Septic Shock From Pan-Spinal Epidural Abscess Attributed to Recent Acupuncture and Trigger Point Injections for Acute Lower Back Pain in a Previously Undiagnosed Diabetic Patient: A Case Report.

Epidural abscesses can lead to devastating neurological consequences if not diagnosed and managed in a timely manner, especially in immunocompromised patients. We report the case of a 60-year-old woman with undiagnosed diabetes mellitus who presented to the hospital with a complaint of progressive altered mental status for the past two days. Eight days prior to presentation, the patient tripped over a pillow at home and developed mildly nagging, acute lower back pain. Upon the recommendation of her friends, she underwent two sessions of acupuncture around the lumbar area on days six and five prior to being brought to the hospital. She also saw her primary care physician on day three prior to presentation, who performed a history and physical examination and, after feeling that she did not have any red flags, empirically administered lidocaine-based trigger point injections near the same lumbar areas with the patient's consent. On the day of presentation, the patient fell at home and was unable to walk, after which she was immediately brought to the hospital, where she demonstrated toxic metabolic encephalopathy due to diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and lower extremity paraplegia. Emergent imaging revealed a pan-spinal epidural abscess (PSEA) after an attempted lumbar puncture led to immediate pus in the syringe. Diagnosing an epidural abscess can be difficult as signs and symptoms can mimic other conditions such as meningitis, encephalitis, and stroke. High suspicion on the physician's end is needed when a patient presents with acute back pain, fevers, and neurological deterioration if the condition is otherwise unexplained, and especially in the presence of risk factors for PSEA that may be recognized only upon presentation.

Trigger point injections followed by immediate myofascial release in the treatment of pelvic floor tension myalgia.

PURPOSE: Pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) is first-line therapy for treatment of pelvic floor tension myalgia (PFTM). Pelvic floor trigger point injections (PFTPI) are added if symptoms are refractive to conservative therapy or if patients experience a flare. The primary objective was to determine if a session of physical therapy with myofascial release immediately following PFTPI provides improved pain relief compared to trigger point injection alone. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort analysis of 87 female patients with PFTM who underwent PFTPI alone or PFTPI immediately followed by PFPT. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores were recorded pre-treatment and 2 weeks post-treatment. The primary outcome was the change in VAS between patients who received PFTPI alone and those who received PFTPI followed by myofascial release. RESULTS: Of the 87 patients in this study, 22 received PFTPI alone and 65 patients received PFTPI followed by PFPT. The median pre-treatment VAS score was 8 for both groups. The median post-treatment score was 6 for the PFTPI only group and 4 for the PFTPI followed by PFPT group, showing a median change in VAS score of 2 and 4, respectively (p = 0.042). Seventy-seven percent of patients in the PFTPI followed by PFPT group had a VAS score improvement of 3 or more, while 45% of patients in the PFTPI only group had a VAS score improvement greater than 3 (p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: PFTPI immediately followed by PFPT offered more improvement in pain for patients with PFTM. This may be due to greater tolerance of myofascial release immediately following injections.

Trigger point injections and dry needling can be effective in treating long COVID syndrome-related myalgia: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Myofascial pain is a complex health condition that affects the majority of the general population. Myalgia has been recognized as a symptom of long COVID syndrome. The treatment for long COVID syndrome-related myalgia lacks research. Dry needling is a technique that involves the insertion of a needle into the tissue of, or overlaying, a pain point. Wet needling is the addition of an injection of an analgesic substance such as lidocaine while performing needling. Both dry and wet needling have are practiced as treatment modalities for myofascial pain. Limited literature exists to define long COVID syndrome-related myalgia and its relation to myofascial pain, or to examine the utility of needling techniques for this pain. We report a case of dry and wet needling as effective treatments for long COVID-related myofascial pain. CASE PRESENTATION: A 59-year-old, previously healthy Hispanic male with no comorbid conditions was diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia. The patient suffered moderate disease without hypoxia and was never hospitalized. Three months later, the patient continued to suffer from symptoms such as exertional dyspnea, "brain fog," and myalgia. An extensive multisystem workup revealed normal cardiac, pulmonary, and end organ functions. The patient was then diagnosed with long COVID syndrome. The nature and chronicity of the patient's myalgia meet the criteria for myofascial pain. Both wet and dry needling were used to treat the patient's myofascial pain, with good short- and long-term therapeutic effects. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 infection has been shown to exacerbate preexisting myofascial pain syndrome. Our case report indicates that long COVID syndrome-related myalgia is likely a form of new-onset myofascial pain. Additionally, both wet and dry needling can be utilized as an effective treatment modality for this pain syndrome, with short- and long-term benefits.

