Search

Summary of Background DataNo study has evaluated the relationship between contrast dispersion patterns and outcomes after fluoroscopically guided cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injection (CTFESI).ObjectivesDetermine whether contrast dispersion patterns predict pain and functional outcomes after CTFESI.MethodsSecondary analysis of data collected during two prospective studies of CTFESI for the treatment of refractory radicular pain. Contrast dispersion patterns visualized by true anteroposterior (AP) projections during CTFESIs were categorized by flow: 1) completely external to the lateral border of the neuroforamen (zone 1); 2) within the neuroforamen but without entry into the lateral epidural space (zone 2); and 3) with extension into the lateral epidural space (zone 3). At baseline and at 1 month post-CTFESI, neck pain, arm pain, and “dominant index pain” (the greater of arm or neck pain) were evaluated using a numeric rating scale (NRS); physical function was assessed using the Five-Item Version of the Neck Disability Index (NDI-5).ResultsOne-month post-CTFESI, neck pain, arm pain, and “dominant index pain” reductions of ≥50% were observed in 39.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 28.2–51.8), 55.6% (95% CI, 43.0–67.5), and 44.1% (95% CI, 32.7–56.2) of participants, respectively. Regarding “dominant index pain,” 72.7% (95% CI, 40.8–91.2), 39.4% (95% CI, 24.2–57.0), and 37.5% (95% CI, 20.5–58.2) of participants reported ≥50% pain reduction when zone 1, zone 2, and zone 3 contrast flow patterns were observed. Contrast dispersion zone was not significantly associated with subgroup differences in neck pain, arm pain, or NDI-5 scores (P>0.05).ConclusionImprovements in pain and function 1 month after treatment with CTFESI did not differ significantly based on the contrast dispersion pattern. Future study is needed to confirm or refute these findings in other procedural settings, in broader patient populations, and with longer-term outcome assessment.

Objective Pulsed radiofrequency stimulation at the dorsal root ganglion is used for treatment of radicular pain; however, its mechanism for neuropathic pain treatment has not been fully elucidated. Here, we investigated whether pulsed radiofrequency stimulation affects the α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptors, which play a critical role in synaptic plasticity. Methods Neuropathic pain was studied using a radicular neuropathic pain model (43 female Sprague-Dawley rats; 200–250 g). In total, 28 rats were assigned to the following groups for fraction analysis: a control group, a control + pulsed radiofrequency stimulation group, a disc pain group, and a disc pain + pulsed radiofrequency stimulation group. For nonfraction analysis of Glutamate A1 (GluA1) and GluA2 subunits, a total of 15 female Sprague-Dawley rats were assigned to a control group, a disc pain group, and a disc pain + pulsed radiofrequency stimulation group. Pulsed radiofrequency stimulation and subsequent analysis were conducted three days after surgery. Results AMPA receptor subunits, GluA1 and GluA2, in the radicular neuropathic pain model were upregulated compared with those in the control group three days after surgery. Pulsed radiofrequency stimulation induced the translocation of GluA1 and GluA2 subunits from the synaptosome to cytosol without a change in the total amount of AMPA receptors in the dorsal horn. Conclusions Our results demonstrated that pulsed radiofrequency stimulation affected the synaptic plasticity corresponding to long-term depression. Thus, we show that long-term depression from pulsed radiofrequency stimulation is associated with analgesic effects in the radicular neuropathic pain model following peripheral inflammation.

ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of lumbar transforaminal injection of steroid for the treatment of radicular pain.DesignComprehensive systematic review.Outcome MeasuresThe primary outcome of interest was the proportion of individuals with reduction of pain by ≥50%. Additional outcomes of interest were a more-than-two-point reduction in pain score, patient satisfaction, functional improvement, decreased use of pain medication, and avoidance of spinal surgery.ResultsFor patients with disc herniations, using the criterion of ≥50% reduction in pain, success rates across included studies (range) were 63% (58–68%) at one month, 74% (68–80%) at three months, 64% (59–69%) at six months, and 64% (57–71%) at one year. For patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, success rates across included studies (range) were 49% (43–55%) at one month, 48% (35–61%) at three months, 43% (33–53%) at six months, and 59% (45–73%) at one year, but there was a lack of corroboration from appropriately controlled studies.ConclusionsThere is strong evidence that lumbar transforaminal injection of steroids is an effective treatment for radicular pain due to disc herniation. There is a lack of high-quality evidence demonstrating their effectiveness for the treatment of radicular pain due to spinal stenosis, though small studies suggest a possible benefit. Lumbar transforaminal injection of nonparticulate steroids is as effective as injections with particulate steroids.

