Long-term effectiveness of transforaminal anterolateral approach CT-guided cervical epidural steroid injections for cervical radiculopathy treatment.

AIM: To evaluate the long-term clinical effectiveness of computed tomography (CT)-guided transforaminal cervical epidural steroid injection using an anterolateral approach for the treatment of cervical radiculopathy (CR) using well-established robust clinical scoring systems for neck pain and neck disability. Despite its widespread use, evidence to support the long-term benefit of routine cervical epidural steroid injection is currently very limited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 113 patients with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-confirmed CR who underwent a steroid injection at a single cervical level via a unilateral transforaminal anterolateral approach. Pain was assessed quantitatively at pre-injection, 15 minutes post-injection, 1 month, 3 months, and at 1 year. Neck disability was assessed using the Oswestry Neck Disability Index (NDI) at pre-injection, 1 month, 3 months, and 1 year time points. RESULTS: Eighty patients completed the study. Sixty per cent reported reduced neck pain (mean pain reduction, 55%), which was clinically significant in 45% cases. Furthermore, 66% reported an improvement in neck disability (mean improvement, 51%), which was clinically significant for 56% patients. Clinically significant good outcomes in both neck pain and neck disability were evident from as early as 1-month, and importantly, were independent both of pre-treatment CR characteristics (including severity of pre-injection neck pain or disability) and of findings on pre-injection MRI imaging. CONCLUSION: Transforaminal anterolateral approach CT-guided epidural steroid injection resulted in a clinically significant long-term improvement in both neck pain and disability for half of the present cohort of patients with unilateral single-level CR. This improvement was independent of the severity of the initial symptoms and pre-injection MRI findings.

Contrast flow in CT-guided lumbar interlaminar epidural steroid injections: does needle position effect the laterality of contrast flow?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of needle position on the laterality of contrast flow in CT-guided lumbar interlaminar epidural steroid injections. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive CT-guided interlaminar lumbar epidural steroid injections was performed. The terminal needle tip position (midline or lateral) and the laterality of epidural contrast were evaluated by two readers. Contrast flow pattern was classified as ipsilateral to needle trajectory, bilateral, or contralateral. Bilateral flow was further divided into asymmetric, symmetrical, or asymmetric to the contralateral side. Inter-reader agreement was calculated with the kappa statistic. The relationship of needle position to contrast laterality was calculated with the chi statistic. Pain scores were compared for bilateral and unilateral flows with a two-tailed T test for independent means. RESULTS: A total of 250 injections were included in 204 patients, with an age range of 24 to 93 years. The most commonly injected level (145/250) was L4-L5. Agreement between the two readers was almost perfect and substantial (kappa 0.751-0.880). The majority of injections (154/250) demonstrated contrast flow ipsilateral to the needle trajectory, 90/250 demonstrated bilateral flow, and 6/250 had contralateral flow. Of the 90 cases with bilateral flow, 80% were performed with a midline terminal needle position (p < 0.001). There was no difference in immediate post-procedure pain scores between patients with ipsilateral or bilateral contrast flow. CONCLUSION: For interlaminar epidural steroid injections, a midline terminal needle tip position has a greater probability of producing bilateral contrast flow compared to a lateral terminal needle tip position.

Results from an expedited spinal nerve root block clinic at a UK tertiary neurosurgical centre.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Observational Study. INTRODUCTION: Lumbar radicular pain has a prevalence of 3-5%. Level 1 evidence has demonstrated equivalence between surgical and injection treatment. We assess the outcomes from a transforaminal epidural steroid injection clinic in a tertiary neuroscience referral centre. METHODS: We performed an analysis of data from consecutive patients entered into a new internal referral database between August 2018 to May 2021. Radicular pain was classified as one of "first presentation" or "recurrence". Outcomes were obtained from follow up clinic letters and recorded in a binary manner of "positive result" or "negative result". Spinal pathology was documented from radiology reports and MRI images. RESULTS: We analysed 208 patients referred to the clinic. Excluding those who improved to a point of not requiring treatment, and those who underwent surgical intervention, 119 patients undergoing injection were included, of which 14 were lost to follow-up. 68 % of patients had a positive result from injection. Subgroup analysis demonstrated good outcomes for both hyperacute (<6 weeks) and chronic (>12 months). Contained disk pathologies had better outcomes than uncontained. There was no difference in outcomes across grades of compression, but previous same level surgery was associated with poorer response rates. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high rate of natural resolution of symptoms in patients with LSRP. In those where pain persists, TFESI is a valuable first line treatment modality. This study suggests the efficacy of TFESI is potentially independent of grade of stenosis and chronicity of symptoms. Contained disc pathologies respond better than uncontained.

