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.

Iatrogenic needle penetrating injury of cervical spinal cord: a case of fatal therapeutic complication.

A 52-year-old woman with of neck pain underwent percutaneous neck injection of local anesthetic and a corticosteroid without image guidance. She collapsed asystolic during the procedure was resuscitated and then died after 2 weeks in the intensive care unit with hypoxic encephalopathy. Complete postmortem examination included additional posterior neck dissection and cervical spinal cord removal with intact dura mater. The entire cervical spinal cord with the dura and leptomeninges was embedded in an oriented sequence of several paraffin blocks. Serial sections of each selected blocks were then studied to locate a putative puncture site. Serial sections from the third and fourth cervical levels (C3-C4) were stained with luxol fast blue-hematoxylin-eosin, iron stain, trichrome stain, and immunostained for b-amyloid precursor protein, and CD68. Histological examination revealed a linear needle track with a subacute healing reaction. The path included the dorsal spinal dura, arachnoid, and the left dorsal column. Clinicopathological correlation and the cause of death are discussed. Careful planning, dissection, sampling, and oriented serial sectioning with immunostaining were key points to document the injuries and understand this case.

Risk of SARS-CoV-2 following joint and epidural corticosteroid injections: A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: The immunosuppressive effects of corticosteroid (CS) injections have come under more scrutiny during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim of the study was to explore any relationship between joint/epidural CS injection and SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positivity. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients 18 years or over who received at least one joint or epidural CS injection by physiatrists in a tertiary care center between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021. This cohort of patients was then compared to a control group who did not receive any CS injection during this time period. RESULTS: A total of 766 patients were identified in the CS injection group and 1546 patients in the control group. Overall, 12.27% of patients turned SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive in the CS injection group, which was similar to 11.90% in the control group (p = 0.797). But 3-month SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate showed a statistically significant higher rate among the CS injection group (3.30% in the CS injection group vs. 2.10% in the control group; p = 0.027). In multivariate regression analysis, after adjusting both groups for Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), there was statistically significant higher SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate in the CS injection group (p = 0.024). However, after adjusting both groups for age and total number of comorbidities, there was no difference between the groups in regard to SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate (p = 0.081). In the subgroup analysis of only COVID-19 vaccinated patients, there was an increased 3-month SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate among patients with severe comorbidities in the CS injection group (p = 0.036). CONCLUSION: The study was not conclusive on the effect of joint or epidural CS injection on SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate, although adjusted analysis suggests higher 3-month SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate after CS injection in patients with severe comorbidities with significant disease burden when compared to controls.

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.

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.

Effect of repeated transforaminal epidural low-dose dexamethasone injections on glucose profiles of diabetic and non-diabetic patients with low back pain.

PURPOSE: We aimed to investigate the effect of repeated transforaminal epidural low-dose dexamethasone injections on glucose profiles and pituitary-adrenal axis functions of diabetic and non-diabetic patients with low back pain. METHODS: A total of 28 patients (ten diabetic [DM group] and 18 non-diabetic patients [non-DM group]) with low back pain were followed-up. Transforaminal epidural low-dose dexamethasone (1.65 mg) injections were repeated every 7-14 days for 8 weeks. Fasting blood sugar (FBS), hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), morning plasma adrenocorticotropin (ACTH), and cortisol levels were measured at baseline and during the 8-week follow-up period. RESULTS: There were no significant changes in FBS and HbA1c levels between baseline and 8-week follow-up period in both DM and non-DM groups (difference in FBS [95% confidence Interval, CI]: - 0.6 mg/dL [- 6.4, 5.1], p = 0.83 in the non-DM group, - 0.2 mg/dL [- 26.2, 25.8], p = 0.99 in the DM group; difference in HbA1c [95% CI] - 0.02% [- 0.1, 0.1], p = 0.69 in the non-DM group, 0.04% [- 0.3, 0.4], p = 0.79 in the DM group). There were no significant longitudinal changes in ACTH and cortisol levels (ACTH, p = 0.38 [baseline vs. 8 week], p = 0.58 [non-DM vs. DM]; cortisol, p = 0.52 [baseline vs. 8 week], p = 0.90 [non-DM vs. DM]). CONCLUSIONS: Repeated transforaminal epidural low-dose dexamethasone injections provided no significant elevations in blood glucose or suppression of the pituitary-adrenal axis for two months from the first injection in both diabetic and non-diabetic patients. Our results indicate the intermediate-term safety of repeated transforaminal epidural low-dose dexamethasone injections with regard to the effect on glucose profile and pituitary-adrenal axis functions.