Prevalence of Myofascial Pain Syndrome and Efficacy of Trigger Point Injection in Patients with Incurable Cancer: A Multicenter, Prospective Observational Study (MyCar Study).

OBJECTIVE: Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is caused by overload or disuse of skeletal muscles. Patients with cancer are often forced to restrict their movement or posture for several reasons. The study was conducted to investigate the prevalence and risks of MPS in patients with incurable cancer. The efficacy of trigger point injection (TPI) was also explored. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective observational study. Patients with incurable cancer who started receiving specialist palliative care were enrolled. We investigated the MPS in this population and accompanying risk factors for restricting body movement. Pre- and post-TPI pain was also evaluated using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) in patients who received TPI. The primary outcome was the prevalence of MPS. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients were enrolled from five institutions in Japan. Most of the patients (n = 94, 93.1%) had distant metastases, and half of the patients (50, 49.5%) received anticancer treatment. Thirty-nine (38.6%) patients had MPS lesions at 83 sites. Multivariate analysis revealed that the significant risk factor for MPS was poor Performance Status (PS) (odds ratio 3.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-9.02, P = .023). We performed TPI for 40 out of 83 MPS lesions. Mean NRS for MPS before TPI was 7.95, which improved to 4.30 after TPI (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: MPS was common in patients with incurable cancer and the risk factor identified in this study was poor performance status. TPI could be a treatment option.

Myofascial Pelvic Pain: An Overlooked and Treatable Cause of Chronic Pelvic Pain.

Myofascial pelvic pain is a common, nonarticular musculoskeletal disorder characterized by the presence of myofascial trigger points in the lower abdominal wall and/or pelvic floor muscles. Myofascial pelvic pain is involved in an estimated 22% to 94% of cases of chronic pelvic pain, which is one of the most common gynecologic conditions in the United States. Myofascial pelvic pain may exist independently or in conjunction with disorders such as vaginismus, dysmenorrhea, and endometriosis and is frequently a causative factor in sexual pain or dyspareunia. This article reviews the pathophysiology, assessment, and treatment options for myofascial pelvic pain, with a particular focus on trigger point injections. Increased recognition and treatment of this commonly overlooked diagnosis has the potential to improve care and outcomes for many patients suffering from chronic pelvic pain.

Pain Management in Neurosurgery: Back and Lower Extremity Pain, Trigeminal Neuralgia.

Interventional anesthetic techniques are an integral component of a biopsychosocial approach and multidisciplinary treatment. Injection techniques are often used to diagnose disorders, decrease the need for surgery, or increase the time to surgery. The role of neural blockade techniques using local anesthetics and steroids in the assessment and treatment of pain continues to be refined. With the current opioid crisis and an aging population with increasing medical comorbidities, there is an emphasis on the use of nonopioid, nonsurgical, and multimodal therapies to treat chronic pain. This article reviews indications, goals, and methods of common injection techniques.

Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial on Trigger Point Injections With 1% Lidocaine Versus Conventional Approaches for Myofascial Pain in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Myofascial neck and back pain is an increasingly common chief symptom in the emergency department. Currently, there are no widely accepted conventional therapies, and there is little evidence on the efficacy of interventions such as trigger point injections (TPIs). OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates whether TPIs with 1% lidocaine can improve myofascial back and neck pain compared with conventional therapies. Secondary outcomes include changes in length of stay and number of opioid prescriptions on discharge. METHODS: This single-center, prospective, randomized, pragmatic trial was carried out in patients clinically determined to have myofascial back or neck pain. Patients were randomized into the experimental arm (TPI with 1% lidocaine) or the control arm (standard conventional approach). Numeric Rating Scores (NRS) for pain and additional surveys were obtained prior to and 20 min after the intervention. RESULTS: The NRS for pain was lower in the TPI group compared with the control group after adjustment for initial pain (median difference -3.01; 95% confidence interval -4.20 to -1.83; p < 0.001). Median length of stay was 2.61 h for the TPI group and 4.63 h for the control group (p < 0.001). More patients in the control group (47.4%) were discharged home with an opioid compared with the TPI group (2.9%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TPI is an effective method for managing myofascial pain in the emergency department. This study indicates it may improve pain compared with conventional methods, reduce length of stay in the emergency department, and reduce opioid prescriptions on discharge.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of onabotulinumtoxin A trigger point injections for myofascial pelvic pain.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic pain is estimated to effect 15% of women, and onabotulinumtoxin A is used to treat a variety of pain disorders. However, the data on the use of onabotulinumtoxin A for the treatment of women with myofascial pelvic pain are limited. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare the effect of onabotulinumtoxin A vs placebo injections to the pelvic floor muscles in women with myofascial pelvic pain. STUDY DESIGN: This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in women with myofascial pelvic pain. Women ≥18 years were eligible if they reported pain ≥6 on a 10 point visual analog scale ≥50% of the time and had pain on palpation ≥6 on the visual analog scale in ≥1 of 6 pelvic floor muscle groups. Participants were randomly allocated to a pelvic floor injection of 200 units of onabotulinumtoxin A or 20 mL of saline. All participants started 8 weeks of physical therapy 4 weeks after the injection. Participants completed validated questionnaires at baseline, 2, 4, and 12 weeks after injection. At each visit, a urogynecologist who was blinded to treatment arm performed a clinical examination with palpation of the left and right sides of 6 pelvic floor muscle groups. The primary outcome was change in participant-reported pain on palpation of the most painful pelvic floor muscle at 2 weeks. Analyses were intention to treat. RESULTS: We consented 60 women. One participant was lost to follow-up after she was consented; therefore, we randomized 59 women. The groups had similar demographic and clinical characteristics. With regard to the primary outcome, there was no significant difference between the intervention and placebo groups in the change in participant-reported pain on palpation of the most painful pelvic floor muscle at 2 weeks. There were no significant differences in participant-reported pain on palpation for any muscle group at 4 or 12 weeks. At 4 and 12 weeks, participants in the intervention group reported greater declines in overall pelvic pain on the visual analog scale compared with the placebo group, although these differences were not statistically significant (both P = .16). Using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement index, participants in the intervention group were more likely to report their symptoms were improved at 4 and 12 weeks compared with the placebo group, although this difference was significant only at 4 weeks (P = .03 and P = .10, respectively). At 2 weeks, the placebo group had a significant improvement in the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory score compared with the intervention group (P = .01); however, this difference did not persist at 4 (P = .19) or 12 weeks (P = .11). At 2 weeks, the most common adverse event was constipation in the intervention and placebo groups, with 10.1% reporting de novo constipation. This was followed by urinary incontinence in the intervention group (22%) and urinary tract infection (9%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Pelvic floor onabotulinumtoxin A injections for myofascial pelvic pain were not more effective than saline injections at decreasing muscle pain on palpation. Despite this, participants who received onabotulinumtoxin A were more likely than those who received saline to report improvement, albeit not statistically significant, in their overall pelvic floor pain at 4 and 12 weeks.

The Risks of Continuing or Discontinuing Anticoagulants for Patients Undergoing Common Interventional Pain Procedures.

Background: Guidelines have been published that recommend discontinuing anticoagulants in patients undergoing interventional pain procedures. The safety and effectiveness of these guidelines have not been tested. Objectives: The present study was performed to determine if continuing or discontinuing anticoagulants for pain procedures is associated with a detectable risk of complications. Methods: An observational study was conducted in a private practice in which some partners continued anticoagulants while other partners routinely discontinued anticoagulants. Results: No complications attributable to anticoagulants were encountered in 4,766 procedures in which anticoagulants were continued. In 2,296 procedures in which anticoagulants were discontinued according to the guidelines, nine patients suffered serious morbidity, including two deaths. Conclusions: Lumbar transforaminal injections, lumbar medial branch blocks, trigger point injections, and sacroiliac joint blocks appear to be safe in patients who continue anticoagulants. In patients who discontinue anticoagulants, although low (0.2%) the risk of serious complications is not zero, and must be considered when deciding between continuing and discontinuing anticoagulants.

