatment group was more significant than that in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P < .05). CONCLUSION: The treatment of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (Qi stagnation and blood stasis syndrome) with Gao's nape needle and modified Shentong Zhuyu decoction can improve the curative effect of traditional Chinese medicine, improve the related discomfort symptoms (neck tenderness, adverse activity, numbness, etc), improve the neck function, reduce IL-10, IL-6, TNF-α, and other related serum inflammatory factors, and improve hemorheological indicators.

Comparison of Selective Nerve Root Pulsed Radiofrequency Vs Paramedian Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injection for the Treatment of Painful Cervical Radiculopathy.

BACKGROUND: Although there are studies evaluating ultrasound-guided selective nerve root pulsed radiofrequency (ULSD-SNRPRF) and fluoroscopy-guided paramedian cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injection (FL-CIESI) for the treatment of chronic cervical radicular pain, no study has compared the efficacy of these 2 methods. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of these 2 methods, their superiority to each other, and the incidence of adverse events. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Outpatient department of a single-center pain clinic. METHODS: Sixty patients who did not respond to conservative treatments for lower cervical radicular pain were randomly divided into 2 groups. One group underwent ULSD-SNRPRF (Group U), and the other underwent paramedian FL-CIESI (Group F). Patients were evaluated pretreatment, and 3 and 6 months posttreatment. The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) was used to assess clinical improvement, The Neck Disability Index (NDI) to assess improvement in functional disability, and the Self-Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs Pain Score (S-LANSS) to assess the treatment's effect on neuropathic pain. Clinically significant pain relief was defined as a 50% or more pain reduction in the NRS-11. The posttreatment reduction in medication consumption was assessed using the Medication Quantification Scale Version III (MQS III). We also evaluated whether there was a difference in treatment-related characteristics, such as procedure time and adverse events. RESULTS: The procedure time was significantly longer in Group U. Blood aspiration was observed in 2 patients in Group U and vascular spread in one patient in Group F, with no significant difference. At 3 and 6 months posttreatment, NRS-11 and NDI scores showed a significant decrease compared to the pretreatment scores in both groups; there was no difference between the groups. Both treatments effectively improved neuropathic pain, with no significant difference between the S-LANSS scores. There was no difference in the reduction of medication consumption between the groups. LIMITATIONS: There was no sham or control group, and the follow-up period was limited to 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Pain relief, functional improvement, and safety were similar between groups. ULSD-SNRPRF and paramedian FL-CIESI are 2 different effective techniques for chronic cervical radicular pain. The choice of method should depend on various factors, such as patient preference, operator experience, and availability of resources. An advantage of ULSD over fluoroscopy is that patients and physicians are not exposed to radiation.

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.

Ultrasound-guided and CT-guided selective cervical nerve root injection for the treatment of cervical radicular pain: A retrospective clinical study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effects and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided selective cervical nerve root injection (SCNI) and computed tomography (CT)-guided SCNI for patients with cervical radicular pain (CRP). METHODS: Forty-two CT-guided SCNI procedures (26 eligible patients) and forty-two US-guided SCNI procedures (25 eligible patients) performed to treat CRP were identified from the medical record system between October 2017 and July 2021 and enrolled in the study. The numeric rating scale was used to assess pre- and postprocedural pain levels, and the neck disability index was used to assess the level of function. All immediate and delayed clinical complications were also recorded. The cost of each procedure and the radiation dose of the CT procedure were documented. The follow-up data were obtained by telephone calls or outpatient visits. RESULTS: Five patients in the CT group and one patient in the US group were lost to follow-up at 1 year. No procedure-related complications were observed in either group. Significant pain relief and cervical function improvement were achieved after treatment in both the CT-guided SCNI and US-guided SCNI groups; however, there were no significant differences between the two groups. The average cost per CT-guided SCNI procedure was 133.2 USD, which was higher than the cost per US-guided SCNI procedure (42.2 USD). Meanwhile, the necessary radiation dose per patient in the CT group was 0.36 ± 0.08 mGy. CONCLUSIONS: US-guided SCNI and CT-guided SCNI have similar efficacy in treating CRP, but US-guided SCNI is radiation free and less costly than the CT-guided procedure.