Outcomes of the Fluoroscopically-Guided vs. Computed-Tomography-Guided Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection in Low Back Pain: A Propensity-matched Prospective Cohort.

Background: Low back pain (LBP), the most common musculoskeletal condition, imposes a significant burden on healthcare and triggers mental and physical disorders. Before surgery, patients are eligible for minimally-invasive treatments, including transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI). We aimed to compare fluoroscopically- and CT-guided TFESI in patients with subacute (4-12 weeks) and chronic (≥12 weeks) LBP. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, 121 adults with subacute or chronic LBP were recruited. Using propensity score matching (PSM), we created two age, sex, and body mass index (BMI) matched groups of fluoroscopically- and CT-guided TFESI, each including 38 patients. The outcomes of interest were the Oswestry disability index (ODI) and numerical rating scale (NRS), which were measured in all patients before the procedure and at the three-month follow-up. Then, the ODI and NRS mean changes were compared between Fluoroscopy and CT groups using repeated measures ANOVA. All analyses were performed with IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results: Of the total 76 matched patients with a mean (SD) age of 66.22 (13.49), 81 (66.9%) were female. ODI and NRS scores significantly decreased from baseline to the three-month follow-up in both treatment groups. The ODI score mean change from baseline to follow-up compared between the two groups was insignificant (fluoroscopy vs. CT mean difference (95% CI): 1.092 (-0.333-2.518), P = 0.131). Similarly, the NRS score mean change from baseline to follow-up compared between the two groups was insignificant (fluoroscopy vs. CT mean difference (95% CI): -0.132 (-0.529-0.265), P = 0.511). Conclusion: Fluoroscopically- and CT-guided TFESI show similar therapeutic effectiveness in patients with subacute and chronic LBP.

Pressure monitoring devices may undetect epidural space: a report on the use of Compuflo® system for epidural injection.

Lumbar epidural infiltration (EI) is a feasible procedure performed in pain therapy. Even though epidural analgesia is widely applied, it remains a blind technique, based on the operator's hand sensations, and it is associated with significant failure rate and several potential complications. Compuflo® (Compuflo, Milestone Scientific, Livingston, NJ) is a computerized injection pump which precisely detects the real time pressure at the tip of a Tuohy needle when placed in human tissues, thanks to a continuous fluid path. In our institution, we usually perform EI for chronic back pain guided by the Compuflo device, especially for expected difficult procedures. However, we report 6 false negative cases on a total number of 60 procedures in which the Compuflo system didn't meet the criteria of epidural space entry, even though the epidural space was actually reached. A mild pressure decrease (less than 50%) which lasted for more than 5 s was reported on the monitor, and the acoustic signal changed in a little bit lower sound, without a clear indication on stopping or not the needle advancement. This unspecific drop in monitored pressure gives false negatives using the Compuflo® system and may lead to excessive advancing of the needle. In conclusion, we consider the epidural pressure monitoring device Compuflo as a tool which may be able to ease the correct positioning of an epidural needle. The percentage of 10% false negative identifications of the epidural space in our case series however suggests more investigations on adequate or specific settings for this epidural system. In the meantime, in chronic pain patients, this anesthetic technique should only be used by experienced hands.

Neuropathic Pain Component in Patients with Cervical Radicular Pain: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.

