Interlaminar Epidural Injections Research Articles

Declining Utilization and Inflation-Adjusted Expenditures for Epidural Procedures in Chronic Spinal Pain in the Medicare Population

BACKGROUND: Despite epidurals being one of the most common interventional pain procedures for managing chronic spinal pain in the United States, expenditure analysis lacks assessment in correlation with utilization patterns. OBJECTIVES: This investigation was undertaken to assess expenditures for epidural procedures in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population from 2009 to 2018. STUDY DESIGN: The present study was designed to assess expenditures in all settings, for all providers in the FFS Medicare population from 2009 to 2018 in the United States. In this manuscript: • A patient was described as receiving epidural procedures throughout the year. • A visit was considered to include all regions treated during the visit. • An episode was considered as one treatment per region utilizing primary codes only. • Services or procedures were considered as all procedures including bilateral and multiple levels. A standard 5% national sample of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) physician outpatient billing claims data for those enrolled in the FFS Medicare program from 2009 to 2018 was utilized. All the expenditures were presented with allowed costs and adjusted to inflation to 2018 US dollars. RESULTS: Total expenditures were $723,981,594 in 2009, whereas expenditures of 2018 were $829,987,636, with an overall 14.6% increase, or an annual increase of 1.5%. However, the inflation-adjusted rate was $847,058,465 in 2009, compared to $829,987,636 in 2018, a reduction overall of 2% and an annual reduction of 0.2%. Inflation-adjusted per patient annual costs decreased from $988.93 in 2009 to $819.27 in 2018 with a decrease of 17.2% or an annual decline of 2.1%. In addition, inflation-adjusted costs per procedure decreased from $399.77 to $377.94, or 5.5% overall and 0.6% annually. Per procedure, episode, visit, and patient expenses were higher for transforaminal epidural procedures than lumbar interlaminar/caudal epidural procedures. Overall, costs of transforaminal epidurals increased 27.6% or 2.7% annually, whereas lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections cost were reduced 2.7%, or 0.3% annually. Inflation-adjusted costs for transforaminal epidurals increased 9.1% or 1.0% annually and declined 16.9 or 2.0% annually for lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections. LIMITATIONS: Expenditures for epidural procedures in chronic spinal pain were assessed only in the FFS Medicare population. This excluded over 30% of the Medicare population, which is enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for inflation, there was a decrease of expenditures for epidural procedures of 2%, or 0.2% annually, from 2009 to 2018. However, prior to inflation, the increases were noted at 14.6% and 1.5%. Inflation-adjusted costs per patient, per visit, and per procedure also declined. The proportion of Medicare patients per 100,000 receiving epidural procedures decreased 9.1%, or 1.1% annually. However, assessment of individual procedures showed higher costs for transforaminal epidural procedures compared to lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural procedures. KEY WORDS: Chronic spinal pain, epidural procedures, caudal epidural, lumbar interlaminar epidural, cervical interlaminar epidural, thoracic interlaminar epidural, lumbar transforaminal epidural procedures, Medicare expenditures

Evaluation of Contrast Flow Patterns with Cervical Interlaminar Epidural Injection: Comparison of Midline and Paramedian Approaches.

Background and objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare and to analyze contrast spread patterns between the paramedian and midline approaches to cervical interlaminar epidural injection (CIEI). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 84 CIEI cases that had been performed for unilateral cervical spinal pain from April 2019 to April 2020. After 3 mL of contrast had been injected into the epidural space, fluoroscopic images were obtained. The CIEI was divided into a midline (Group M, n = 42) and a paramedian (Group P, n = 42) approach by anteroposterior imaging. The P Group was classified into a more medial (Group Pm, n = 26) and a more lateral (Group Pl, n = 16) group. Using ImageJ on an anteroposterior image, we assessed the grayscale brightness ratio of the ipsilateral or contralateral side of the vertebral body as well as the intervertebral disc space one level just above the needle location. We identified the dispersion of contrast into the ventral epidural space. Results: The grayscale brightness ratio was significantly higher in Group P than in Group M (p < 0.001). The incidence of ventral epidural spread in Group M was 57.1% versus 88.1% in Group P, which was significantly different (p = 0.001). Conclusions: The fluoroscopic CIEI finding in the paramedian approach predominantly showed an excellent delivery of the injectate to the ipsilateral side in comparison to the contralateral side. This showed a greater advantage in delivery toward ventral epidural space as compared to the midline approach.