Combined Ultrasound and Fluoroscopy versus Ultrasound versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection for the Treatment of Unilateral Lower Lumbar Radicular Pain: A Retrospective Comparative Study.

Background and Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the mid-term effectiveness and safety of a combined ultrasound (US) and fluoroscopy (FL)-guided approach in comparison to US-guided and FL-guided caudal epidural steroid injections (CESI) for treating unilateral lower lumbar radicular pain. Materials and Methods: A total of 154 patients who underwent CESI between 2018 and 2022 were included. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the guidance method: combined US and FL (n = 51), US-guided (n = 51), and FL-guided (n = 52). The study design was retrospective case-controlled, utilizing patient charts and standardized forms to assess clinical outcomes, adverse events, complications during the procedures. Results: In all groups, Oswestry Disability Index and Verbal Numeric Scale scores improved at 1, 3, and 6 months after the last injection, with no significant differences between groups (p < 0.05). The treatment success rate at all time points was also similar among the groups. Logistic regression analysis showed that injection method, cause, sex, age, number of injections, and pain duration did not independently predict treatment success. Blood was aspirated before injection in 2% (n = 1), 13.5% (n = 7), and 4% (n = 2) of patients in the combined US and FL groups, FL-guided groups, and US-guided groups, respectively. Intravascular contrast spread was detected in one patient in the combined method groups and seven in the FL-guided groups. Conclusions: When comparing pain reduction and functional improvement, there was no significant difference between the three methods. The combined method took less time compared to using FL alone. The combined approach also showed a lower occurrence of intravascular injection compared to using FL alone. Moreover, blood vessels at the injection site can be identified with an ultrasound using the combined method. Given these advantages, it might be advisable to prioritize the combined US- and FL-guided therapy when administering CESI for patients with unilateral lumbar radicular pain.

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.

CT-guided Pulsed Radiofrequency Combined with Steroid Injection for Sciatica from Herniated Disk: A Randomized Trial.

Background Evidence regarding effective nonsurgical management of sciatica remains limited. Purpose To determine a difference in effectiveness between combined pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) treatment versus TFESI alone for sciatic pain due to lumbar disk herniation. Materials and Methods This prospective multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted between February 2017 and September 2019 in participants with sciatica due to lumbar disk herniation lasting 12 weeks or longer that was not responsive to conservative treatment. Study participants were randomly assigned to undergo one CT-guided treatment with combined PRF and TFESI (n = 174) or TFESI alone (n = 177). The primary outcome was leg pain severity, as assessed with the numeric rating scale (NRS) (range, 0-10) at weeks 1 and 52 after treatment. Secondary outcomes included Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) score (range, 0-24) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score (range, 0-100). Outcomes were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle via linear regression. Results Mean age of the 351 participants (223 men) was 55 years ± 16 (SD). At baseline, NRS was 8.1 ± 1.1 in the PRF and TFESI group and 7.9 ± 1.1 in the TFESI group. NRS was 3.2 ± 0.2 in the PRF and TFESI group and 5.4 ± 0.2 in the TFESI group (average treatment effect, 2.3; 95% CI: 1.9, 2.8; P < .001) at week 1 and 1.0 ± 0.2 and 3.9 ± 0.2 (average treatment effect, 3.0; 95% CI: 2.4, 3.5; P < .001), respectively, at week 52. At week 52, the average treatment effect was 11.0 (95% CI: 6.4, 15.6; P < .001) for ODI and 2.9 (95% CI: 1.6, 4.3; P < .001) for RMDQ, favoring the combined PRF and TFSEI group. Adverse events were reported in 6% (10 of 167) of participants in the PRF and TFESI group and in 3% (six of 176) of participants in the TFESI group (eight participants did not complete follow-up questionnaires). No severe adverse events occurred. Conclusion In the treatment of sciatica caused by lumbar disk herniation, pulsed radiofrequency combined with transforaminal epidural steroid injection is more effective for pain relief and disability improvement than steroid injection alone. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Jennings in this issue.