Background and Objectives: Evidence regarding the prevalence of neuropathic pain in patients with cervical radicular pain is limited. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of neuropathic pain components in patients with cervical radicular pain using established screening tools and identify the relationship between neuropathic pain components and clinical factors. Materials and Methods: Data from 103 patients (aged ≥ 20 years) with cervical radicular pain who visited our pain clinic were analyzed retrospectively. Demographic characteristics, history of neck surgery, pain intensity using numeric rating score, dominant pain site, duration of symptoms, and neck disability index were assessed. The prevalence of neuropathic pain components was defined according to the Douleur Neuropathique 4 questions and painDETECT questionnaire tools. Patient characteristics were compared using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and the independent t-test or Mann−Whitney U test for continuous variables. The correlation between neck disability index and other variables was analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Results: Of the 103 patients, 29 (28.1%) had neuropathic pain components. The neck disability index was significantly higher (p < 0.001) for patients in the neuropathic pain group (23.79 ± 6.35) than that in the non- neuropathic pain group (18.43 ± 7.68). The Douleur Neuropathique 4 questions (r = 0.221, p < 0.025) and painDETECT questionnaire (r = 0.368, p < 0.001) scores positively correlated with the neck disability index score. Conclusions: The prevalence of neuropathic pain components in patients with cervical radicular pain was low. The patients in our study showed a strong correlation between functional deterioration and their neuropathic pain screening score. This study may be useful in understanding the characteristics of cervical radicular pain.

The Role of Power Doppler Ultrasonography in Caudal Epidural Injection.

Background and Objectives: Although the ultrasound-guided technique is used in caudal epidural injections, severe complications can happen if ultrasound cannot identify the occurrence of intravascular injection. To determine intraepidural and intravascular injection during caudal epidural injections, we used power Doppler ultrasonography (PDU) when injecting medications into the epidural space. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective study that enrolled a total of 277 patients with refractory low back pain or degenerative disc from January 2019 to December 2019. The injectate flow of caudal epidural injections was examined with the assistance of PDU and confirmed by fluoroscopy. Four flow patterns were identified by PDU in our study: the "Earthworm sign," the "Patch sign," the "Tubular sign" and the "Absent flow sign." The accuracy of PDU in identifying intraepidural and intravascular injections was determined by fluoroscopy images recorded during each injection. Results: We evaluated 277 patients (mean age, 68.6 ± 13.2 years; 106 men). The "Patch sign" showed a sensitivity of 88.76% and a specificity of 80% in predicting epidural injection without intravascular injection. The "Earthworm sign" demonstrated a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 100% in detecting intravascular injection. The "Tubular sign" showed a specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 9.4% in predicting successful epidural injection. The absence of a flow signal showed a sensitivity of 1.87% and a specificity of 90% in predicting successful epidural injection. Conclusions: Ultrasound-guided caudal epidural injection can accurately determine intraepidural and intravascular injections with the assistance of PDU and is thus a good alternative technique to fluoroscopy-guided caudal epidural injection.

Comparative effectiveness of paravertebral Ozone injection and caudal epidural steroid-hyaluronidase injection in lumbosacral spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Lumbosacral spinal stenosis (LSS) is the narrowing of the lumbar spinal canal. LSS usually happens in older people who do not have the proper physical condition to undergo surgery. Therefore, minimally invasive methods such as Ozone therapy and epidural injection can be used in these patients. OBJECTIVE: The objective this study was to compare the effect of caudal epidural steroid-hyaluronidase injection with paravertebral intramuscular Ozone injection on reducing pain in patients with LSS. METHODS: A total of 30 patients suffering from LSS randomized to two groups. Group A (n = 15) received three paravertebral intramuscular infiltrations of the Ozone, Group B (n = 15) received a caudal epidural injection of steroid-hyaluronidase. The effects of the interventions were evaluated by measuring Visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability index (ODI), Quebec Back Pain Disability (QBPDS) and Roland Morris low back pain questionnaire (RMQ) before the interventions and at 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks after the interventions. RESULTS: Within-group changes showed significant improvement in VAS, ODI, RMQ, and QBPDS scores in both groups from pre-treatment to end of follow-up (all p < 0.05). The mean VAS score at all follow-up had significant differences between the two groups (p < 0.01). The mean ODI, RMQ, and QBPDS scores at 2-week and 4-week had significant differences between the two groups (p < 0.01). At the 8-week follow-up, there was no significant difference between groups concerning mean ODI, RMQ, and QBPDS scores (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both intramuscular injection Ozone and caudal epidural injection steroid- hyalaz significantly reduce pain. The existing data suggested 8 weeks improvements in pain severity are more significant for paravertebral Ozone injection, compared to caudal epidural steroid-hyaluronidase injection.