Analysis of Subdural Injection During Lumbar Interlaminar Epidural Injection in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome.

Persistent or recurrent back and leg pain following spinal surgery, known as failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), significantly limits daily life activities. A lumbar epidural injection can reduce adhesions, inflammation, and nerve compression, although the epidural space can be distorted due to dura mater and epidural tissues changes after spinal surgery. This study analyzed subdural injection during lumbar epidural injection in FBSS patients. We retrospectively analyzed data from 155 patients who received a lumbar interlaminar epidural injection to manage FBSS. We grouped the patients based on the injected contrast medium appearance in the subdural (group S) or epidural spaces (group E) in fluoroscopic contrast images. Demographic, clinical, surgical and fluoroscopic data were recorded and evaluated, as were the pain scores before and after injection. There were 59 patients (38.1%) in the subdural group. Injection distance from the surgery level differed between the groups. Risk of subdural injection at level 1 distance from the surgery level had an odds ratio of 0.374, and at level ≥2, it was 0.172, when compared to level 0. Subdural incidence differed with the distance from surgical site. Physicians should strive to reduce subdural incidence when the injection is planned at surgery site in FBSS.

Ultrasound-guided interventions during pregnancy for lumbosacral pain unresponsive to conservative treatment: A retrospective review.

Current conventional therapeutic strategies for lumbosacral pain during pregnancy are usually inadequate and data regarding interventional analgesic procedures feasible in pregnant women is scarce. We decided to retrospectively review our experience of ultrasound-guided pain management procedures in pregnant women with lumbosacral pain unresponsive to conservative treatment. Twenty women in the second trimester of pregnancy with lumbosacral pain developed during pregnancy unresponsive to conservative treatments who underwent the following ultrasound-guided pain interventions were included: sacroiliac joint, caudal epidural, interlaminar epidural, and trigger point injections. All patients were followed up until early postnatal period using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. All but one patient achieved satisfactory pain control throughout the pregnancy with a single injection. Significant declines in ODI and VAS scores was attained within the first 2 weeks and first week of intervention, respectively, which was maintained thereafter until early postnatal period. Injections used for effective interventional pain management in nonpregnant populations seem to represent an effective and safe method also for pregnant women when performed under ultrasound guidance, with rapid onset and enduring duration of action until the time of delivery.

Effect of low-dose lidocaine on objective upper extremity strength and immediate pain relief following cervical interlaminar epidural injections: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial

BackgroundLow-dose lidocaine is a common diluent for analgesia following cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injection (CIESI). Concerns with this practice exist. A single-arm cohort reported that 20% of patients develop postprocedural...

Https://painphysicianjournal.com/current

Background: Chronic neck pain is reportedly considered the fourth leading cause of disability. Cervical interlaminar epidural injections are among the commonly administered nonsurgical interventions for managing chronic neck pain, secondary to disc herniation and radiculitis, spinal stenosis, or chronic neck pain of discogenic origin. Objectives: To systematically review the differences in the effectiveness of cervical epidural injections with local anesthetics with or without steroids for the management of chronic neck pain. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A comprehensive search of the literature of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared epidural injections with local anesthetic with or without steroids was performed, including a search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for all years up to May 2019. Meta-analysis was done for pain relief based on the Numeric Rating Scale, functional status based on the Neck Disability Index, and opioid intake dosage. Results: Four studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 370 patients were divided into 2 groups: the experimental group received cervical epidural injection with steroid and local anesthetic, and the control group received injection with local anesthetic only. Regrading pain relief, no significant difference was observed between both groups (weighted mean difference [WMD], –0.006; 95% confidence interval (CI), –0.275 to 0.263; P = 0.963; I2 = 0.0% at 12 months). There was also no significant difference in the improvement of the functional status (WMD, 0.159; 95% CI, –1.231 to 1.549; P = 0.823; I2 = 9.8% at 12 months). Similarly, there was no significant difference in opioid dosage (WMD, –0.093; 95% CI, –5.952 to 5.766; P = 0.975; I2 = 0.0% at 12 months). Limitations: Only a few studies on this premise were found in the literature. There was also a lack of heterogeneity of the included RCT studies. Conclusions: The addition of steroids to anesthetic injectates was not associated with better pain and functional score outcomes compared with anesthetic injectate alone in patients with chronic neck pain. Key words: Chronic neck pain, cervical radiculopathy, cervical disc disease, spinal stenosis, facet joint pathology, cervical epidural injections, steroid injections, local anesthetic injections, systematic review, meta-analysis, randomized control trial