Effect of Radiofrequency on Dorsal Root Ganglion Versus Transforaminal Steroids Injection on Tumor Necrosis Factor-Alpha Level in Lumbar Radicular Pain.

BACKGROUND: The mechanism of pain control with pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) is unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the efficacy of combined PRF on dorsal root ganglion (DRG) with transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) vs TFESI-alone on pain improvement and serum tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) level in lumbar disc-related radicular pain. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Neurology and Pain Management clinics. METHODS: A total of 80 patients with lumbar disc prolapse were divided into 2 groups: combined PRF on DRG with TFESI group and TFESI-alone group. The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Functional Rating Index (FRI) before intervention and at 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months after the intervention were observed. Serum TNF-a level was assessed pre- and post-intervention at 3 months. RESULTS: The scores of NRS-11, ODI, and FRI showed a significant improvement at 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months following intervention in both combined PRF & TFESI group and TFESI-alone group (P < 0.001 in all comparisons), with no significant difference between the 2 groups. Serum TNF-a levels showed a statistically significant reduction, 3 months following intervention in the combined PRF & TFESI group (P < 0.001), but not in the TFESI-alone group (P = 0.297) (P between groups < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: The main limitation of this study is that TNF-a level was not assessed earlier to see how long the steroids might reduce TNF-a. On the other hand, further study with extended follow-up periods is needed to confirm the long-term lowering effect of TNF-a provided by PRF. CONCLUSIONS: Combined PRF on DRG with TFESI showed similar outcomes to TFESI-alone in relieving pain in patients with lumbar disc prolapse. However, PRF on DRG caused a significant decrease in TNF-a serum levels at 3 months.

N-Acetyl Cysteine as an Add-on Therapy is Useful in Treating Acute Lumbar Radiculopathy Caused by Disc Herniation: Results of a Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Available experimental and clinical evidence indicates that N-Acetyl cysteine (NAC) may have an analgesic role in specific pain conditions, particularly neuropathic pain. Thus, we hypothesized that NAC supplementation might be also helpful in decreasing pain and improving pain-related disability in patients with acute radiculopathy. We designed this study to investigate the potential use of NAC-adjunctive treatment to Nonsteroidal Anti- Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with acute radiculopathy secondary to lumbar intervertebral disc herniation. METHODS: Sixty-two patients diagnosed with acute lumbar radiculopathy associated with disc herniation were randomly allocated to the NAC or the placebo groups. Besides naproxen at a dose of 500 mg twice a day, participants based on their allocation group started with NAC or matched placebo at a dose of 600 mg twice a day for eight weeks. The pain severity, measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and pain-related disability measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were measured at baseline and weeks 2, 4, and 8 of treatment. Global improvement of symptoms rated by Patient and Clinical Global Impressions of Change (PGIC and CGIC) was also recorded at the end of week 8. All analyses were conducted on an Intentionto- Treat (ITT) analysis data set. RESULTS: A comparison of the VAS and ODI scores at weeks 2 and 4 of the treatment between the two groups did not show a significant difference. In contrast, from week 4 to week 8, we noticed a significantly greater reduction in the mean VAS and ODI scores in the NAC group compared to the placebo group (p-value <0.001 for both variables). In parallel with these results, also, more NAC-treated than placebo-treated patients achieved treatment success defined as ''very much'' or ''much improved'' on CGIC and PGIC scales, and these differences reached a significant level (p-value = .011 and p-value = .043). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested that NAC might be a relevant candidate for adjunct therapy in managing acute lumbar radiculopathy. Additional clinical trials are needed to validate these findings.

Does a Positive Response to Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection Identify Patients Who Can Avoid Surgery for Two Years?