BackgroundRadicular pain is related to lesions that either directly compromise the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) or indirectly compromise the spinal nerve and its roots by causing ischemia or inflammation of the axons.ObjectiveOur study aimed to assess the outcomes of pulsed readiofrequency treatment (PRF) according to electrodiagnosis results in patients with chronic intractable lumbosacral radicular pain.MethodsA total of 82 failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) patients were included in this study. All of them underwent electromyography/nerve conduction studies before pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment at the DRG, and they were classified according to the electrodiagnostic results as: group 1, no definite finding (normal); group 2, radiculopathy; and group 3, neuropathy. Pain intensity was assessed according to a numeric rating scale score and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) before treatment and at one, three, six, and 12 months after treatment, and successful treatment was defined as a pain score reduction of ≥50% at 12 months, as compared with the pretreatment score.ResultsPretreatment electrodiagnosis identified 28 patients with no definite findings, 31 patients with radiculopathy, and 23 patients with neuropathy. The patients with neuropathy had less pain relief after treatment than those with no definite findings and those with radiculopathy. The prevalence of pain reduction of at least 50% was lower in the neuropathy group than in the other groups. There was no statistically significant difference in ODI between group.ConclusionOutcomes after PRF at the DRG did not show strong differences according to electrodiagnostic findings in FBSS patients with chronic intractable lumbosacral radicular pain.

Objective To assess the effect depression has on outcomes after cervical epidural steroid injections (CESIs). Design Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database. Setting Single institution tertiary care center. Subjects Fifty-seven patients with cervical spondylosis and cervical radicular pain who were deemed appropriate surgical candidates but elected to undergo CESI first were included. Methods Twenty-one of 57 (37%) patients with depression (defined as Zung Depression Scale >33) were included. Patient-reported outcomes including Neck Disability Index (NDI), numeric rating scale (NRS) for arm pain (AP), NRS for neck pain (NP), and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) were collected at baseline and three-month follow-up. Minimal clinically important differences were then calculated to provide dichotomous outcome measures of success. Results Overall, 24 and 28 patients achieved at least 50% improvement in AP and NP, respectively. In terms of disability, 25/57 (43.9%) patients achieved >13.2-point improvement on the NDI overall. In patients with depression, 4/21 (19.0%) and 5/21 (23.8%) achieved at least 50% improvement on the NRS for AP and NP, respectively, compared with 20/36 (55.5%) and 23/36 (63.8%) in patients without depression. This difference was statistically significant for both pain measures (P

Objective. Quantitative sensorial tests (QST) are used for evaluating specific sensorial nerve function. In this study, QST and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings are compared in lumbar disc herniation patients, and the accuracy of QST data was investigated. Material and Methods. Sixty-four patients between 18 and 70 years of age suffering from radicular pain with positive Lasegue's test were included in this study. Specific criteria included complaints due to L5 discopathy. MRI findings were classified according to the Pfirmann grading system, and QST was applied to the L5 dermatoma of both symptomatic and nonsymptomatic legs of all patients. Vibration detection threshold, heat detection threshold, cold detection threshold, and heat pain detection threshold values were obtained, and MRI findings were classified according to the Pfirmann grading system. Results. When we compared the symptomatic and nonsymptomatic legs of participants, there were significant differences by means of all QST parameters (0 5 0.00). In a comparison of the QST and MRI Pfirmann grading systems, there is also a strong parallel statistical correlation between the Pfirmann grade and QST parameters (P < 0.05). Conclusions. According to the results of our study, QST has an additive effect to MRI for nerve root compression evaluation in the clinical basis, which might enable more sensitive diagnosis and treatment protocol. QST can also be an alternative method for evaluation of nerve root compression in patients who have contraindications for MRI. © 2017 American Academy of Pain Medicine. All rights reserved.

OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive percutaneous spinal procedures are popular in trying to reduce spinal pain. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the safety of intervertebral disc chemonucleolysis and to report the effectiveness of a percutaneous, minimally invasive treatment for contained herniated intervertebral discs in the lumbar spine using the recently marketed radiopaque gelified ethanol. METHODS: Pain relief before and after the procedure was self-evaluated by each patient using a verbal numeric scale (VNS) ranging from 0 to 10. Patients were also scored prior to procedure and after chemonucleolysis during several follow-up periods using the Roland-Morris low back pain and disability questionnaire (RMQ). Follow-up periods were defined as 0-6, 6-12, 12-18, 18-24, and 24-30 months. Clinically significant functional improvement (CSFI) was defined as a decrease of five or more points on the RMQ scale and a decrease of at least 50% of pain intensity using VNS. RESULTS: Using the RMQ scale, CSFI was achieved in 20/29 patients in the first follow-up period, 20/27 patients in the second follow-up period, 9/12 patients in the third follow-up period, 8/9 patients in the fourth follow-up period, and 4/4 patients in the last follow-up period. Using the VNS rating, CSFI was accomplished in 19/29 patients in the first follow-up period, 19/27 patients in the second follow-up period, 9/12 patients in the third follow-up period, 8/9 patients in the fourth follow-up period, and 4/4 in the last follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Intradiscal application of gelified ethanol may be effective in pain reduction using the VNS and Roland-Morris low back pain and disability questionnaire. The treatment is safe and easy to handle.