Role of transforaminal epidural injections or selective nerve root blocks in the management of lumbar radicular syndrome - A narrative, evidence-based review

ObjectiveLumbar radicular Syndrome (LRS) is a common spinal pathology and is attributed to complex interplay of mechanical, inflammatory and immunological processes. Epidural injection of steroids has a significant therapeutic role in mitigating the inflammatory component of LRS. Trans-foraminal approach under image guidance enables a targeted drug delivery. The current narrative review discusses the various aspects related to lumbar trans-foraminal epidural injection of steroid (LTFIS). MethodsAn elaborate search on PubMed, Google and Medline databases was made using keywords “lumbar selective nerve root block”, “lumbar trans-foraminal epidural steroid injection”, “selective nerve root block in lumbar disc prolapse”, “trans-foraminal epidural steroid injection in lumbar prolapse”, “selective nerve root block in lumbar radiculopathy”, and “trans-foraminal epidural steroid injection in lumbar radiculopathy” The articles were selected based on specific inclusion criteria. ResultsOur search identified 539 articles. All articles discussing alternate procedures, LTFIS in other pathologies, diagnostic roles of LTFIS, not pertaining to concerned questions, in non-English language and duplicate articles were excluded. Review articles, randomised controlled trials or level 1 studies were given preference. Overall, 108 articles were included. Being a focussed narrative review, further screening [Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) or Methodological Index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) criteria] was not performed to select articles. Based on the evidence, LTFIS is an effective and useful treatment modality. It is offered to patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) presenting with persistent, unilateral, radiculopathy after a course of conservative measures for around 6 weeks’ duration. It has been reported to yield better results than caudal or inter-laminar epidural injections. The anti-inflammatory and nociceptive signal stabilization actions of steroids, as well as mechanical effects of washout of inflammatory mediators and neural lysis contribute to its efficacy. The three different approaches include sub-pedicular, retro-neural and retro-discal. The procedure is performed under image guidance using a water-soluble contrast under fluoroscopy. The four described radiculogram patterns include “arm”, “arrow”, “linear” and “splash”. Computerised tomography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging are other modalities, which may be helpful in performing LTFIS. The use of particulate versus non-particulate steroids is controversial. ConclusionThe overall success rate of SNRB is reported to be 76–88%. The majority of benefits are observed during immediate and early post-injection period. Clinical factors including duration and severity of symptoms, and radiological factors like presence of osteophytes, location, size and type of disc prolapse influence outcomes. The radiculogram “splash” pattern is associated with poor outcomes.

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

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. 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. 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. 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. 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.