An alternative approach for lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injection-Far lateral approach.

INTRODUCTION: Transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) is one of the nonoperative interventions for lower back pain. In this study, we presented an alternative approach for TFESI, far lateral lateral recess TFESI (FLLR TFESI), which is targeted on lateral recess and anterior epidural space in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylosis-related radiculopathy. TECHNIQUE: Under fluoroscopy, needle entry site and pathway are drawn according to the spinal anatomy. The needle is advanced toward the lateral recess and the needle tip is placed medially to the medial border of the pedicle under anteroposterior view and posteriorly to the posterior border of the upper endplate under lateral view. After checking optimal contrast spread, steroids and local anesthetics are injected. CASE ILLUSTRATION: An 86-year-old woman who suffered from lower back pain with radiculopathy received interventional treatment. Comparing the "traditional" supraneural approach with the FLLR approach, the difference in contrast enhancement to lateral recess is clearly shown. DISCUSSION: Compared to the pre-existing approaches, the FLLR approach may provide better ventral epidural and lateral recess enhancement. Furthermore, with the advanced needle tip, the injectate may enhance not only the at-level nerve root but also the nerve root of adjacent level during their existence in a single injection. With blunt needle usage, no nerve root injury or dura puncture was noted so far. CONCLUSION: FLLR TFESI is a modified fluoroscopic technique targeted on lateral recess and anterior epidural space. However, subsequent trials are needed to confirm its efficacy in pain reduction and the rate of complications.

Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome after caudal epidural steroid injection: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Caudal epidural injections are easy, effective, and safe methods and are good options for patients with low back pain and radicular lower extremity pain. Although various complications related to the technique of the procedure or the drugs used in the procedure have been described, Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome (PRES) has not yet been defined for this intervention. CASE: In this case report, we describe a case of PRES, which we supported with MRI findings in our patient who developed convulsions, changes in consciousness, and vision loss after being administered with caudal epidural steroid, and whose imaging findings regressed with the regression of clinical symptoms during the treatment process. CONCLUSION: Although PRES is rarely reported, it should be kept in mind that it is a complication that can develop after caudal epidural steroid injection.

Incidence of Extravascular Perivertebral Artery Contrast Flow During Cervical Transforaminal Epidural Injections.

BACKGROUND: During a cervical transforaminal epidural injection, injectate flows along the path of least resistance. Given the proximity of the vertebral artery to the intervertebral foramen, injected contrast may flow along the external wall of the artery. The incidence of this contrast flow pattern during cervical transforaminal epidural injections is unknown. PURPOSE: To determine the incidence of extravascular perivertebral artery contrast flow patterns during cervical transforaminal epidural injections. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective, observational, in vivo study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients receiving cervical transforaminal epidural injections at a single outpatient spine clinic. OUTCOME MEASURES: The presence or absence of extravascular perivertebral artery contrast flow. METHODS: The saved images from 100 consecutive patients were reviewed by two independent observers and classified with or without extravascular perivertebral artery contrast flow. The incidence was determined and kappa was used to examine inter-rater reliability. All disagreements were reviewed, and the final classification was determined by consensus. RESULTS: The inter-rater reliability was moderate, with a kappa value of 0.69. The incidence of extravascular perivertebral artery contrast flow patterns was 49% by consensus. No statistically significant differences in incidence were present when comparing three different final needle tip positions. CONCLUSIONS: During a cervical transforaminal epidural injection, an extravascular perivertebral artery contrast flow pattern is frequently encountered. This includes flow along the exiting nerve and then around the vertebral artery, as suggested by this study. Although this contrast pattern does not represent an intravascular injection into the vertebral artery, practitioners should remain cautious to exclude intravascular needle placement before injecting medication.

