Intra-Articular Platelet Rich Plasma vs Corticosteroid Injections for Sacroiliac Joint Pain: A Double-Blinded, Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Using stringent inclusion criteria, a double-blinded study protocol, and fluoroscopically guided injections, we compare intra-articular sacroiliac joint platelet-rich plasma injections with intra-articular steroids. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Two large university-based interdisciplinary spine centers. SUBJECTS: A total of 26 patients with a positive diagnostic block (>80% relief). METHODS: Subjects who had a positive diagnostic block were randomized to undergo either a fluoroscopically guided intra-articular injection of steroid or a platelet-rich plasma injection. Follow-up was at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. Outcomes included level of pain, as indicated on a 0- to 100-mm numeric pain rating scale, and functional disability score, obtained via the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). RESULTS: At 1, 3, and 6 months, both groups improved; however, subjects who received steroid injections reported lower pain scores than did subjects who received platelet-rich plasma. Using categorical data, we observed significantly more responders (defined as pain scores that improved by 50% or more from baseline) at 1 and 3 months in the group who received steroids than in the group who received platelet-rich plasma. CONCLUSION: Although both groups showed improvements in pain and function, the steroid group had significantly greater response and significantly more responders than did the platelet-rich plasma group.

Procedural Pain During Lumbar Medial Branch Blocks With and Without Skin Wheal Anesthesia: A Prospective Comparative Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if skin wheals reduce procedural pain associated with lumbar medial branch blocks (MBBs) performed with 25-gauge needles. DESIGN: Prospective comparative observational study. SETTING: Outpatient Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation and interventional pain practice within an academic tertiary care center. SUBJECTS: Ninety-nine consecutive patients who underwent lumbar MBBs for facet pain were included. Patients who were obese or required larger-diameter needles were excluded. METHODS: One to three facet joints were targeted per side, with some patients receiving bilateral procedures. All injections were performed with 25-gauge, 3.5-inch Quincke tip needles under fluoroscopic guidance. A total of 306 needle sticks were recorded. MBBs were performed without skin wheals or any other type of local anesthesia (35 patients, 108 needle sticks), with skin wheals (30 patients, 94 needle sticks), and in mixed groups (34 patients, 47 needle sticks with skin wheals, 57 needle sticks without skin wheals or other type of local anesthesia). Patients rated the pain of each needle placement immediately after the multilevel MBB procedure. RESULTS: Considering all 306 needle sticks, needles that were placed using skin wheals caused slightly more pain than those placed without skin wheals or any other type of local anesthesia (P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Skin wheals do not reduce and may increase procedural pain associated with lumbar MBBs performed with 25-gauge needles.

Long-Term Effects of Repeated Injections of Local Anesthetic With or Without Corticosteroid for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the overall long-term effectiveness of treatment with epidural corticosteroid injections for lumbar central spinal stenosis and the effect of repeat injections, including crossover injections, on outcomes through 12 months. DESIGN: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing epidural injections of corticosteroid plus lidocaine versus lidocaine alone. SETTING: Sixteen clinical sites. PARTICIPANTS: Participants with imaging-confirmed lumbar central spinal stenosis (N=400). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to receive either epidural injections with corticosteroid plus lidocaine or lidocaine alone with the option of blinded crossover after 6 weeks to receive the alternate treatment. Participants could receive 1 to 2 injections from 0 to 6 weeks and up to 2 injections from 6 to 12 weeks. After 12 weeks, participants received usual care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) (range, 0-24, where higher scores indicate greater disability) and leg pain intensity (range, 0 [no pain] to 10 [pain as bad as you can imagine]). Secondary outcomes included opioid use, spine surgery, and crossover rates. RESULTS: At 12 months, both treatment groups maintained initial observed improvements, with no significant differences between groups on the RDQ (adjusted mean difference, -0.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.6 to 0.9; P=.55), leg pain (adjusted mean difference, 0.1; 95% CI, -0.5 to 0.7; P=.75), opioid use (corticosteroid plus lidocaine: 41.4% vs lidocaine alone: 36.3%; P=.41), or spine surgery (corticosteroid plus lidocaine: 16.8% vs lidocaine alone: 11.8%; P=.22). Fewer participants randomized to corticosteroid plus lidocaine (30%, n=60) versus lidocaine alone (45%, n=90) crossed over after 6 weeks (P=.003). Among participants who crossed over at 6 weeks, the 6- to 12-week RDQ change did not differ between the 2 randomized treatment groups (adjusted mean difference, -1.0; 95% CI, -2.6 to 0.7; P=.24). In both groups, participants crossing over at 6 weeks had worse 12-month trajectories compared with participants who did not choose to crossover. CONCLUSIONS: For lumbar spinal stenosis symptoms, epidural injections of corticosteroid plus lidocaine offered no benefits from 6 weeks to 12 months beyond that of injections of lidocaine alone in terms of self-reported pain and function or reduction in use of opioids and spine surgery. In patients with improved pain and function 6 weeks after initial injection, these outcomes were maintained at 12 months. However, the trajectories of pain and function outcomes after 3 weeks did not differ by injectate type. Repeated injections of either type offered no additional long-term benefit if injections in the first 6 weeks did not improve pain.

