Literature DB >> 18227326

A prospective evaluation of iodinated contrast flow patterns with fluoroscopically guided lumbar epidural steroid injections: the lateral parasagittal interlaminar epidural approach versus the transforaminal epidural approach.

Kenneth D Candido1, Meda S Raghavendra, Mariadas Chinthagada, Soraya Badiee, Donald W Trepashko.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lumbar midline interlaminar and transforaminal (TF) epidural steroid injections are treatments for low back pain with radiculopathy secondary to degenerative disk disease. Since pain generators are located anteriorly in the epidural space, ventral epidural spread is the logical target for placement of antiinflammatory medications. In this randomized, prospective, observational study, we compared contrast flow patterns in the epidural space using the parasagittal interlaminar (PIL) and transforaminal approaches with continual fluoroscopic guidance.
METHODS: Sixty adult patients with low back pain and unilateral radiculopathy from herniated or degenerated discs were enrolled. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups: TF or PIL (30 in each). All procedures were performed using continual fluoroscopic guidance and 5 mL of contrast. Contrast spread was rated (primary outcome measure) by the interventionalist. Spread was scored 0-2, with 0 = no anterior spread; 1 = anterior spread, same level as needle insertion; and 2 = anterior spread at > or = 1 segmental level. The secondary outcome measure was analgesia at 2 wk, 1, 3, and 6 mo.
RESULTS: One hundred percent (29 of 29) patients in the PIL group and 75% (21 of 28) patients in the TF group demonstrated anterior epidural spread. The mean spread grade was 1.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.83-2.0) in the PIL group and 1.46 (95% CI, 1.17-1.46) in the TF group (P = 0.003). Mean fluoroscopy time was 28.96 s (95% CI, 23.9-34.1 s) in the PIL group and 46.25 s (95% CI, 36.27-56.23 s) in the TF group (P = 0.003). Visual analog scale scores were equivalent between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The PIL approach is superior to the TF approach for placing contrast into the anterior epidural space with reduction in fluoroscopy times and an improved spread grade. With increasing attention to neurological injury associated with TF, the PIL approach may be more suitable for routine use.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18227326     DOI: 10.1213/ane.0b013e3181605e9b

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  26 in total

1.  Inadvertent intra-articular lumbar facet joint injection during fluoroscopically guided interlaminar epidural steroid injection.

Authors:  Ambrose J Huang; Daniel I Rosenthal; William E Palmer
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2010-09-04       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  Lateralizing epidural catheter placement as evidenced by electrical stimulation.

Authors:  Nigel E Sharrock; George Go
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  An evaluation of contrast dispersal pattern on preganglionic epidural injection through trans-lateral recess approach in patients with lumbosacral radiculopathy.

Authors:  Min Seok Kang; Jin Ho Hwang; Joon Sik Ahn
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Pain reduction after lumbar epidural injections using particulate versus non-particulate steroids: intensity of the baseline pain matters.

Authors:  Marek Tagowski; Zbigniew Lewandowski; Jürg Hodler; Thomas Spiegel; Gerhard W Goerres
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-03-18       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  Do Epidural Injections Provide Short- and Long-term Relief for Lumbar Disc Herniation? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Laxmaiah Manchikanti; Ramsin M Benyamin; Frank J E Falco; Alan D Kaye; Joshua A Hirsch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  CT Fluoroscopy-Guided Blood Patching of Ventral CSF Leaks by Direct Needle Placement in the Ventral Epidural Space Using a Transforaminal Approach.

Authors:  T J Amrhein; N T Befera; L Gray; P G Kranz
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 3.825

7.  Incidence of inadvertent intra-articular lumbar facet joint injection during fluoroscopically guided interlaminar epidural steroid injection.

Authors:  Ambrose J Huang; William E Palmer
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2011-12-12       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Immediate pain response to interlaminar lumbar epidural steroid administration: response characteristics and effects of anesthetic concentration.

Authors:  W S Bartynski; R B Jennings; W E Rothfus; V Agarwal
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 3.825

9.  Comparison of transforaminal verse interlaminar epidural steroid injection in low back pain with lumbosacral radicular pain: a meta-analysis of the literature.

Authors:  Guo Wei; Jie Liang; Bo Chen; Caisheng Zhou; Neng Ru; Jianfeng Chen; Fan Zhang
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-05-20       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Comparison of the Oblique Interlaminar and Transforaminal Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injections for Treatment of Low Back and Lumbosacral Radicular Pain.

Authors:  Eun-Ji Choi; Soon Ji Park; Yeong-Min Yoo; Ji-Uk Yoon; Sang-Wook Shin; Gyeong-Jo Byeon
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2021-02-15       Impact factor: 3.133

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.