An Updated Analysis of Utilization of Epidural Procedures in Managing Chronic Pain in the Medicare Population from 2000 to 2018

With increasing costs of health care in the United States, attention is focused on expensive conditions. Musculoskeletal disorders with low back and neck pain account for the third highest amount of various disease categories. Minimally invasive interventional techniques for managing spinal pain, including epidural injections, have been considered to be growing rapidly. However, recent analyses of utilization of interventional techniques from 2000 to 2018 has shown a decline of 2.6% and a decline of 21% from 2009 to 2018 for epidural and adhesiolysis procedures. The objectives of this analysis of epidural procedures from 2000 to 2018 are to provide an update on utilization of epidural injections in managing chronic pain in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population, with a comparative analysis of 2000 to 2009 and 2009 to 2018. Utilization patterns and variables of epidural injections in managing chronic spinal pain from 2000 to 2009 and from 2009 to 2018 in the FFS Medicare population in the United States. This analysis was performed by utilizing master data from CMS, physician/supplier procedure summary from 2000 to 2018. The analysis was performed by the assessment of utilization patterns using guidance from Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). Overall, epidural procedures declined at a rate of 20.7% per 100,000 Medicare enrollees in FFS Medicare in the United States from 2009 to 2018, with an annual decline of 2.5%. However, from 2000 to 2009, there was an increase of 89.2%, with an annual increase of 7.3%. This analysis showed a decline in all categories, with an annual decrease of 4.7% for lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections, 4.7% decline for cervical/thoracic transforaminal epidural injections, 1.1% decline for lumbar/sacral transforaminal epidural injections, and finally 0.4% decline for cervical/thoracic interlaminar epidural injections. Overall declines from 2009 to 2018 were highest for cervical and thoracic transforaminal injections with 35.1%, followed by lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections of 34.9%, followed by 9.4% for lumbar/sacral transforaminal epidurals, and 3.5% for cervical and thoracic interlaminar epidurals. This analysis was limited by noninclusion of Medicare Advantage plans, which constitutes almost 30% of the Medicare population. In addition, utilization data for individual states continues to be sparse and may not be accurate or representative of the population. The declining utilization of epidural injections in all categories with an annual of 2.5% and overall decrease of 20.7% from 2009 to 2018 compared with annual increases of 7.3% and overall increase of 89.2% from 2000 to 2009 shows a slow decline of utilization of all epidural injections. Chronic spinal pain, interlaminar epidural injections, caudal epidural injections, transforaminal epidural injections, utilization patterns.

Interventional Pain Medicine Practice in the UK and the USA: A Survey of 242 Pain Physicians

Pain medicine practices vary across different regions within a country and between countries. The objective of the survey was to study the variation in interventional pain medicine practices in the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US). A survey was designed in 2019 on Survey Monkey®. Pain physicians from the UK and the US were invited to respond. A total of 120 responses were received from pain physicians in the UK and 122 from the US. Twenty-six percent and 90% of pain physicians in the UK and US, respectively, are in full-time pain medicine practice. There was marked variation in the utilization of diagnostic medial branch blocks before performing radiofrequency denervation (RFD) between the UK and the US. In the UK, 42% of pain physicians, and 50% in the US, use a 20-gauge or a 22-gauge radiofrequency needle for lumbar RFD. Around 30% to 50% of pain physicians, both in the UK and the US, discontinued antithrombotic agents before medial branch blocks at all the spinal levels. Around 50% of pain physicians in the UK and US are stopping anticoagulants before lumbar and cervical RFD. Over 95% of UK and US respondents stopped antithrombotic agents for interlaminar and transforaminal epidural injections along the spine. At the lumbar level, 51% of pain physicians in the UK and 47% in the US use a particulate steroid for the initial lumbar transforaminal epidural injection (TFESI); and 4% and 14% in the UK and US, respectively, use a particulate steroid for initial cervical TFESI. Eight percent of pain physicians in the UK and 20% from the US would switch to a particulate steroid if the initial TFESI with a nonparticulate steroid did not provide satisfactory pain relief. Ten percent of pain physicians from the United Kingdom and 20% from the US believed that this switch provides better pain relief. Interventional pain physicians from the UK and the US were invited to respond. This may not reflect global practice. Our survey has highlighted the wide variation in interventional pain medicine practices both in the UK and the US. The relevant governing bodies in the UK and in the US should encourage clinicians to use at least an 18-gauge radiofrequency needle for RFD at the lumbar level. Discontinuing antithrombotic agents for the lumbar medial branch block is not justifiable. Pain physicians must discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using a nonparticulate over a particulate steroid preparation with the patient before performing TFESI as a standard procedure during the consenting process. Antithrombotic agents, epidural steroid, medial branch blocks, pain practice variations, particulate and nonparticulate steroids, radiofrequency denervation, spinal interventions.