Background: Transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) is widely used to manage lumbar radiculopathy. In clinical settings, patients often undergo repeated transforaminal epidural injections with or without steroid administration. Objectives: To examine whether a positive response to TFESI at the first month, can in clinical settings, identify patients with radiculopathy who can avoid surgery for two years. Study Design/Setting. This prospective observational study was conducted at an academic medical center. Methods: Individuals aged ≥20 years who had been referred to our pain center by spine surgeons were enrolled. All patients were assessed using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline and 1 month after the first TFESI. Patients were divided into two groups according to the NRS decrement: the positive response (PR) group achieved a ≥2.0 decrease on the NRS 1 month after the first TFESI compared to baseline and the no response (NR) group achieved a <2.0 decrease on the NRS. The incidence rates of surgery over two years were compared between the two groups. In addition, we calculated the hazard ratio of the PR group to the NR group regarding the incidence of surgery over two years using the Cox proportional hazard model, adjusting for baseline NRS. Results: Seventy-six patients completed the two-year follow-up. In total, 8 and 68 patients had bilateral and unilateral radiculopathy, respectively. The PR and NR groups included 35 and 41 patients, respectively. The rate of surgery avoidance was 85.7% and 73.2% in the PR and NR groups, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (p=0.26). After adjusting for baseline NRS, the hazard ratio of the PR group to the NR group regarding the incidence of surgery within two years was 0.35 (95% confidence interval: 0.11-1.11, p=0.08). Conclusion: A positive response to TFESI may not identify patients who can avoid surgery for two years.

Ultrasound-guided transforaminal epidural injection with fluoroscopy confirmation for the treatment of unilateral lumbar radiculopathy: A randomized controlled non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound (US)-guided injections for chronic pain has multiple advantages over traditional radiologic method. The study was performed to exam the clinical outcomes of lumbar transforaminal epidural injection (LTFEI) between US and fluoroscopy (FL) guidance for lumbar radiculopathy (LRP). METHODS: A total of 164 patients with LRP were randomly assigned into US and FL group to receive LTFEI in a 1:1 ratio. Pain relief and functional disability were assessed by numeric rating scale (NRS) and Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ) scores before treatment, 1 month and 3 months post-intervention. Contrast spread pattern, fluoroscopic image number and complications were also recorded. The primary outcome was accurate rate of contrast dispersing into lumbar epidural space, and non-inferiority margin was predefined at -15 %. RESULTS: The accuracy of LTFEI was 90.2 % and 91.5 % in US and FL group, and the lower limit of the 95 %CI of mean difference between two modalities (-4.9 % (95 %CI: -12.8 %, 3.1 %)) was above the non-inferiority margin. Procedure time in US group (531.90 ± 67.12 s) was shorter than FL group (904.20 ± 120.20 s) (p < 0.05), while radiation dosage in the US group was lower than in the FL group (3047.20 ± 569.53 vs. 8807.50 ± 1039.10 µGy m2, p < 0.001). Both groups didn't differ in pain reduction (F = 1.050, p = 0.306) and functional improvement (F = 0.103, p = 0.749) during follow-up period. No severe complications occurred in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: US-guided LTFEI confirmed by FL was not inferior to conventional FL method in terms of accurate rate of lumbar epidural contrast dispersion. Effective pain relief and functional ability improvement were comparable between two modalities, and US technique had advantages of less radiation exposure and possible facilitation of avoiding critical vessels around intervertebral foramen.

Caudal epidural steroid injection versus transforaminal ESI for unilateral S1 radiculopathy: a prospective, randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: Epidural steroid injections are frequently performed to manage radicular symptoms. Most research investigating the effectiveness of different routes of epidural injections were conducted with non-homogeneous groups. In this study our aim was to investigate the efficacy of caudal versus transforaminal approaches in patients with unilateral S1 radiculopathy secondary to a paracentral L5-S1 disc herniation. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized clinical trial. SETTING: A university hospital pain management center. METHODS: The study was conducted between January 2022 and February 2023. Patients with unilateral S1 radiculopathy were randomly divided into two groups: the caudal epidural steroid injection (CESI) and the transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) group. Severity of pain and disability were assessed with Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at baseline, 3 weeks, and 3 months after treatment. Fifty percent or more improvement in NRS-11 was defined as treatment success. Fluoroscopy time and doses of exposed radiation were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 60 patients were included in the final analysis (n = 30 for each group). Significant improvement in pain and disability scores was observed at 3rd week and 3rd month compared to baseline (P < .001). Treatment success rate at 3rd month was 77% for the CESI group and 73% for the TFESI group without any significant difference between the groups (P = .766). CONCLUSIONS: CESI is equally effective as TFESI in the management of S1 radiculopathy due to a paracentral L5-S1 disc herniation. Both approaches can reduce pain and disability, while CESI requires shorter fluoroscopy time and less radiation exposure.