Efficacy of ultrasound guided caudal epidural steroid injection with or without ozone in patients with lumbosacral canal stenosis; a randomized clinical controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Lumbosacral canal stenosis is known as the most common cause of back surgery with several complications. Selecting a minimally invasive treatment with high efficacy in such patients is necessary. This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of ozone therapy in combination with caudal epidural steroid in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: A double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted on 50 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis allocated into two study groups. Under ultrasound guidance, the first group received 80 mg of triamcinolone hexavalent with 4 mL of Marcaine 0.5% and 6 mL of distilled water to the caudal epidural space. The second group received an injection similar to the first group, combined with 10 mL of ozone (O2-O3) gas at a concentration of 10 µg/cc. The patients were followed at baseline, one, and six months after injection with clinical outcomes measures using Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Walking Distance (WD) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). RESULTS: The mean age of subjects, 30 males (60%) and 20 females (40%), was reported as 64.51 ± 7.19 years old. Reduction of pain intensity based on VAS score was statistically significant in both groups at follow-up periods (P < 0.001). The VAS changes in the first month and sixth months showed no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.28 and P = 0.33, respectively). The improvement in disability index (ODI) in both types of treatment during follow-up was significant (P < 0.0001), and there was no difference between the two treatment groups in one month and six months (P = 0.48 and P = 0.88, respectively). As for walking distance, the improvement process with both types of treatment during follow-up periods was significant (P < 0.001). However, after one and six months of treatment, the rate of improvement in patients' walking distance in the caudal epidural steroid injection plus ozone group was significantly higher than in the epidural steroid group (p = 0.026 and p = 0.017, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the results of VAS and ODI outcomes showed that caudal epidural steroid injection combined with ozone has no advantage over caudal epidural steroid injection alone. Interestingly, our results demonstrated that the group receiving caudal epidural steroid injection plus ozone scored significantly higher on the walking distance index than the group receiving caudal epidural steroid alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: IRCT IRCT20090704002117N2 (registration date: 07/08/2019).

Interlaminar versus transforaminal epidural steroid injections: a review of efficacy and safety.

Spine intervention is an important treatment option for the management of spinal pain, and the numbers of the most representative epidural steroid injection (ESI) procedures performed are expected to increase significantly in the future along with increased life expectancy and the increasing prevalence of spinal disorders. Therefore, it is important to understand the efficacy of ESIs according to each spinal disorder they are administered to treat, and one must be familiar with the possible complications. In fact, although numerous ESI-related articles have been published, there is still considerable controversy regarding the efficacy of ESI procedures. Furthermore, due to the rarity of serious complications, most instances have been recorded in the form of case reports. In this article, we aimed to review the indications of cervical and lumbar ESIs and to compare interlaminar ESI (ILESI) and transforaminal ESI (TFESI) techniques in terms of analgesic efficacy, possible complications, and safety profiles. This article includes opinions based on the authors' experience with ESI indications and efficacy, and presents practical tips for coping with specific situations related to each complication. By combining the dedicated anatomical understanding of radiologists with image-guided interventions, ESI is expected to stand out in the rapidly expanding field of spine intervention.

Spine injections: the rationale for CT guidance.

Back pain is one of the most common medical problems and is associated with high socioeconomic costs. Imaging-guided spinal injections are a minimally invasive method to evaluate where the back pain is originating from, and to treat patients with radicular pain or spinal stenosis with infiltration of corticosteroids. CT-guided spine injections are a safe procedure, characterized by precise needle placement, excellent visualization of the relevant anatomical structures, and low radiation exposure for the patient and the interventional radiologist. In this review article, the variety of applications of CT-guided injections (focused on nerve roots and epidural injections) and the optimal injection procedure as well as risks and side effects are discussed.