Evaluation of Cost-Utility of Thoracic Interlaminar Epidural Injections.

Chronic thoracic pain, even though not as prevalent as low back and neck pain, appears in approximately 30% of the general population. The severity of thoracic pain and degree of disability seems to be similar to other painful conditions. Despite this severity, interventions in managing chronic thoracic pain are less frequent, and there is a paucity of literature regarding epidural injections and facet joint interventions. As with lumbar and cervical spine, a multitude of interventions are offered in managing chronic thoracic pain, including interventional techniques with epidural injections and facet joint interventions. A single randomized controlled trial (RCT) has been published with a 2-year follow-up of clinical effectiveness of the results. However, there have not been any cost-utility analysis studies pertaining to either epidural injections or facet joint interventions in thoracic pain. Based on the results of the RCT, a cost-utility analysis of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections was undertaken. Evaluation of the cost-utility analysis of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids in managing thoracic disc herniation, thoracic spinal stenosis, and thoracic discogenic or axial pain was assessed in 110 patients with a 2-year follow-up. Direct payment data from 2018 was utilized for procedural costs and indirect costs. Costs, including drug costs, were determined by multiplication of direct procedural payment data by a factor of 1.67 or addition of 40% of cost to accommodate for indirect payments and arrive at overall costs. Cost-utility analysis showed direct procedural cost of USD $1943.19, whereas total estimated costs year per QALY were USD $3245.12.

Cervical Interlaminar Epidural Injections In The Treatment Of Cervical Disc Herniation, Post Surgery Syndrome, Or Discogenic Pain: Cost Utility Analysis From Randomized Trials

Background: Neck pain is one of the major conditions attributing to overall disability in the United States. There have been multiple publications assessing clinical and cost effectiveness of multiple modalities of interventions in managing chronic neck pain. Even then, the literature has been considered sparse in relation to cervical interlaminar epidural injections in managing chronic neck pain. In contrast, cost utility studies of lumbar interlaminar injections, caudal epidural injections, cervical and lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, percutaneous adhesiolysis demonstrated costs of less than $3,500 for quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Objectives: To assess the cost utility of cervical interlaminar epidural injections in managing chronic neck and/or upper extremity pain secondary to cervical disc herniation, post-surgery syndrome in neck, and axial or discogenic neck pain. Study Design: Analysis based on 3 previously published randomized trials of the effectiveness of cervical interlaminar epidural injections assessing their role in disc herniation, cervical post-surgery syndrome, and axial or discogenic pain. Setting: A contemporary, private, specialty referral interventional pain management center in the United States. Methods: Cost utility of cervical interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids in managing cervical disc herniation, cervical post-surgery syndrome, and cervical discogenic or axial neck back pain was conducted with data derived from 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included a 2-year follow-up, with inclusion of 356 patients. The primary outcome was significant improvement defined as at least 50% in pain reduction and disability status. Direct payment data from all carriers from 2018 was utilized for the assessment of procedural costs. Overall costs, including drug costs, were determined by multiplication of direct procedural payment data by a factor of 1.67 to accommodate for indirect payments respectively for disc herniation, discogenic pain, and cervical post-surgery syndrome. Results: The results of the 3 RCTs showed direct cost utility for one year of QALY of $2,412.31 for axial or discogenic pain without disc herniation, $2,081.07 for disc herniation, and $2,309.20 for post surgery syndrome, with an average cost per one year QALY of $2,267.57, with total estimated overall costs with addition of indirect costs of $3,475.38, $4,028.55, $3,856.36, and $3,785.89 respectively. Limitations: The limitation of this cost utility analysis includes that it is a single center evaluation. Indirect costs were extrapolated. Conclusion: This cost utility analysis of cervical interlaminar epidural injections in patients nonresponsive to conservative management in the treatment of disc herniation, post surgery syndrome and axial or discogenic neck pain shows $2,267.57 for direct costs with a total cost of $3,785.89 per QALY. Key words: Cervical interlaminar epidural injections, chronic neck pain, cervical disc herniation, cervical discogenic pain, post surgery syndrome, cost utility analysis, cost effectiveness analysis, quality-adjusted life years

Letter to the Editor Regarding a Recent Article: Cervical Epidural Depth: Correlation Between Cervical MRI Measurements of the Skin-to-Cervical Epidural Space and the Actual Needle Depth During Interlaminar Cervical Epidural Injections.