[The use of a fixed combination of diclofenac and orphenadrine in the treatment of acute pain syndrome in patients with discogenic lumbosacral radiculopathy and lumboischialgia]. / Primenenie fiksirovannoi kombinatsii diklofenaka i orfenadrina v terapii ostrogo bolevogo sindroma u patsientov s diskogennoi poyasnichno-kresttsovoi radikulopatiei i lyumboishialgiei.

Acute pain syndromes caused by discogenic lumbosacral radiculopathy and lumboischialgia are not uncommon in clinical practice and characterized by a high risk of becoming chronic. The pathogenetic aspects, features of the clinical picture, existing approaches to conservative treatment of these conditions are analyzed in this paper. Data on the efficacy and safety of a fixed combination of diclofenac and orphenadrine (Neodolpasse) use in the treatment of vertebrogenic pain syndromes based on the NEODOLEX study results are presented, and the authors' own clinical observations are given. Possible reasons for the high efficacy of Neodolpasse in patients with discogenic radiculopathies and nonspecific back and neck pain are discussed.

Ultrasound-guided Versus Computed Tomography Fluoroscopy-assisted Cervical Transforaminal Steroid Injection for the Treatment of Radicular Pain in the Lower Cervical Spine: A Randomized Single-blind Controlled Noninferiority Study.

OBJECT: To estimate the contrast dispersion short-term clinical efficacy and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided transforaminal steroid injection (TFSI) compared with computed tomography (CT) guidance for the treatment of cervical radicular pain. METHOD: A total of 430 patients with cervical radicular pain from cervical herniated disk or cervical spondylosis were recruited in the randomized, single-blind, controlled, noninferiority trial. The patients were randomly assigned to receive either the US-guided or CT-guided TFSI for 1 affected cervical nerve. The dispersion pattern of contrast was monitored at the time of TFSI in both groups, using CT. Patients were assessed for pain intensity by numeric rating scale (NrS) and functional disability by Neck Disability Index (NDI) at baseline, 1 and 3 months after the intervention. Complications were also recorded. RESULTS: The satisfactory rate of contrast distribution was respectively 92.1% in US group and 95.8% in CT group. Pain reduction and functional improvement were showed in both groups during follow-up. Statistical difference was not observed in the decrease in NRS pain scores and NDI scores between 2 groups with F =1.050, P =0.306 at 1 month and F =0.103, P =0.749 at 3 months after intervention. No permanent and severe complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that US provided a noninferior injectate spread pattern and similar improvement of radicular pain and functional status when compared with CT-guided TFSI. US may be advantageous during this procedure because it allows visualization of critical vessels and avoids radiation exposure.