Objective Low-dose local anesthetic is often used in cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections (CIESI), yet its effect on upper extremity strength has not been studied. The presence of consequent weakness has potential implications for postprocedure safety. This study aimed to determine whether low-dose lidocaine in a C7-T1 CIESI causes objective weakness. Design Prospective case series. Setting Academic pain center. Subjects Adults, cervical radicular pain. Methods Participants underwent CIESI with 1 mL of 1% lidocaine (3 mL total injectate). Elbow flexion (EF), wrist extension (WE), elbow extension (EE), and handgrip strength were measured by dynamometry at baseline, 15 minutes, and 30 minutes postinjection. Changes in strength from baseline and the proportion of participants with a minimum perceptible change in EF, WE, EE, and handgrip strength (≥20%) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results Twenty-seven participants were included. At 15 and 30 minutes postinjection, there was no within-participant difference in EF, WE, EE, and handgrip strength from baseline overall. Nonetheless, five (19%, 95% CI = 4-33) of the participants demonstrated a 20% or greater strength decrease in at least one myotomal distribution. A 20% or greater decrease in strength was present in left EF 4% (95% CI = 0-11%), right EF 7% (95% CI = 0-17%), left WE 4% (95% CI = 0-11%), and right WE 7% (95% CI = 0-17%). Conclusions The present data suggest that CIESI with an injectate volume of 3 mL that includes 1 mL of 1% lidocaine may result in objective upper extremity weakness that is above the minimum threshold of perception in a subset of patients.

Objective Oral and injected steroids are used commonly in the treatment of cervical radicular pain despite a paucity of data demonstrating their efficacy. The purpose of this study is to assess whether the response to orally administered steroids among patients with acute cervical radicular pain who develop recurrent pain is associated with their subsequent response to cervical epidural steroid injections. Methods Patients referred to our center were evaluated and then referred for cervical epidural steroid injections at the clinical discretion of the provider; those who met inclusion criteria were offered participation in the study. After the injection was administered, patients were contacted by telephone and asked to complete the Brief Pain Inventory Short Form at one week, one month, three months, and six months postinjection. Results Pain reduction after cervical steroid injection was not significantly different between 49 patients who reported pain reduction with a prior course of oral steroids and 22 patients who reported no pain reduction. Average pain scores decreased over six months (P

Objective. To determine the effectiveness and risks of non–image-guided lumbar interlaminar epidural steroid injections. Design. Systematic review. Interventions. Three reviewers with formal training and certification in evidence-based medicine searched the literature on non–image-guided lumbar interlaminar epidural steroid injections. A larger team of seven reviewers independently assessed the methodology of studies found and appraised the quality of the evidence presented. Outcome Measures. The primary outcome assessed was pain relief. Other outcomes such as functional improvement, reduction in surgery rate, decreased use of opioids, and complications were noted, if reported. The evidence was appraised in accordance with the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system of evaluating evidence. Results. The searches yielded 92 primary publications addressing non–image-guided lumbar interlaminar epidural steroid injections. The evidence supporting the effectiveness of these injections for pain relief and functional improvement in patients with lumbar radicular pain due to disc herniation or neurogenic claudication secondary to lumbar spinal stenosis is limited. This procedure may provide short-term benefit in the first 3–6 weeks. The small number of case reports on significant risks suggests these injections are relatively safe. In accordance with GRADE, the quality of evidence is very low. Conclusions. In patients with lumbar radicular pain secondary to disc herniation or neurogenic claudication due to spinal stenosis, non–image-guided lumbar interlaminar epidural steroid injections appear to have clinical effectiveness limited to short-term pain relief. Therefore, in a contemporary medical practice, these procedures should be restricted to the rare settings where fluoroscopy is not available.