Rationale for fluoroscopic guidance in spine injections.

Spine injections are commonly performed in the treatment of back pain. The purpose of this article is to review the current literature surrounding image guided spine injections focusing on scenarios where fluoroscopic guidance can be advantageous in addition to discussing similarities among the different modalities.

An update on epidural steroid injections: is there still a role for particulate corticosteroids?

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) play an important role in the multifaceted management of neck and back pain. Corticosteroid preparations used in ESIs may be considered "particulate" or "non-particulate" based on whether they form a crystalline suspension or a soluble clear solution, respectively. In the past two decades, there have been reports of rare but severe and permanent neurological complications as a result of ESI. These complications have principally occurred with particulate corticosteroid preparations when using a transforaminal injection technique at cervical or thoracic levels, and only rarely in the lumbosacral spine. As a result, some published clinical guidelines and recommendations have advised against the use of particulate corticosteroids for transforaminal ESI, and the FDA introduced a warning label for injectable corticosteroids regarding the risk of serious neurological adverse events. There is growing evidence that the efficacy of non-particulate corticosteroids for pain relief and functional improvement after ESI is non-inferior to particulate agents, and that non-particulate injections almost never result in permanent neurological injury. Despite this, particulate corticosteroids continue to be routinely used for transforaminal epidural injections. More consistent clinical guidelines and societal recommendations are required alongside increased awareness of the comparative efficacy of non-particulate agents among specialists who perform ESIs. The current role for particulate corticosteroids in ESIs should be limited to caudal and interlaminar approaches, or transforaminal injections in the lumbar spine only if initial non-particulate ESI resulted in a significant but short-lived improvement.

Effect of sacralization on the success of lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injection treatment: prospective clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to invastigate the effect of the sacralization on the results of transforaminal epidural steroid injection for radicular low back pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 64 patients diagnosed with radicular low back pain due to unilateral and single-level lumbar disk herniation. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients with sacralization (Group S) and patients without lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (Group A). Injection was applied to the relevant level. Patients were evaluated with Numeric Rating Scale and Modified Oswestry Disability Index before, at week 3 and month 3 after the procedure. Sacralization presence was determined by MRI. Sacralization was categorized by anteroposterior lumbar radiography using Castellvi classification. Treatment success was considered as ≥ 50% reduction in NRS scores. RESULTS: Numeric Rating Scale and Modified Oswestry Disability Index scores decreased in both groups on both week 3 and month 3 (p < 0.05). Pain scores of Group S (median value 5 (3-6)) were significantly higher than Group A ((median value 3 (0-5)) in the third month follow-up (p = 0.026), but no significant difference was observed at other time points. There was no significant difference in Modified Oswestry Disability Index scores between the groups at all follow-ups (p > 0.05). Treatment success in the third month was 44.8% in Group S and 65.6% in Group A. CONCLUSION: Transforaminal epidural steroid injection is an effective and safe method for radicular low back pain. Sacralization presence should be evaluated before treatment considering that it may be a risk factor reducing treatment success.

A comparison between effectiveness of gluteal trigger point and epidural steroid injection in lumbosacral canal stenosis patients: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Lumbosacral Spinal Stenosis (LSS) is a degenerative spine disease and a major cause of pain and disability, especially in geriatrics. Primary symptom control in patients with LSS includes conservative treatment and non-surgical methods. In this study, we aimed to compare the effect of steroid injection via epidural and gluteal trigger point techniques. METHODS: Patients aged 40-75 years old who had pain and other clinical signs of spinal stenosis in the last 6 months were included in our study and divided into two groups of gluteal trigger point (TP) or epidural steroid injection (ESI). The patients were evaluated based on the visual analog scale (VAS), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the Quebec back pain disability scales during their pre-injection period and 2 weeks after follow-ups till 8 weeks. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients were included in our study. The TP group had a significant decrease in comparison with their follow-ups; however, in the epidural group, the significant decrease was only observed compared to the pre-injection period and the scores did not have any significant decreases after the second week regarding the ODI, RQM, and VAS scales. The TP group demonstrated significantly higher scores of decreases of ODI and Quebec score compared to the epidural group at weeks 4 and 8. Regarding RQM, the TP groups demonstrated significantly higher scores of decreases compared to the epidural group at weeks 2, 4 and 8. (p < 0.001 p = 0.008, and p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Both epidural and TP steroid injection significantly reduced the patients' pain and improved their QoL and function; however, more satisfactory results were observed in the TP group during the patients' follow-ups, while the epidural group demonstrated only statistically significant improvement during the short-term follow-up.