Benefits and harms of treatments for chronic nonspecific low back pain without radiculopathy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Currently, there are no published studies that compare nonpharmacological, pharmacological and invasive treatments for chronic low back pain in adults and provide summary statistics for benefits and harms. PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to compare the benefits and harms of treatments for the management of chronic low back pain without radiculopathy and to report the findings in a format that facilitates direct comparison (Benefit-Harm Scale: level 1 to 7). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, including trial registries, from electronic databases up to 23rd May 2022. PATIENT SAMPLE: Adults with chronic nonspecific low back pain, excluding radicular pain, in any clinical setting. OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of pain at immediate-term (≤2 weeks) and short-term (>2 weeks to ≤12 weeks) and serious adverse events using the Benefit-Harm Scale (level 1 to 7). METHODS: This was a registered systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Interventions included nonpharmacological (acupuncture, spinal manipulation), pharmacological and invasive treatments compared to placebo. Best evidence criteria was used. Two independent reviewers conducted eligibility assessment, data extraction and quality appraisal. RESULTS: The search retrieved 17,362 records. Three studies provided data on the benefits of interventions, and 30 provided data on harms. Studies included interventions of acupuncture (n=8); manipulation (n=2); pharmacological therapies (n=9), including NSAIDs and opioid analgesics; surgery (n=8); and epidural corticosteroid injections (n=3). Acupuncture (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.51, 95%CI -0.88 to -0.14, n=1 trial, moderate quality of evidence, benefit rating of 3) and manipulation (SMD -0.39, 95%CI -0.56 to -0.21, n=2 trials, moderate quality of evidence, benefit rating of 5) were effective in reducing pain intensity compared to sham. The benefit of the other interventions was scored as uncertain due to not being effective, statistical heterogeneity preventing pooling of effect sizes, or the absence of relevant trials. The harms level warnings were at the lowest (eg, indicating rarer risk of events) for acupuncture, spinal manipulation, NSAIDs, combination ingredient opioids, and steroid injections, while they were higher for single ingredient opioid analgesics (level 4) and surgery (level 6). CONCLUSIONS: There is uncertainty about the benefits and harms of all the interventions reviewed due to the lack of trials conducted in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain without radiculopathy. From the limited trials conducted, nonpharmacological interventions of acupuncture and spinal manipulation provide safer benefits than pharmacological or invasive interventions. However, more research is needed. There were high harms ratings for opioids and surgery.

Predictive factors for favorable short-term response to interlaminar epidural block for cervical radiculopathy.

PURPOSE: We sought to identify clinical predictors of favorable short-term outcomes associated with cervical interlaminar epidural injection (CIEI). Previous studies investigating the predictive factors of CIEI efficacy have shown inconsistent results. Gaining information on the possible response determinants of CIEI is necessary for appropriate treatment selection and outcomes prediction in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical data of 72 patients who received fluoroscopic-guided CIEI using the paramedian approach for cervical radiculopathy to identify the predictive factors for short-term outcomes of CIEI. Demographic characteristics, history of neck surgery, diagnosis, initial numeric rating score, duration of symptoms, Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) questions, painDETECT questionnaire, neck disability index, and ventral epidural spread of contrast medium were assessed. Treatment success was defined as at least a 50% reduction in the numeric rating score after CIEI and was designated as a good response. RESULTS: The short-term success rate of CIEI for cervical radiculopathy was 55.56%. Multivariate logistic regression analysis established that spinal stenosis (odds ratio 0.183; P = 0.012), a longer duration of > 24 weeks of symptoms (odds ratio 0.206; P = 0.026), and combined positive results for the DN4 and painDETECT (odds ratio, 0.019; P = 0.008) decreased the odds ratio of a good response, 2-3 weeks after CIEI. CONCLUSIONS: CIEI provides a significant short-term outcome in patients with cervical radiculopathy. However, CIEI efficacy may be negatively affected in patients with spinal stenosis, the presence of a chronic state, and a possible neuropathic pain component.

Treatment of Sciatica and Lumbar Radiculopathy with an Intervertebral Foramen Opening Protocol: Pilot Study in a Hospital Emergency and In-patient Setting.

