BACKGROUND: Infiltration procedures are a common treatment of lumbar radiculopathy. There is a wide variety of infiltration techniques without an established gold standard. Therefore, we compared the effectiveness of CT-guided transforaminal infiltrations versus anatomical landmark-guided transforaminal infiltrations at the lower lumbar spine in case of acute sciatica at L3-L5. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted of 107 outpatients treated between 2009 and 2011. All patients were diagnosed with lumbar radiculopathic pain secondary to disc herniation in L3-L5. A total of 52 patients received CT-guided transforaminal infiltrations; 55 patients received non-imaging-guided nerve root infiltrations. The therapeutic success was evaluated regarding number of physician contacts, duration of treatment, type of analgesics used and loss of work days. Defined endpoint was surgery at the lower lumbar spine. RESULTS: In the CT group, patients needed significantly less oral analgesics (p < 0.001). Overall treatment duration and physician contacts were significantly lower in the CT group (p < 0.001 and 0.002) either. In the CT group, patients lost significant fewer work days due to incapacity (p < 0.001). Surgery had to be performed in 18.2 % of the non-imaging group patients (CT group: 1.9 %; p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: This study shows that CT-guided periradicular infiltration in lumbosciatica caused by intervertebral disc herniation is significantly superior to non-imaging, anatomical landmark-guided infiltration, regarding the parameters investigated. The high number of treatment failures in the non-imaging group underlines the inferiority of this treatment concept.
BACKGROUND: Infiltration procedures are a common treatment of lumbar radiculopathy. There is a wide variety of infiltration techniques without an established gold standard. Therefore, we compared the effectiveness of CT-guided transforaminal infiltrations versus anatomical landmark-guided transforaminal infiltrations at the lower lumbar spine in case of acute sciatica at L3-L5. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted of 107 outpatients treated between 2009 and 2011. All patients were diagnosed with lumbar radiculopathic pain secondary to disc herniation in L3-L5. A total of 52 patients received CT-guided transforaminal infiltrations; 55 patients received non-imaging-guided nerve root infiltrations. The therapeutic success was evaluated regarding number of physician contacts, duration of treatment, type of analgesics used and loss of work days. Defined endpoint was surgery at the lower lumbar spine. RESULTS: In the CT group, patients needed significantly less oral analgesics (p < 0.001). Overall treatment duration and physician contacts were significantly lower in the CT group (p < 0.001 and 0.002) either. In the CT group, patients lost significant fewer work days due to incapacity (p < 0.001). Surgery had to be performed in 18.2 % of the non-imaging group patients (CT group: 1.9 %; p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: This study shows that CT-guided periradicular infiltration in lumbosciatica caused by intervertebral disc herniation is significantly superior to non-imaging, anatomical landmark-guided infiltration, regarding the parameters investigated. The high number of treatment failures in the non-imaging group underlines the inferiority of this treatment concept.
Authors: J H Mink; A L Deutsch; T B Goldstein; R Bray; R Pashman; I I Armstrong; M Sinel; A Gart Journal: Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am Date: 1998-05 Impact factor: 1.784
Authors: J Karppinen; A Malmivaara; M Kurunlahti; E Kyllönen; T Pienimäki; P Nieminen; A Ohinmaa; O Tervonen; H Vanharanta Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2001-05-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Fabian Henry Jürgen Elsholtz; Lars-Arne Schaafs; Christoph Erxleben; Bernd Hamm; Stefan Markus Niehues Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Maximilian Nunninger; Victor Paul Bela Braun; Marco Ziegert; Felix Benjamin Schwarz; Bernd Hamm; Michael Scheel; Paul Jahnke Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2019-12-14 Impact factor: 2.804