Evaluation of an automatic approach device to the epidural space of Beagle dogs.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the epidural anesthesia device (EPIA), which facilitates an automatic approach to location of the epidural space, with the performance of clinicians using tactile sensation and differences in pressure when inserting an epidural needle into the epidural space of a dog. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, crossover experiment. ANIMALS: A total of 14 Beagle dogs weighing 7.5 ± 2.4 kg (mean ± standard deviation). METHODS: Each dog was anesthetized three times at 2 week intervals for three anesthesiologists (two experienced, one novice) to perform 14 epidural injections (seven manual and EPIA device each). The sequence of methods was assigned randomly for each anesthesiologist. The dogs were anesthetized with medetomidine (10 µg kg-1), alfaxalone (2 mg kg-1) and isoflurane and positioned in sternal recumbency with the pelvic limbs extended cranially. Epidural puncture in the manual method was determined by pop sensation, hanging drop technique and reduced injection pressure, whereas using the device a sudden decrease in reaction force on the device was detected. A C-arm identified needle placement in the epidural space, and after administration of iohexol (0.3 mL), the needle length in the epidural space was defined as the mean value measured by three radiologists. Normality was tested using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, and significant differences between the two methods were analyzed using an independent sample t test. RESULTS: In both methods, the success rates of epidural insertion were the same at 95.2%. The length of the needle in the epidural space using the device and manual methods was 1.59 ± 0.50 and 1.68 ± 0.88 mm, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.718). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: EPIA device was comparable to human tactile sense for an epidural needle insertion in Beagle dogs. Further research should be conducted for application of the device in clinical environments.

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.

Effectiveness of ultrasonography-guided caudal epidural steroid injection compared to the fluoroscopic application.

BACKGROUND: Caudal epidural steroid injection (CESI) has been increasingly used for treating lower back pain. However, there is still significant controversy about the efficacy and safety of different imaging techniques used to guide CESI. In this context, the objective of this study is to compare the efficacies of fluoroscopy- and ultrasonography-guided CESI in patients with chronic lower back pain. METHODS: The population of this retrospective, observational study consisted of all consecutive patients who underwent CESI for lower back pain between 2018 and 2020. Of the 371 patients included in the study sample, 192 had undergone fluoroscopyguided CESI (Group F) and 179 ultrasonography-guided CESI (Group U). Patients' pain and functional statuses were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) immediately before (baseline) and after the procedure (postintervention day 0-D0), during the second week (D15), the first month (D30), and the third month (D90) after the procedure. RESULTS: The mean age of Group F was significantly higher than that of Group U (p < 0.001). The number of patients with lumbar dischernia was significantly higher in Group U, whereas the number of patients with spinal stenosis and lumbar disc hernia + spinal/lumbar stenosis was significantly higher in Group F (p = 0.001). The baseline and D0 ODI scores were significantly lower in Group U than in Group F (p = 0.006 and p = 0.017, respectively). There was no significant difference between the groups in other VAS and ODI scores (p > 0.05). Intragroup analyses revealed significant reductions in VAS and ODI scores over the follow-up period till D30 compared to the baseline scores in each group (p < 0.001). The decrease recorded in the ODI score between the D15 and baseline measurements was significantly higher in Group F than in Group U (p = 0.006). DISCUSSION: The study findings indicated that ultrasound-guided CESI was as effective as fluoroscopy-guided CESI in treating chroniclower back pain.

MANIFESTATIONS AND TREATMENT OF LOWER BACK PAIN SYNDROME IN WARTIME.