Permanent Paraplegia as a Complication of Injection of Contrast Media at L2-L3 Vertebral Level.

BACKGROUND: The lumbar intrathecal (subarachnoid) space is accessed for both therapeutic and diagnostic purposes. Occasionally, the needle may unintentionally enter the intrathecal space during lumbar interlaminar epidural steroid injections (LESIs)-one of the most commonly performed medical procedures in the United States. Ordinarily, this merely constitutes a minor complication or even a desired placement (in the case of some diagnostic procedures). However, some patients have a rare condition wherein the spinal cord terminates below the L2 vertebral level (tethered cord). In such cases, injections administered at the lumbar level may potentially result in spinal cord damage and irreversible paraplegia if the physician performing the intervention does not recognize the intramedullary position of the needle. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe and analyze an unintentional L2-L3 injection of contrast medium into a tethered spinal cord. Many physicians may consider lumbar injections "safe" because the spinal cord usually terminates at or above the L2 vertebral level. However, complacency stemming from this false impression of safety contributes to nonadherence to practice guidelines, which may lead to catastrophic neurological complications. Presented here is the first published occurrence of paraplegia that resulted from contrast medium injection into the spinal cord during a myelography study performed below the L2 vertebral level. CONCLUSIONS: Disregard of the procedural guidelines by the physicians performing an elective diagnostic intervention may cause devastating neurological complications. The described casualty occurred because of failure to review previous imaging studies, injection of the contrast medium despite unsuccessful attempts to aspirate cerebrospinal fluid, and an unwillingness to terminate the procedure immediately when the patient reported an unusual sensation in both of his lower extremities. Consequently, we suggest that not only for cervical and thoracic but also for lumbar interlaminar ESIs, previous imaging studies should be reviewed before the injection.

Modification of the Cervical Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection Technique Based Upon the Anatomic Angle of the Superior Articular Process on MRI.

OBJECTIVE: A modification of the conventional technique for cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injection (CTFESI) has been developed. This technique may, theoretically, decrease the likelihood of the needle encountering the vertebral artery and spinal nerve. The approach uses angle measurements of the superior articular process ventral surface from the patient's axial MRI as a guide for fluoroscopic set-up and needle trajectory. This report aims to compare contrast flow patterns of the modified approach with those of the conventional technique. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review and prospective blinded analysis of contrast flow patterns. Setting. Outpatient interventional physiatry practice. METHODS: A retrospective blinded qualitative review of fluoroscopic images was performed to compare contrast flow patterns of CTFESIs performed using the modified approach with those using the conventional technique. A detailed description of the modified approach is provided in this report. RESULTS: Ninety-seven CTFESI procedures were used for flow analysis. The modified approach resulted in a statistically significant greater percentage of injections with epidural flow: 69% [95% CI = 57-82%] modified approach vs. 42% [95% CI = 28-56%] conventional approach. The modified technique also showed a statistically significant higher percent of injections categorized as having an ideal flow pattern, that of predominate epidural and/or intraforaminal flow: 65% [95% CI = 52-78%] vs. 27% [95% CI = 14-40%]. CONCLUSIONS: A modification of the conventional CTFESI technique, developed for the purpose of improved safety, may provide superior contrast flow patterns when compared to the conventional approach.