Interventional Treatment for Post-traumatic Headache.

Post-traumatic headache (migraine) is the most common symptom of concussion and traumatic brain injury. An expert opinion-based review along with a literature review (PubMed) was conducted looking at known interventional procedures for post-traumatic headache using the keywords post-traumatic headache, post-traumatic migraine headache, concussion, mild traumatic brain injury, and traumatic brain injury and the following categories: mechanism, pathophysiology, treatment, physical therapy, neurostimulation, Botox@/Onabotulinum toxin, and surgical intervention. The results returned a total of 181 articles of which 52 were selected. None of the articles included randomized placebo-controlled studies, and most were either prospective or retrospective case analysis and/or review articles or consensus opinion papers, with most studies yielding positive results. Despite a lack of hard evidence, interventional procedures, alone or in combination, appear to be an effective treatment for post-traumatic headaches.

Updates of Topical and Local Anesthesia Agents.

As described in this article, there are many advances in topical and local anesthesia. Topical and local anesthetics have played a great role in dentistry in alleviating the fears of patients, eliminating pain, and providing pain control. Many invasive procedures would not be performed without the use and advances of topical/local anesthetics. The modern-day dentist has the responsibility of knowing the variety of products on the market and should have at least references to access before, during, and after treatment. This practice ensures proper care with topical and local anesthetics for the masses of patients entering dental offices worldwide.

Procedural Headache Medicine in Neurology Residency Training: A Survey of US Program Directors.

OBJECTIVE: To survey neurology residency program directors (PDs) on trainee exposure, supervision, and credentialing in procedures widely utilized in headache medicine. BACKGROUND: Clinic-based procedures have assumed a prominent role in headache therapy. Headache fellows obtain procedural competence, but reliance on fellowship-trained neurologists cannot match the population eligible for treatments. The inclusion of educational modules and mechanisms for credentialing trainees pursuing procedural competence in residency curricula at individual programs is not known. METHODS: A web-based survey of US neurology residency PDs was designed by the American Headache Society (AHS) procedural special interest section in collaboration with AHS and American Academy of Neurology's Headache and Facial Pain section leadership. The survey addressed exposure, training, and credentialing in: (1) onabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA) injections, (2) extracranial peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs), and (3) trigger point injections (TPIs). RESULTS: Fifty-five PDs (42.6%) completed the survey. Compared to noncompleters, survey completers were more likely to feature headache fellowships at their institutions (38.2% vs 10.8%, P=0.0002). High exposure (onabotA=90.9%, PNBs=80.0%, TPIs=70.9%) usually featured hands-on patient instruction (66.2%) and lectures (55.7%). Supervised performance rates were high (onabotA=65.5%, PNBs=60.0%, TPIs=52.7%), usually in continuity clinic (60.0%) or headache elective (50.9%). Headache specialists (69.1%) or general neurology (32.7%) faculty most commonly trained residents. Formal credentialing was uncommon (16.4-18.2%), mostly by documenting supervised procedures (25.5%). Only 27.3% of programs permitted trainees to perform procedures independently. Most PDs felt procedural exposure (80.0-90.9%) and competence (50.9-56.4%) by all trainees was important. CONCLUSIONS: Resident exposure to procedures for headache is high, but credentialing mechanisms, while desired by most PDs, are not generally in place. Implementation of a credentialing process may ensure trainees enter practice with the ability to perform procedures safely and effectively.

Injections for chronic pain.

Although interventional procedures should be used cautiously in the setting of chronic pain, there is a role for a variety of injections to facilitate a patient's overall rehabilitation program. There are many resources available, including a prior issue of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America, which discuss the more conventional spinal injections. The focus of this article is on lesser-known injection options for treating chronic pain. The authors separately discuss trigger point injections, regenerative injections (prolotherapy), and injections using botulin toxins.

Pneumothorax: a tale of pain or spontaneity.

Pneumothoraces may be due a variety of aetiologies. Here we present two different cases: one with a unilateral pneumothorax due an iatrogenic medical procedure and another of idiopathic spontaneous bilateral nature. Although both cases were initially managed conservatively, the latter case required surgical intervention. We also conduct a literature review of the aetiology and management of pneumothoraces.