OBJECTIVE: The aim: To improve treatment of patients with lower back pain through identification of pathogenetic factors in its formation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and methods: The early results of treatment of 84 patients with lower back pain (main group) were analysed. Patients of the main group were divided into two subgroups: one group involved patients with mental disorders, the other - patients not suffering from such disorders (the Spielberger-Hanin Anxiety Test used). The patients of the main group with mental disorders (49 patients) were administered with epidural steroid injections and antidepressants. The patients with no mental disorders (35 patients) were administered with epidural steroid injections only. The control group involved 36 patients with lower back pain who did not undergo any psychological testing and were administered with epidural steroid injections only. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index questionnaire were used to assess pain syndrome. The assessment was carried out twice: in the pre-operative period and in three months after the treatment. RESULTS: Results: A significant difference in the early treatment results between the main and control groups was established according to both the Visual Analog Scale and the Oswestry Disability Index in favour of the main group patients, who were differentiated by pathogenetic factors of the pain syndrome formation. CONCLUSION: Conclusions: Lower back pain syndrome necessitates clarification of its components in order to develop pathogenically based treatment.

Injection into the Space of Okada During Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections.

OBJECTIVE: Ensuring medication delivery to the epidural space is crucial for effective transforaminal epidural steroid injections. Epidural needle placement is determined by injecting a small amount of contrast at the final needle position. The purpose of this study is to illustrate the appearance of contrast flow in the retrodural retroligamentous space of Okada during computed tomography- and fluoroscopy-guided cervical and lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections. DESIGN: This retrospective study will use a series of cases to demonstrate contrast within the space of Okada during epidural transforaminal steroid injections. SETTING: Tertiary medical center. SUBJECTS: Study subjects are adult patients who underwent transforaminal epidural steroid injection at our institution. METHODS: Cases were identified through the use of a search engine of existing radiology reports at our institution. Epidural steroid injection procedural reports were searched for the terms "Okada" and "retrodural space." Images from the procedure were reviewed by the authors (all proceduralists with dedicated training in spinal injections) to confirm the presence of contrast within the space of Okada. RESULTS: This case series illustrates six examples of contrast injection into the retrodural space of Okada during cervical and lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections. CONCLUSIONS: Contrast uptake in the retrodural space of Okada may be seen during transforaminal epidural injections. Although relatively uncommon, it is likely underrecognized. It is extremely important that providers who perform transforaminal epidural steroid injections be familiar with this non-epidural contrast flow pattern so they can adjust needle positioning to deliver steroid to the epidural space.

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.

Radiation dose of fluoroscopy-guided versus ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy-guided lumbar spine epidural steroid injections.

OBJECTIVE: Compare radiation dose of lumbar spine epidural steroid injections (ESIs) performed under fluoroscopy guidance and ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy guidance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of consecutive lumbar ESIs performed using fluoroscopy, between May 2017 and April 2019, and using ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy, between August 2019 and February 2021, was performed. Ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy technique omits a planning CT scan, utilizes CT-fluoroscopy, and minimizes radiation dose parameters. Patient characteristics (age, sex, height, weight, body mass index (BMI)), procedural characteristics (anatomic level, type of ESI, procedure time, pain reduction, complications, trainee participation), and radiation dose were compared. Chi-square tests and two-sample t-tests were performed for statistical analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-seven patients (mean age 55.8 ± 16.7; 85 women) underwent ESIs using fluoroscopy. Sixty-six patients (mean age 60.9 ± 16.7; 33 women) underwent ESIs using ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy. The effective dose for the fluoroscopy group was 0.30 mSv ± 0.34, compared to 0.15 mSV ± 0.11 for ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy (p < 0.001). The average age in the CT-fluoroscopy group was older (p = 0.04), and there was more trainee participation in the fluoroscopy group (p < 0.001); otherwise there was no statistically significant difference in patient or procedural characteristics between the conventional fluoroscopy group and the ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy group. There was no statistically significant difference in immediate post-procedure pain reduction between the groups (p = 0.16). Four intrathecal injections occurred only in the fluoroscopy group, though this difference was not significant (p = 0.18). CONCLUSION: Ultralow-dose CT-fluoroscopy technique for image-guided lumbar spine ESIs can lower radiation dose compared to fluoroscopy-guided technique.