Recently, Friedly et al. published a study on the effectiveness of epidural injections of steroids (ESIs) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) [1]. Because of its apparent implications for clinical practice, this study attracted comments both in the professional [2] and lay press [3]. However, the study prompts reflection on a number of issues that extend beyond the conventional appraisal of a study. Those issues pertain to how physicians think about a condition, how it should be treated, and how to best assess the effectiveness of that treatment. The following article addresses those issues in the interest of informing physicians about how contemporary practices are confounded by lack of diagnostic discipline, and how this makes the conduct of controlled trials complicated and, therefore, makes the results difficult to assess. The cardinal issues are the symptoms of LSS; the diagnosis of LSS; the rationale for treatment; the consequent appropriate selection of patients; the outcomes assessment, either in practice or in a study including the reporting of those outcomes; and the need for rigorous control of the technical performance of the therapeutic intervention. Each of these issues has a critical bearing on appraising not only the literature on LSS, but also on how physicians treat this condition in conventional practice. The literature is profuse with heterogeneity in symptomology related to LSS. While there is no consensus in the current literature on acceptable LSS symptoms, the most commonly quoted symptoms are neurogenic claudication, radicular pain, and low back pain (LBP). Additional symptoms commonly mentioned in literature were fatigue and loss of power in the legs, anesthesia, and a feeling of numbness in the sacral dermatomes. In an attempt to achieve consensus, Katz et al. in 1995 published symptoms most strongly associated with the diagnosis of LSS (likelihood ratio ≥ 2), …

Background. In a previous prospective study on pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment adjacent to the lumbar dorsal root ganglion (DRG) for patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, we reported success in 55.4% of the patients at 6 months. Identification of predictors for success after PRF may improve outcome. We assessed the predictors of PRF in patients with chronic intractable lumbosacral radicular pain. Methods. Patients with monosegmental chronic lumbosacral radicular pain of L5 or S1 first received a selective nerve root block at the corresponding level. Independent of the result of this block a PRF treatment at the same level was performed. At 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months after the procedure the outcome was evaluated. Results. A positive diagnostic nerve root block and age a parts per thousand yen 55 were predictive factors for successful outcome at 6 months, while disability was a negative predictor. The use of failed back surgery syndrome, gender, duration of pain, Numerical Rating Scale, level and side of treatment, DN4, and RAND-36 as predictors for success was not supported. Conclusions. Successful outcome after PRF adjacent to the DRG, in patients with intractable chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, is more likely in patients a parts per thousand yen 55 years, with limited disability and after a positive diagnostic nerve root block. A combination of all these factors creates a fair predictive value (AUC: 0.73).

Objective To compare equivalent doses of a nonparticulate (dexamethasone) with a particulate (betamethasone) corticosteroid in lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) in terms of pain, function, and complications. Design Fifty-six patients presenting with debilitating radicular pain were randomized in a double-blind controlled trial to receive a lumbar transforaminal injection of either dexamethasone 7.5 mg (n = 29) or betamethasone 6.0 mg (n = 27). Setting A pain clinic and physical medicine and rehabilitation department in two academic hospital centres. Outcome Measures Data were collected at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. The primary outcome was pain reduction on a visual analog scale (VAS) at 3 months. Secondary outcomes were functional improvement, as measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and number and type of complications. Results No differences on the VAS, analyzed either as a continuous ( P = 0.209) or categorical variable (≥50% ( P = 0.058) or ≥75% ( P = 0.865) improvement) and ODI ( P = 0.181) were found between the two groups at 3 months. At 6 months, improvement of ODI score was at the limit of statistical significance in favor of dexamethasone ( P = 0.050). Multivariate regression analysis, adjusting for potential confounding variables, showed that differences on the ODI became statistically significant at the 6 month follow-up, also in favor of dexamethasone (adjusted P = 0.003). No serious complications were observed in either group. Conclusion According to this study, pain relief and functional improvement are similar for both dexamethasone and betamethasone at 3 months. Considering its safety profile, dexamethasone could be considered as first choice for TFESI. However, given that the study was underpowered, more research is needed to support a recommendation of systematically using dexamethasone in TFESI.

Objectives The objective of this study was to determine the effects of combining pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment and transforaminal epidural injection (TFEI) to treat patients with chronic refractory lumbar radicular pain caused by lumbar spinal stenosis. Study design Randomized control trial. Settings Interventional pain management practice. Method Sixty-two patients were assigned to the study groups (PRF group = 31; control group = 31). Under fluoroscopic guidance, the RF needle was positioned close to the lumbar dorsal root ganglion. The PRF group received 3 cycles of PRF treatment, and sensory stimulation without RF lesioning was applied to the control group. After PRF or sham lesioning, a local anesthetic with steroid was injected. The primary outcome of a successful response was defined as: 1) ≥50% or 4–point pain reduction in the numerical rating scale (NRS) without an increase in the Oswestry disability index (ODI) or medication quantification scale (MQS), or mean score

Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Mul-tidisciplinary Pain Center, ZOL, Genk, BelgiumReprint requests to: Koen Van Boxem, MD, PhD, FIPP,Department of Anesthesiology Critical Care and Multi-disciplinary Pain Center, Sint Jozefkliniek, Bornem enWillebroek, Kasteelstraat 23, 2880 Bornem, Belgium.Tel: 132 3 890 16 94; Fax: 132 3 890 59 23; E-mail:dr.Van.Boxem@sjk.be.Conflict of interest: None of the authors have a conflictof interest.Funding sources: The work has been performed incollaboration between all the authors, without anyfinancial support.AbstractBackground and Objectives. There is little evidenceconcerning the medical management of lumbosacralradicular pain. The prognosis for patients sufferingpain for more than 3 months is poor. Pulsed radiofre-quency (PRF) treatment of the dorsal root ganglion(DRG) has been suggested as a minimally invasivetreatment. We studied the effect on pain and qualityof life of PRF treatment of the DRG in patients withchronic, severe lumbosacral radicular pain.Methods. Patients with lumbosacral radicular painwere screened to select a homogeneous popula-tion. PRF treatment of the DRG was performed at L5or S1. Evaluation was carried out at 6 weeks,3 months, and 6 months. Pain reduction and “fullyrecovered” or “much improvement,” in terms of theglobal perceived effect, were the primary outcomes.Quality of life (RAND-36), disability (Oswestry Dis-ability Index), and the neuropathic pain scales leedsassessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs(LANSS) and DN4 were registered at each timepoint. Medication use was scored with the Medica-tion Quantification Scale.Results. Out of 461 screened patients, 65 wereincluded. According to the intention to treat analy-sis, clinical success was achieved in 56.9%, 52.3%,and 55.4% of the patients at respectively 6 weeks,3 months, and 6 months. DN4, Oswestry DisabilityIndex and physical component for the RAND-36qualityof life improved significantly while the mentalcomponent remained unchanged. The number ofpatients on opioids was reduced.Conclusions. PRF treatment of the DRG may beconsidered for patients with chronic, severe lumbo-sacral radicular pain refractory to conventionalmedical management.Key Words. Radiofrequency; Lumbosacral radicu-lar pain; Pulsed radiofrequency; Dorsal root gan-glion; Conventional Medical ManagementIntroductionLumbosacral radicular (LRS) pain is an important healthcare problem. In the general, population older than 30years of age, up to 5% suffer low back pain radiating1

Objectives Intra-arterial injections of local anesthetic during cervical transforaminal epidural block (TFEB) can cause rare but fatal neurologic complications. We hypothesized that using a dose of local anesthetic lower than seizure threshold during cervical TFEB would not be associated with seizure activity in cases of accidental intra-arterial injection. Methods Patients were randomized to one of two groups: group I received injections of 1 mL of 1% lidocaine mixed with dexamethasone 2.5 mg (n = 15), and group II received 1 mL of 0.125% lidocaine mixed with dexamethasone 2.5 mg (n = 15). When the numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain was greater than 3, cervical TFEBs were performed three times at 2-week intervals. Patients were evaluated up to 3 months. Results Thirty patients with cervical radicular pain were enrolled in this study. The NRS pain score on the day of procedure and at 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months following the initial procedure were similarly significantly reduced in both groups. The total number of procedures performed and the outcomes evaluated according to Odom's criteria at the 3-month follow-up visit were not different between groups. Overall, 73.3% and 80% patients in groups I and II, respectively, rated the degree of their symptom relief as excellent or good. Conclusion Cervical TFEB performed using 0.125% lidocaine with dexamethasone achieved similar satisfactory effects as 1% lidocaine with dexamethasone for the treatment of cervical radicular pain. Therefore, the use of low-dose lidocaine with dexamethasone is reasonable for cervical TFEB, as this may reduce the incidence of rare but fatal complications.

Dear Editor, Epiduroscopy has previously been used for epidural adhesiolysis [1,2]. Recently, epiduroscopy with laser ablation has also been used for low back and radicular pain due to disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and failed low back surgery syndrome [3,4]. Epiduroscopic laser neural decompression (ELND) has become a useful tool for diagnostic purposes as well as the treatment for low back pain and/or radicular pain. With this technique (ELND), it is possible to remove disc fragments and adhesion bands, to confirm the epidural and nerve root pathology, to irrigate the epidural space, and to administer specific drugs close to the sites of pathology, all during one intervention. We wish to report a patient with symptoms of low back and radicular pain referable to the L5 dermatome but originating from a herniated disc at the L2–3 spinal segment, which was detected and promptly relieved by ELND. A 51-year-old woman sought treatment for her low back pain and radicular pain presenting in the right L5 dermatome. Her symptoms had abruptly commenced after playing golf. She was treated with medications …