Letter to the Editor Regarding a Recent Article: Cervical Epidural Depth: Correlation Between Cervical MRI Measurements of the Skin-to-Cervical Epidural Space and the Actual Needle Depth During Interlaminar Cervical Epidural Injections.

Comparative study between transforaminal epidural selective nerve root block versus interlaminar epidural in the treatment of lumbar radicular leg pain

&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background:&lt;/strong&gt; Sciatic neuralgia is a result of nerve root oedema because of the inflammatory, immunological and mechanical factors. Steroid injections play an important role in the management of sciatic radiculopathy. Steroids act by reducing the oedema around the nerve roots and decreasing pain. Locally administered steroids have the advantage of reduced dosage and targeted delivery around the nerve roots. This forms the basis of epidural steroid injections. This can be given around the nerve root in the transforaminal space or in the interlaminar space. There is a paucity of literature comparing the two techniques of epidural steroid injections. We have done a randomized comparative trial, to compare the effectiveness of the two modalities of injection in the management of a single level unilateral foraminal disc herniation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods:&lt;/strong&gt; Patients were randomized in two groups Group A: Transforaminal epidural (SNRB) and Group B: interlaminar epidural. Same dose of steroid was used in each group.&lt;strong&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results:&lt;/strong&gt; Immediate post injection, 2 week and 1 month transforaminal epidural (SNRB) was better compare to interlaminar epidural however at the end of 3 months the difference was not significant (p=0.08).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/strong&gt; Both transforaminal and interlaminar epidural injection are effective form of treatment in mild to moderate grade of disc disease. Both the technique provide short lasting relief in the symptoms associated with disc pathology, however pain management is better in transforaminal group compared to interlaminar group. Thus these techniques can be considered for delaying surgery and providing intermitant relief. &lt;/p&gt;

Ultrasound-Assisted Lumbar Interlaminar Epidural Dye Injection and Evaluation of Its Distribution by Anatomical Dissection.

Background: Epidural steroid injections are frequently used to treat lumbar radicular pain. However, the spread of a solute in the epidural space needs further elucidation. We aimed at assessing the distribution of green dye in the epidural space after lumbar epidural injection on cadavers.Methods: We performed ultrasound-guided injections of green dye between lumbar vertebrae 4 and 5 in 24 cadavers. The cadavers were randomly divided into group A and B according to the volume of injected dye; 3 ml in group A (n = 13) and 6 ml in group B (n = 11). Accuracy of the needle insertion and patterns and distributions of the spread were compared between the groups. After local dissection, we examined the spread of dye in dorsal and ventral epidural spaces and presented the distribution as whole numbers and quartiles of intervertebral segments. Mann-Whitney U Test was used to compare distribution of dye spread between groups A and B. Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test was used to compare the spread of dye in cranial and caudal direction within the group. We considered P < 0.05 as significant.Results: Data were obtained from all 24 cadavers. Median levels of dorsal cranial dye distribution in groups A and B were 2 and 4 (P = 0.02), respectively. In the dorsal caudal−2 and 2, respectively (P = 0.04). In the ventral epidural space cranial dye spread medians were−0 and 2 in groups, respectively (P = 0.04). Ventral caudal spread was 0 and 1, respectively (P = 0.03). We found a significant difference between cranial and caudal dye distribution in group B (P < 0.05). In group A the dye spread was bilateral. In group B cranial and caudal dye spread was observed.Conclusions: Ventral dye flow was observed in 50% of injections. Bilateral spread of dye occurred in 63%, and more often in group A. Cranial spread was slightly higher than caudal spread in group A despite a smaller injected volume, and significantly higher in group B following a larger volume.