AIMS: Perform a pilot study of a static nerve root foramen opening protocol for lumbar radiculopathy from disc hernia in an emergency hospital setting to establish if patients could execute the protocol, consistency would occur across outcomes, superior outcomes would occur in the experimental group, and if the protocol would be safe. METHODS: Patients with sciatica arrived of their own volition at the local emergency hospital department, were admitted for care and were randomized into two groups: 1) control (n = 10): forward bending, walking, and medication; and 2) experimental (n = 10) as control subjects, plus a static lumbar foramen opening protocol using flexion and contralateral lateral flexion (side-lying). Outcomes were back and leg pain (i.e. visual analog scale), disability (i.e. EuroQol5D5L and Oswestry) and straight leg raise. RESULTS: At admission, the baseline outcome variables between groups were not significantly different. All patients had moderate or large disc hernias on MRI and 75% had neurological deficits in electrophysiology. At discharge, patients in the experimental group were significantly better (p ≤ .05) than controls in all outcomes. Statistical analysis of the outcomes produced greater significance, effect sizes and minimal clinically important differences in the experimental group. Patients in the experimental group consumed less medication than control patients (21% versus 79%), including less than half the opioids (tramadol). No adverse responses occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Patients could perform the protocol and superior outcomes occurred, with no adverse effects. The data support more detailed study of therapeutic efficacy, days in hospital, costs, conversion to surgery, and medication consumption, including opioids.

CT-guided vs. fluoroscopically guided transforaminal epidural steroid injections for lumbar radiculopathy: a comparison of efficacy, safety and cost.

INTRODUCTION: There are no formal guidelines for whether CT-guided or fluoroscopy-guided TFESI should be undertaken for patients with symptoms of lumbar nerve root irritation and corresponding nerve impingement. Here, we sought to compare the efficacy, safety and cost of computer tomography (CT)-guided and fluoroscopically guided transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent lumbar TFESI at our institution between June 2016 and June 2018 were identified. Six-week follow-up outcomes were categorised. The radiation doses and associated cost was retrieved from our institution's costing system. RESULTS: One hundred and sixteen patients were included (CT-50; fluoroscopy-56). There were no complications. More patients were discharged 6 weeks after CT-guided lumbar TFESI when compared with fluoroscopically guided TFESI (CT-23, fluoroscopy-14 (P = 0.027)). There was no difference in the number of patients who were referred to surgery (P = 0.18), for further pain management (P = 0.45), or for further TFESI (P = 0.43). The effective radiation dose was significantly higher for CT-guided TFESI (CT-5.73 mSv (3.87 to 7.76); fluoroscopy-0.55 mSv (0.11 to 1.4) (P < 0.01)). The total cost for CT-guided lumbar TFESI was £237.50 (£235 to £337), over £800 less than under fluoroscopic guidance (£1052 (£892.80 to £1298.00), P < 0.01)). Removing cost associated with staff and theatre use (staffing, theatre, medical indemnity and overheads) revealed CT-guided lumbar TFESI to be less expensive than if the procedure was fluoroscopy-guided-CT-guided: £132.6 (130.8 to 197.5); fluoroscopy: £237.4 (£209.2 to £271.9) (P = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: CT-guided TFESI was associated with a higher discharge rate, a lower cost, but a ten times higher radiation dose when compared with fluoroscopically guided TFESI. Prospective studies are required to compare the efficacy of these procedures and to investigate how the radiation dose of CT-guided TFESI can be reduced without jeopardising efficacy or safety.

Comparative Effects of Different Epidural Injection Approaches on Lumbosacral Radicular Pain: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is the main cause of low back pain and/or radiculopathy. Currently, epidural intervention is a widely used and effective conservative treatment method for managing low back and radicular pain caused by LDH. OBJECTIVES: To explore the effectiveness of different epidural injection approaches in adult patients with lumbosacral radicular pain. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: An electronic literature search was performed in the Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. Two authors independently performed data extraction and quality assessment. A Bayesian random effects model was conducted to incorporate the estimates of direct and indirect treatment comparisons and rank the interventions in order. Effect estimates from Bayesian NMA were presented as mean difference (MD) with 95% credible intervals (CrI). RESULTS: This NMA assessed caudal (C), interlaminar (IL), transforaminal (TF) and parasagittal interlaminar (PIL) epidural injection approaches for lumbosacral radicular pain from 7 trials. A statistically significant treatment difference for pain relief was reported for midline interlaminar (MIL) vs PIL (MD, 1.16; 95%CrI, 0.31-2.06), MIL vs TF (MD, 1.12; 95%CrI, 0.51-1.85), C vs TF (MD, 1.07; 95%CrI, 0.01-2.18) in short-term follow-up and MIL vs TF (MD, 1.8; 95% CrI, 0.3-3.48) in intermediate-term follow-up. For functional improvement, a statistically significant difference was observed with MIL vs PIL (MD, 9.9; 95% CrI, 0.64-19.94) and MIL vs TF (MD, 1.08; 95% CrI, 1.08-17.08) in short-term follow-up. Moreover, the PIL approach and TF appeoach were ranked in the top 2 for pain relief and functional improvement, both in short-term and intermediate-term follow-up. LIMITATIONS: 1) The number of studies included was small; 2) some treatments lacked direct comparisons; 3) only scores from the visual analog scale for pain and the Oswestry Disability Index were included in the result; 4) important outcomes, such as complications, were not included. CONCLUSION: In short-term and intermediate-term follow-up, the PIL approach has the highest probability for pain relief and functional improvement.