Dear Editor, We read the excellent article regarding response to transforaminal injection of steroids and correlation to MRI findings in patients with cervical radicular pain by Klessinger et al. ⇓ with interest and we feel compelled to comment because their experience is so far removed from ours over the past 30 years. Specifically, they report that only just over a third of patients achieved at least 50% reduction of pain at one month after treatment with just under a quarter ultimately having to undergo an operation. Contrast this to our prospective, independently-assessed series of cervical radiculopathies treated with periradicular/epidural corticosteroid injections ⇓. Three quarters of our patients had 100% reduction of pain and the remaining quarter: 80%. No patients required an operation. How can this …

Objective The aim of this study was to determine 1) if repeat lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) resulted in recovery of pain relief, which has waned since an index injection, and 2) if cumulative benefit could be achieved by repeat injections within 3 months of the index injection. Design Retrospective observational study with statistical modeling of the response to repeat TFESI. Setting Academic radiology practice. Patients Two thousand eighty-seven single-level TFESIs were performed for radicular pain on 933 subjects. Subjects received repeat TFESIs >2 weeks and

Objective To determine the effectiveness of cervical transforaminal injection of steroids (CTFIS) and to explore possible determinants of response in patients with cervical disc herniation. Design Retrospective practice audit covering a time period of 6 months. Setting Single spine center in which the patients underwent CTFIS, surgery, and subsequent treatment. Magnetic resonance images were reviewed independently by a radiologist and two neurosurgeons. Interventions Consecutive patients with cervical radicular pain and a magnetic resonance imaging demonstrating nerve root affection received CTFIS. Evaluation in terms of pain reduction and in relation to the level and side of the affected nerve root, the duration of pain, neck or radicular pain, and the presence of sensory or motor deficits. The radiological features assessed were the location, grading, and cause of the impingement. Results Forty-eight patients were included. Only 35.4% of patients achieved at least 50% reduction in pain 1 month after treatment. The initial pain on the numeric rating scale was reduced from 6.8 to 1.8. None of the clinical or radiological features was associated with a successful outcome. 22.9% of the included patients had to undergo an operation. The duration of these patients' symptoms was significantly shorter (P = 0.01) than in patients without operation. Conclusion Only a minority of patients with disc herniation or spondylosis and a proven nerve root compression benefits from CTFIS. The potential advantage for the patient must be compared with the risk of the procedure. Even with the combination of clinical and radiological findings, the prediction of a favorable outcome of CTFIS was not possible.

Dear Editor: It is important for the pain physician to accurately diagnose spinal pathology that requires urgent surgical intervention. When signs of spinal cord compression occur, prompt diagnosis and surgical decompression are necessary ⇓. Thoracic disk herniations account for approximately 0.25–0.75% of all symptomatic disk herniations, with 70% showing signs of spinal cord compression by the time of diagnosis ⇓. Unfortunately, because thoracic spinal lesions are rare, they can often be misdiagnosed at first ⇓. Extradural spinal lesions such as calcified, herniated disks in the thoracic spine most commonly present as localized pain in the uper back or pain along a dermatomal distribution in the chest or abdominal area ⇓. They can also mimic lesions of the lumbar spine and initially mislead a physician who is attempting to manage the symptoms of lumbar radicular pain. We present a case of a patient who presented with severe low back and bilateral lower extremity radicular pain who was found to have an extradural thoracic spinal lesion causing critical spinal stenosis and was successfully diagnosed and managed. A 38-year-old-female presented to the Emergency Department for an acute exacerbation of her 2-year history of chronic bilateral back and lower extremity pain. In her right …

Objective To assess whether a nonparticulate steroid (dexamethasone, 10 mg) is less clinically effective than the particulate steroids (triamcinolone, 80 mg; betamethasone, 12 mg) in lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) in subjects with radicular pain with or without radiculopathy. Design Retrospective observational study with noninferiority analysis of dexamethasone relative to particulate steroids. Setting Single academic radiology pain management practice. Subjects Three thousand six hundred forty-five lumbar TFESIs at the L4-5, L5-S1, or S1 neural foramina, performed on 2,634 subjects. Methods/Outcome Measures Subjects were assessed with a pain numerical rating scale (NRS, 0–10) and Roland–Morris disability questionnaire (R-M) prior to TFESI, and at 2 weeks and 2 months follow-up. For categorical outcomes, successful pain relief was defined as either ≥50% reduction in NRS or pain 0/10; functional success was defined as ≥40% reduction in R-M score. Noninferiority analysis was performed with δ = −10% as the limit of noninferiority. Continuous outcomes (mean NRS, R-M scores) were analyzed for noninferiority with difference bounds of 0.3 for NRS scores and 1.0 for R-M scores. Results With categorical outcomes, dexamethasone was demonstrated to be noninferior to the particulate steroids in pain relief and functional improvement at 2 months. Using continuous outcomes, dexamethasone was demonstrated to be superior to the particulate steroids in both pain relief and functional improvement at 2 months. Conclusion This retrospective observational study reveals no evidence that dexamethasone is less effective than particulate steroids in lumbar TFESIs performed for radicular pain with or without radiculopathy.

