Literature DB >> 30620259

Fluoroscopy-guided versus CT-guided Lumbar Steroid Injections: Comparison of Radiation Exposure and Outcomes.

Tobias J Dietrich1, Cynthia K Peterson1, Konstantinos G Zeimpekis1, Susanne Bensler1, Reto Sutter1, Christian W A Pfirrmann1.   

Abstract

Purpose To compare the radiation exposure for participants and interventionalists as well as participant outcomes between fluoroscopy-guided versus CT-guided lumbar spinal injections. Materials and Methods This prospective, nonrandomized observational study included 1446 participants (mean age, 60.6 years; range, 18-91 years) who received transforaminal epidural injections or facet joint injections under fluoroscopic or CT guidance between October 2009 and April 2016. Effective doses were estimated by conversion from dose-area product for fluoroscopy-guided injections and dose-length product for CT-guided injections. Radiation exposure for interventionalists was measured with dosimeters at the body and wrist. The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale was used to assess clinical participant outcomes at 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month after lumbar spine injections. Student t and χ2 tests were used for statistical analysis. Results The mean effective participant dose for fluoroscopy-guided lumbar transforaminal epidural injections was 0.24 mSv ± 0.22, compared with 0.33 mSv ± 0.10 for CT-guided injections (P < .003). The mean effective participant dose for fluoroscopy-guided lumbar facet joint injections was 0.10 mSv ± 0.11, compared with 0.33 mSv ± 0.13 for CT-guided injections (P < .001). Radiation exposure for the interventionalist was higher during fluoroscopy-guided compared with CT-guided lumbar transforaminal epidural injections (body: 0.42 × 10-3 mSv ± 0.99 vs 0.11 × 10-3 mSv ± 0.44, P < .03; wrist: 1.44 × 10-3 mSv ± 2.69 vs 0.14 × 10-3 mSv ± 0.55, P < .001). Radiation exposure of the wrist for the interventionalist was higher during fluoroscopy-guided compared with CT-guided lumbar facet injections (0.46 × 10-3 mSv ± 0.93 vs 0.06 × 10-3 mSv ± 0.24, respectively; P < .006). Clinical participant outcomes as determined with the PGIC scale did not differ between fluoroscopy-guided and CT-guided injections (P = .15-.96). Conclusion Radiation exposure in fluoroscopy-guided lumbar spinal injections was lower for participants and higher for physicians when compared with CT-guided injections; however, no associations were observed between clinical participant outcomes and type of imaging-guided injection technique at all evaluated time points. © RSNA, 2019.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 30620259     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2018181224

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  10 in total

1.  Counterpoint: Conventional Fluoroscopy-Guided Selective Cervical Nerve Root Block-A Safe, Effective, and Efficient Modality in the Hands of an Experienced Proceduralist.

Authors:  F W Ott; R Pluhm; K Ozturk; A M McKinney; J B Rykken
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 2.  Rationale for fluoroscopic guidance in spine injections.

Authors:  Lindsay Stratchko; Jennifer Pitts; John Symanski; Andrew Ross; Kirkland Davis; Eric Monroe; Humberto Rosas
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2022-09-14       Impact factor: 2.128

Review 3.  Spine injections: the rationale for CT guidance.

Authors:  Sanja Bogdanovic; Reto Sutter; Veronika Zubler
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2022-09-23       Impact factor: 2.128

Review 4.  Epidural Steroid Injections for Low Back Pain: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Massimiliano Carassiti; Giuseppe Pascarella; Alessandro Strumia; Fabrizio Russo; Giuseppe Francesco Papalia; Rita Cataldo; Francesca Gargano; Fabio Costa; Michelangelo Pierri; Francesca De Tommasi; Carlo Massaroni; Emiliano Schena; Felice Eugenio Agrò
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-12-26       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  50th anniversary of computed tomography: past and future applications in clinical neuroscience.

Authors:  William P Dillon
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2021-10-18

6.  Treatment Effect of CT-Guided Periradicular Injections in Context of Different Contrast Agent Distribution Patterns.

Authors:  Vera Reuschel; Cordula Scherlach; Christian Pfeifle; Matthias Krause; Manuel Florian Struck; Karl-Titus Hoffmann; Stefan Schob
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-23

7.  Predictive value of immediate pain relief after lumbar transforaminal epidural injection with local anesthetics and steroids for single level radiculopathy.

Authors:  Christoph Germann; Tobias Götschi; Reto Sutter
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 2.128

8.  Impact of flow pattern, body mass index, and age on intraprocedural fluoroscopic time and radiation dose during sacroiliac joint injections.

Authors:  Christin A Tiegs-Heiden; Naveen S Murthy; Jennifer R Geske; Felix E Diehn; Vance T Lehman; Greta B Liebo; Jared T Verdoorn; Carrie M Carr; Gavin A McKenzie
Journal:  Neuroradiol J       Date:  2021-03-08

9.  Radiation dose reduction for CT-guided intrathecal nusinersen administration in adult patients with spinal muscular atrophy.

Authors:  Isabell Cordts; Marcus Deschauer; Paul Lingor; Egon Burian; Thomas Baum; Claus Zimmer; Christian Maegerlein; Nico Sollmann
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  CT-guided transforaminal epidural steroid injection for discogenic lumbar radiculopathy: influence of contrast dispersion and radiologist's experience on clinical outcome.

Authors:  Christoph Germann; Dimitri N Graf; Benjamin Fritz; Reto Sutter
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2021-08-12       Impact factor: 2.199

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.