A Prospective Comparison of CT-Epidurogram Between Th1-Transforaminal Epidural Injection and Th1/2-Parasagittal Interlaminar Epidural Injection for Cervical Upper Limb Pain

Background: Cervical epidural injections for treating neck and upper limb pain are performed by 2 methods: transforaminal and interlaminar. Many serious complications caused by inadvertent intravascular injection have been reported with the use of cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injection through the anterior-lateral approach. Despite international practical guidelines that have been proposed, cervical transforaminal epidural injection is still less recommended than cervical interlaminar epidural injection. Objectives: The objective of this study is to introduce Th1-transforaminal epidural injection (Th1- TFEI) through the posterior-lateral approach, compare the injectate spread in Th1-TFEI with that of Th1/2-parasaggital interlaminar epidural injection (Th1/2-pILEI), and clarify the clinical characteristics of Th1-TFEI. Study Design: This research involved a prospective study of 30 patients receiving both Th1-TFEI and Th1/2-pILEI. Methods: Thirty patients with unilateral upper limb pain were enrolled for this prospective study. Th1-TFEI and Th1/2-pILEI were administered on each case in random order under fluoroscopy, and computed tomographic (CT) epidurograms were compared. Changes in circulatory dynamics, presence of Horner’s syndrome, changes in the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS-11), and adverse events were investigated. Results: Patients included 15 men and 15 women and included 24 cases of cervical spine disease and 6 cases with other upper limb pain. The Th1-TFEI group had significantly higher rates of “Th1 root filling” (100%), “ventral spread” (70.0%), and “lateral limitation” (26.7%) compared to the Th1/2-pILEI group. In the Th1-TFEI group, cephalad spread averaged 2.97 vertebral bodies, reaching approximately up to C6. The Th1/2-pILEI group had an average of 4.76 vertebral bodies, approximately up to C4. The 2 groups showed significant differences in cephalad spread. Horner’s syndrome appeared in the Th1-TFEI group at a rate of 56.7%, significantly higher than that in the Th1/2-pILEI group at 17.2%. The presence of Horner’s syndrome showed significant correlations with “ventral spread” and “spread up to C6.” There were no significant differences in NRS-11 improvement and changes in circulatory dynamics between the groups. There were no major complications. Limitations: The components of injectate were standardized; however, the needle gauge numbers were varied. In addition, interpretation of the CT-epidurogram was not blinded. The sample size was small; therefore, multivariate analysis was not possible. Conclusions: CT-epidurogram comparison revealed that Th1/2-pILEI was not localized on the injection side, and there was better dorsal spread – although ventral spread was small. Contrarily, Th1-TFEI was localized on the injection side, and better ventral spread was shown while cephalad spread was limited. We expected the addition of a sympathetic block effect suggested by the Horner’s syndrome as well as the merits of the ventral spread. However, short-term clinical effects were equal to those of Th1/2 pILEI. In future research, we need to standardize the diseases to include and to increase the number of cases to enable evaluation of clinical effectiveness.Key words: Epidural, cervical, transforaminal, interlaminar, fluoroscopy, CT-epidurogram, dorsal, ventral, cephalad, Horner’s syndrome

Comparison of effectiveness for fluoroscopic cervical interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroid in cervical post-surgery syndrome.