Background Transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) is a widely utilized interventional pain technique for radicular pain. Although the six o'clock position of the pedicle in the so-called “safe triangle” has been used as a target location, there have been a number of reported catastrophic complications of this procedure, including paraplegia. The mechanism of this has been attributed to the intravascular injection of steroids. The goal of this study was to examine the intraforaminal location of thoracolumbar medullary arteries which would help guide pain physicians in developing safer techniques and guidelines. Methods Twenty-four (24) embalmed cadavers were dissected and examined for the presence and distribution of thoracolumbar anterior medullary arteries. Access to the anterior surface of the spinal cord was made via anterior corpectomy from C2 to S5. Each medullary artery's course was determined by dissection from its origin, the anterior spinal artery, through the intervertebral foramen. The foramen was subsequently opened in the coronal plane, and the intraforaminal location of the artery, its diameter, and its relation to other foraminal structures were examined and measured. Results In the thoracolumbar foramina (T4–L2), 39 anterior medullary arteries were found, including 23 great medullary arteries (Adamkiewicz artery). One Adamkiewicz artery was found to be located in the left S2 foramen and was not included in the statistical analysis. Of the analyzed 39 anterior medullary arteries, 29 (74%) were located in the upper 1/3 of the foramen, 9 (23%) were located in the middle, and 1 (3%) artery was located in the lower 1/3. In relation to the dorsal root ganglion—ventral root complex, 21 (54%) arteries were located anterosuperiorly, 16 (41%) anteriorly, and 2 (5%) anteroinferiorly. The average intraforaminal artery diameter was 1.20 mm (0.84–1.91 mm). At thoracolumbar levels, the artery is almost always (92% ± 15%) located anterosuperior to the nerve. At typical thoracic levels, it is less often anterosuperior (38% ± 19%), but more often anterior to the nerve. Conclusions At thoracolumbar levels, if needles were to encounter an artery, they are most likely to do so if placed anterosuperior to the nerve. Encountering an artery anterosuperior to the nerve is less likely at typical thoracic levels, but the likelihood is far from negligible. Pain physicians should be cognizant of this when considering optimal needle placement during transforaminal epidural steroid injections.

Background. Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are now increasing in popularity with regard to the management of chronic lumbar radiculopathy. While ESIs have been shown to be effective in relieving low back and radicular pain, adverse reactions have also been reported, notably abnormal vaginal bleeding. Objective. We present a case series of four women, both pre- and postmenopausal, with chronic lumbar radiculopathy and corresponding pathology who developed abnormal vaginal bleeding after receiving either ESIs or facet medial branch blocks (MBBs) for pain management. Setting. University of California, Los Angeles. Patients. Four women, both pre- and postmenopausal. Conclusions. We discuss the potential effects of corticosteroids on the hypothalamic–pituitary–ovarian axis and highlight our patients' risk factors for abnormal vaginal bleeding, both exogenous and endogenous, as well as focus on the technical approaches to corticosteroid administration utilized in our patients' procedures. We acknowledge that because this is a small case series, further prospective investigation is warranted regarding the above topics. Until then, it may be beneficial to consider whether patients, both pre- and postmenopausal, have risk factors for abnormal uterine bleeding prior to undergoing interventional pain management strategies, specifically ESI and MBB, and to inform all women upon consent that abnormal vaginal bleeding is a potential risk following procedures with corticosteroids.