Physician turnover rates and job stability in interventional spine and pain practices: Results of an IPSIS survey study.

Background: Physician turnover and job instability have profound implications for healthcare systems, private facilities, and patient outcomes. High physician turnover disrupts continuity of care, impedes establishment of patient-physician relationships, and may compromise overall healthcare quality. Objective: This survey study explores the rate of job turnover in the field of Interventional Spine and Pain Medicine, based on a 2022 survey of physicians of the International Pain and Spine Intervention Society. Methods: A standardized, anonymous survey was distributed by email via Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) software to physician members of the International Pain and Spine Interventional Society (IPSIS). Results: Our survey results indicate that interventional spine/pain physicians with initially lower starting salaries were more likely to leave their first job. We also found that those currently in a productivity-based compensation models were more likely to have left their first job. Conclusions: Of the interventional pain and spine physicians who had been in practice for at least three years, over 65% reported leaving their initial job after training.

A Tale of Two Institutions: COVID-19 Positive Rates in Asymptomatic Patients Pre-Screened for Spine Procedures and Surgeries in Los Angeles, California.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by the severe respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has created an unprecedented global public health emergency. The aim of the current study was to report on COVID-19 rates in an asymptomatic population prior to undergoing spine procedures or surgeries at two large Los Angeles healthcare systems. METHODS: Elective spine procedures and surgeries from May 1, 2020 to January 31, 2021 were included. Results from SARS-CoV-2 virus RT-PCR nasopharyngeal testing within 72 hours prior to elective spine procedures were recorded. Los Angeles County COVID-19 rates were calculated using data sets from Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. Chi-squared test and Stata/IC were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 4,062 spine procedures and surgeries were scheduled during this time period. Of these, 4,043 procedures and surgeries were performed, with a total of 19 patients testing positive. Nine positive patients were from UCLA, and 10 from USC. The overall rate of positive tests was low at .47% and reflected similarities with Los Angeles County COVID-19 rates over time. CONCLUSIONS: The current study shows that pre-procedure COVID-19 testing rates remains very low, and follows similar patterns of community rates. While pre-procedure testing increases the safety of elective procedures, universal COVID-19 pre-screening adds an additional barrier to receiving care for patients and increases cost of delivering care. A combination of pre-screening, pre-procedure self-quarantine, and consideration of overall community COVID-19 positivity rates should be further studied.

Isolated Neck Extensor Myopathy: A Case Presentation of Rapid Onset and Spontaneous Recovery.

Patients presenting with a chin-on-chest deformity, or dropped head syndrome, may have a diagnosis of isolated neck extensor myopathy (INEM). INEM is a diagnosis of exclusion occurring primarily in elderly patients. INEM usually has a benign progression, which may involve the shoulder girdle but does not advance to other muscle groups. Patients without an inflammatory etiology typically experience minimal or no recovery of their symptoms. Dropped head syndrome has various implications on a patient's quality of life and activities of daily living. We present a unique case of INEM with rapid onset and complete clinical recovery within a time frame of 4 months. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V.

Ultrasound for Lumbar Spinal Procedures.

Ultrasonography has become an increasingly valuable and promising tool for performing image-guided spine interventions. The increase in the use of ultrasound utilization has led to more studies evaluating ultrasound-guided interventional spine procedures in comparison to fluoroscopy and computed tomography. Several studies have investigated the use of ultrasound for lumbosacral pain management procedures with favorable outcomes.