Deep Learning Algorithm Trained on Lumbar Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Predict Outcomes of Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection for Chronic Lumbosacral Radicular Pain.

BACKGROUND: Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are widely used to alleviate lumbosacral radicular pain. Knowledge of the therapeutic outcomes of TFESI allows clinicians to elucidate therapeutic plans for managing lumbosacral radicular pain. Deep learning (DL) can outperform traditional machine learning techniques and learn from unstructured and perceptual data. A convolutional neural network (CNN) is a representative DL model. OBJECTIVES: We developed and investigated the accuracy of a CNN model for predicting therapeutic outcomes after TFESI for controlling chronic lumbosacral radicular pain using T2-weighted sagittal lumbar spine magnetic resonance (MR) images as input data. STUDY DESIGN: Imaging study using DL. SETTING: At the spine center of a university hospital. METHODS: We collected whole T2-weighted sagittal lumbar spine MR images from 503 patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain due to a herniated lumbar disc (HLD) and spinal stenosis. A "good outcome" was defined as a >= 50% reduction in the numeric rating scale (NRS-11) score at 2 months after TFESI vs the pretreatment NRS-11 score. A "poor outcome" was defined as a < 50% decrease in the NRS-11 score at 2 months after TFESI vs pretreatment. RESULTS: In the prediction of therapeutic outcomes after TFESI on the validation dataset, the area under the curve was 0.827. LIMITATIONS: Our study was limited in that we used a small amount of lumbar spine MR imaging data to train the CNN model. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that a CNN model trained, using whole lumbar spine sagittal T2-weighted MR images, could help determine outcomes after TFESI in patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain due to an HLD or spinal stenosis.

An open-label non-inferiority randomized trail comparing the effectiveness and safety of ultrasound-guided selective cervical nerve root block and fluoroscopy-guided cervical transforaminal epidural block for cervical radiculopathy.

OBJECT: To compare therapeutic efficacy and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided selective nerve root block (SNRB) and fluoroscopy (FL)-guided transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) for cervical spine radiculopathy (CSR). METHOD: 156 patients with CSR randomly received US-guided SNRB verified by FL or FL-guided TFESI. We hypothesised that the accuracy rate of contrast dispersion into epidural or intervertebral foraminal space in the US group was not inferior to that in the FL group with a margin of clinical unimportance of -15%. Pain intensity assessed by Numeric Rating Scales (NRS) and functional disability estimated by neck disability index (NDI) were compared before treatment, at 1, 3 and 6 months after the intervention. Puncture time and complication frequencies were also reported. RESULTS: 88.7% and 90.3% accuracy ratings were respectively achieved in the US and FL groups with a treatment difference of -1.6% (95%CI: -9.7%, 6.6%) revealing that the lower limit was above the non-inferiority margin. Both NRS and NDI scores illustrated improvements at 1, 3 and 6 months after intervention with no statistically significant differences between the two groups (all p > .05). Additionally, shorter administration duration was observed in the US group (p < .001). No severe complications were observed in both group. CONCLUSION: Compared with the FL group, the US group provided a non-inferior accuracy rate of epidural/foraminal contrast pattern. For the treatment of CSR, the US technique provided similar pain relief and functional improvements while facilitating distinguishing critical vessels adjacent to the foramen and requiring a shorter procedure duration without exposure to radiation. Therefore, it was an attractive alternative to the conventional FL method.Key messagesWe conducted a prospective, open-label, randomised and non-inferiority clinical trial to estimate a hypothesis that the precisely accurate delivery through ultrasound (US)-guided cervical selective nerve root block (SNRB) was non-inferior to that using FL-guided transforaminal epidural steroid injection. Additionally, US-guided SNRB was as effective as FL-guided TFESI in the treatment effect on pain relief and function improvements. Notably, the US technique might be an alternative to the conventional FL method due to the ability to prevent inadvertent vascular puncture (VP) and intravascular injection (IVI) with a shorter administration time and absence of radiation exposure.