BackgroundNeck and back pain are leading sources of disability placing substantial burden on health care systems. Surgical interventions in managing chronic neck pain secondary to various disorders continue to increase. Even though surgical interventions are effective, a significant proportion of patients continue to have symptomatology and develop cervical post-surgery syndrome. This study was performed to know the effectiveness of cervical interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids.MethodsThe effectiveness of fluoroscopic cervical interlaminar epidural injections in post-surgery syndrome was evaluated in a randomized, active controlled trial. The study population included 116 patients assigned to 2 groups. Group 1 received cervical interlaminar epidural injections with local anesthetic alone and Group 2 received injection with local anesthetic and steroids. The main outcomes were defined as significant improvement (greater than 50%) of pain relief using the numeric rating scale and/or functional status improvement using the Neck Disability Index (NDI).ResultsBoth groups had similar results with significant improvement (≥ 50% pain relief and functional status improvement) in 69% of the patients in Group I, whereas, in Group II, 71% of the patients showed significant improvement at the end of 2 years. During a 2-year period, the average number of procedures was 5 to 6, with an average of approximately 12 weeks of significant improvement per procedure.ConclusionsFluoroscopic cervical interlaminar epidural injections administered in cervical post-surgery syndrome using local anesthetic, regardless of the use of steroids, may be effective in approximately 70% of the patients at 2-year follow-up.

Long-term comparative study between transforaminal and interlaminar epidural injection of steroids in lumbar radiculopathy due to single-level disc herniation

Background: Epidural steroid injection is commonly used in treating radicular pain secondary to lumbar disc prolapse, which is a common clinical condition. Two main techniques were suggested to deliver the steroids: interlaminar and transforaminal injections. Methods: From June 2013 to March 2016 we performed a prospective study on 40 patients between the ages of 19 and 55 yr. All the patients had low back pain and lower limb radiculopathy secondary to a single-level lumbar disc prolapse. The pupose of this study was to compare interlaminar and tranforaminal injection techniques regarding the short-term and long-term improvement of back pain, leg pain, and functional outcomes. On admission the patients were evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for functional capacity. They were followed for a period of 47 to 49 wk (mean 48 wk), and clinical and functional outcomes were assessed using the same tools for evaluation. Results: We found that VAS and ODI improved in both the transforaminal and interlaminar groups both short and long term, but the only statistically significant improvement was in VAS for leg pain and the ODI in the transforaminal group. Conclusions: Epidural steroid injection is generally a safe procedure, but the transforaminal approach gives better results than the interlaminar approach in relieving radicular pain and improving functional outcome.

NEEDLE TIP DEPTH ASSESSMENT ON FORAMINAL OBLIQUE FLUOROSCOPIC VIEWS DURING CERVICAL RADIOFREQUENCY NEUROTOMY. A TECHNICAL NOTE

Background: Precise needle tip visualization using fluoroscopy is critical to avoid injury to nearby neurovascular structures during cervical radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN). The contralateral oblique (CLO) view has been shown to be superior to the lateral view for needle tip visualization during cervical interlaminar epidural injection (CESI). It has been demonstrated that increasing the angle of obliquity during CESI causes the needle tip to appear to move dorsal and superficial on contralateral oblique views. Needle tip visualization for cervical RFN has been described using a foraminal oblique (FO) view, but the technique and effect of angle on needle tip depth have not been studied. Objective: To analyze how the needle tip depth changes with varying oblique angles of FO views during cervical RFN. Methods: Fluoroscopic views during cervical RFN between lateral and 50 degrees FO in a single subject were analyzed. Results: The needle tip appears to move ventral and deeper with increasing angle of obliquity with respect to the lamina. Conclusion: Contrary to the phenomenon noticed with contralateral oblique views in CESI, in this case the needle tip appears to move ventral and deeper with increasing angle of obliquity on foraminal oblique views during cervical RFN. It becomes crucial for practitioners to understand that during cervical RFN, with inadequate foraminal oblique angle, needle tip looks artificially superficial, which in turn may cause one to advance the needle to a dangerous depth. Limitation: This is an observational study in a single subject; hence further larger studies are needed to confirm the findings in this technical report. Key words: contralateral oblique, needle depth assessment, cervical radiofrequency neurotomy, cervical radiofrequency ablation, foraminal oblique, fluoroscopy views, fluoroscopy angles

Epidural interlaminar injections in severe degenerative lumbar spine: fluoroscopy should not be a luxury

ObjectiveTo assess technical efficacy, accuracy, and safety of epidural (interlaminar) injections performed blindly in patients with a severely degenerated lumbar spine.MethodsOver 12 consecutive months, 138 patients with a severe degenerative...