Incidence of Unintentional Flow of Contrast into the Facet Joints During Fluoroscopy-Guided Cervical Interlaminar Epidural Injections: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: We sometimes encounter unintentional flow of contrast into the facet joints during cervical interlaminar epidural injection, which leads to false-positive epidural injection. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the rate of facet flow of contrast and to investigate various factors associated with injection into the space of Okada during fluoroscopy-guided cervical interlaminar epidural injection. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Images from consecutive cases of fluoroscopy-guided cervical interlaminar epidural injection performed at a single institution between July 2015 and July 2018 were obtained and reviewed. METHODS: Cases of epidural injection were classified as either facet flow or no facet flow. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify the predictive factors of unintended injection into the Okada space. RESULTS: A total of 2,006 cases were included. Intra-articular flow was identified in 6.0% of cases (121/2,006). All cases of flow of contrast into the facet joints were recognized, and appropriate epidurograms were obtained during the procedures. The highest rate of unintended facet flow of the contrast (10.1%, 44/436) occurred at C5-6. Cervical interlaminar epidural injection at C5-6 and above (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.929, P = 0.001) and the paramidline approach for epidural injection (aOR = 2.427, P < 0.001) were associated with injection into the space of Okada. CONCLUSIONS: We detected injection into the space of Okada during fluoroscopy-guided cervical interlaminar epidural injection in 6.0% of procedures. Cervical interlaminar epidural injection at C5-6 and above and the paramidline approach for epidural injection were positive predictors of unintentional facet flow of the contrast.

Complications Associated with Lumbar Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Low back pain with radicular symptoms is a common cause of disability in the adult population in the USA. Lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) is one of the most frequently used intervention for lumbar radiculitis. The purpose of this review is to evaluate complications associated with lumbar TFESI. RECENT FINDINGS: Based on the literature review, the reported rate of minor complications was between 2.4 and 9.6%. The major complications including spinal abscess, spinal cord infarct, and epidural hematoma were documented as case reports. Some patients with spinal cord infarct had permanent neurologic deficits, while the other patients had recovery of neurological function after surgical or medical intervention. This review identifies both the minor and major complications related to lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections. According to this review, most complications are minor. Lumbar TFESI can be considered a safe treatment in the management of lumbar radicular pain. However, pain specialists should be aware of the potentially devastating major complications. Early recognition and treatment of complications are crucial for improving the outcome.

Complications of Fluoroscopically Guided Cervical Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injections.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injection is a common intervention in the management of cervical radiculitis. Given the large number of injections done annually, it is important to assess the potential complications associated with this procedure. RECENT FINDINGS: Based on current published studies, the overall complication rate varies. The vast majority are minor complications. However, this review also identified potentially catastrophic complications following cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections. Based upon our review, cervical epidural steroid injection is considered a safe intervention. Nevertheless, catastrophic complications such as spinal cord injuries from needle placement, infections, and epidural hematoma can occur. It is prudent to take appropriate measures to minimize these complications.

Fluoroscopically guided lumbar spine interlaminar and transforaminal epidural injections: inadvertent intravascular injection.

BACKGROUND: Inadvertent intravascular injection is a rare but catastrophic complication of lumbar epidural injections. PURPOSE: To determine risk factors for inadvertent intravascular injection in fluoroscopically guided lumbar spine epidural injections. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 212 patients who presented for lumbar interlaminar or transforaminal injection were prospectively enrolled. Patient demographics, history of surgery, injection side, site and approach, and volume of contrast injected were recorded. RESULTS: There were 89 (42%) interlaminar and 123 (58%) transforaminal injections. For 36 (17%) patients, there had been surgery at the injected or adjacent lumbar level. There were 25 (12%) inadvertent intravascular injections, with an incidence of 2/93 (2%) for interlaminar and 23/119 (19%) for transforaminal injections. The patients with inadvertent intravascular injection were older (P = 0.017) and had prior surgery at or adjacent to the level of injection (P < 0.0001). Transforaminal approach had a higher intravasation rate than interlaminar injections, both when comparing the entire cohort (P = 0.0001) and only patients without prior surgery (P = 0.01). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, transforaminal injections (odds ratio [OR] 9.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.14-44.6, P = 0.003) and prior surgery at or adjacent to the level of injection (OR 5.71, 95% CI 2.15-15.15, P < 0.001) were independently associated with increased risk of inadvertent intravascular injections. CONCLUSION: Inadvertent intravascular injection occurred in 12% of our lumbar injection cohort and is more common with transforaminal injections, in older patients, and with prior lumbar surgery at or adjacent to the level of injection.