Adalimumab Mitigates Lumbar Radiculopathy in a Case of Ankylosing Spondylitis.

BACKGROUND Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is an immune-mediated chronic inflammatory condition grouped under spondyloarthritis (SpA), which is an umbrella term for a group of interrelated inflammatory rheumatic conditions with characteristic radiographic findings such as erosions and ankylosis of the sacroiliac joint. Unfortunately, there is an average delay of 8-9 years between the onset of the symptoms and diagnosis due to infrequent consideration of this disease in the differential diagnosis of patients with low back pain and unusual or incomplete presenting clinical symptoms. CASE REPORT We describe the case of a 37-year-old male patient with no significant past medical history and surgical history of bilateral hip arthroplasty secondary to idiopathic aseptic necrosis of the bilateral femoral head and bilateral rotator cuff repaired surgery due to multiple motor vehicle accidents (MVA) with a chief concern of chronic low back pain. In this case of ankylosing spondylitis presenting with low back pain and radicular symptoms, his symptoms were resistant to multiple opioid medications, trigger point injections, and epidural steroid injections. Initiation of adalimumab subsequently relieved the patient's symptoms and restored his ability to perform daily activities. CONCLUSIONS This is an unusual presentation of AS with radiographic evidence of bilateral sacroiliitis. The neurological manifestations in AS are not uncommon, and they can occur during the quiescent stage of the disease. It should be emphasized that early diagnosis is essential to prevent progression of the disease and avoid unnecessary treatment for the patient.

Ultrasound-guided Cervical Retro-laminar Block for Cervical Radicular Pain: A Comparative Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN AND OBJECTIVE: Cervical radiculopathy is a common clinical condition, often treated with cervical epidural steroid injections (ESI). Retro-laminar cervical blocks (RLCB) may be considered safer than ESI as they do not require entering the neuroaxis.In this study, we evaluated the outcome of RLCB in patients with cervical radiculopathy who had failed conservative treatment and were candidates for cervical spine decompression surgery. BACKGROUND DATA: Recently, we reported a clinical pilot study investigating the treatment of cervical radiculopathy with an ultrasound-guided RLCB. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective, comparative analysis of prospectively collected data was carried out on the medical records of all patients who underwent RLCB for cervical radicular pain, between August 2019 and March 2021. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were included in the analysis, with a total of 139 procedures.A significant pain reduction was achieved for most patients immediately after the procedure and at the final follow up (16.9±13.4 wk). The mean numerical rating scale for the whole cohort changed from 7.21±2.51 to 4.04±2.51 ( P -value <0.01) at the time of discharge, with similar patterns at the subgroup level. A functional evaluation was carried out by a questionnaire (Neck Disability Index-NDI). Overall, 83% of patients had a lower postprocedural NDI than preprocedural NDI. For 80% of patients, the improvement of NDI surpassed the minimal clinically important change at the final assessment. Most patients (61%) were discharged after just one RLCB. Eight patients (8%) eventually underwent surgery. The most frequent complaint was injection site soreness; however, there were no major adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that RLCB can be performed as an alternative to cervical ESI and decompressive surgery in patients with cervical radicular pain that's refractory to noninvasive treatment. More comparative and prospective studies are needed to confirm our results.