Objectives. Intradiscal high-pressure injection of saline (IDHP) is a noninvasive procedure for a lumbar intervertebral disc extrusion and an alternative treatment to surgery, such as microendoscopic discectomy (MED). The purpose of this study was to compare the representative outcomes of IDHP with MED in terms of pain relief, reduction of disability, and risk of complications. Methods. Forty-five patients with primarily radicular pain due to an extrusion type disc herniation who underwent either IDHP (N = 24) or MED (N = 21) were enrolled in the study. The visual analog pain scale (VAS) and the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scoring system for the treatment of low-back disorders were assessed at pretreatment, 2 weeks posttreatment, and JOA was again taken 3 months posttreatment. Patients were asked to choose their satisfaction from four alternatives, “excellent,”“good,”“fair,” and “poor,” 3 months after treatment. Results. Mean VAS decreased from 65.1 to 18.8 mm in the IDHP group, and from 80.6 to 16.5 in the MED group. Mean JOA recovery rates at 3 months posttreatment were 67.2 and 75.2, and patients with “excellent” or “good” results were 73.7% and 78.6% in the IDHP and in MED, respectively. Conclusions. IDHP produced significant effects on patients with radicular pain, leading to the improvement of VAS and JOA. Although IDHP displayed slightly less efficacy than MED, IDHP appears to be an alternative as a nonoperative treatment for a lumbar intervertebral disc extrusion.

OBJECTIVE, DESIGN AND SETTINGS: The purpose of this randomized, prospective study is to compare the efficacy of two different routes in administering epidural steroid injections interlaminar (IL) vs transforaminal (TF) in patients with unilateral radicular pain.We randomly enrolled and followed 64 patients with chronic radiculopathy.Significant improvements were maintained throughout 6 months (24 weeks) of follow-up (P0.001, respectively). The average visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at 24 weeks improved to 4.0 ± 2.2 cm in the IL group and 3.8 ± 2.1 cm in the TF group (P=0.717). Baseline functional capacity was comparable for the IL and the TF group (52% vs 53%) when assessed using Oswestry (P=0.647). At 6 months, both groups improved, 39% for the IL group and 38% for the TF group, suggesting change from severe to moderate disability scoring range. There were 24 out of the 32 (75%) patients in the IL group at 24 weeks who improved more than 2 cm on the VAS scale and 17 patients (53%) had50% of the pain relief. In the TF group, there were 27 out of the 32 (84%) patients with2 cm improvement on VAS pain scale, and 20 of 32 (63%) with50% improvement at 24 weeks. Functional capacity changes were similar, 16 out of the 32 patients (50%) improved 10 points or more on the Oswestry scale in the IL group and 21 out of the 32 in the TF group (66%).Using either route of epidural injections to deliver steroids for unilateral chronic radiculopathy secondary to herniated intervertebral disc provided significant improvements in patients function and pain relief. However, we could not find a statistically significant difference between two indicated groups either in functional improvement or in reduction in pain, although half-dose of steroids delivered via TF route provided somewhat better long-term pain relief and functional capacity improvements.

Study Design. An institutional, prospective clinical data analysis. Objective. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new navigable percutaneous disc decompression device (L'DISQ) in patients with lumbar disc herniation with radicular pain. Methods and Outcome Measures. We performed disc decompressions using L'DISQ on 27 patients with persistent disabling back and leg pain for 1 month or longer (average 6.48 months) due to a herniated lumbar intervertebral disc. Baseline data were prospectively gathered before the index procedure and at 1, 4, 12, and 24 weeks post-procedure. Data included pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]), measure of disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] and Rolando–Morris Questionnaire [RM]), health-related quality of life (Bodily Pain Scale of Short Form-36 version 2 [SF-36 BP]), and passive straight leg raising test (SLR). Results. The VAS fell from 7.08 ± 1.22 to 1.84 ± 0.99 scores at 24 weeks post-procedure. At 24 weeks, the ODI had fallen from 41.88 ± 10.61 to 16.66 ± 8.55% and the RM from 11.52 ± 3.91 to 2.68 ± 1.97 points. The SF-36 BP dropped significant improvement from 32.89 ± 5.83 to 49.57 ± 4.96 scales. In the SLR test, the angular change of 24 weeks showed considerable improvement from 60.20 ± 20.02 to 83.00 ± 14.29 degrees. No major complication occurred, although two cases developed a disc reherniation 1 month post-procedure. Conclusions. The L'DISQ device is specifically designed to remove herniated disc using a wand that can be navigated into a disc protrusion or extrusion. Following decompression, we measured clinically significant pain improvement and decreased disability for patients with both radicular and axial pain caused by protruded and extruded discs.

Objective. Lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections are procedures often utilized in the treatment of low back pain associated with radicular pain. Particulate steroids have been known to play a role in embolism. It is, unknown whether nonparticulate steroids are as effective as particulate steroids. To investigate the effect of an epidural steroid injection on back pain, we conducted a randomized, controlled trial comparing nonparticulate steroid with particulate steroid to treat lumbar disc herniation. Design. One hundred-six patients were randomized to receive lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections (N = 53) with either dexamethasone 7.5 mg, or with triamcinolone acetate 40 mg (N = 53). Measurement were taken before treatment and one month after treatment using a visual analog scale, short McGill pain questionnaire, and revised Oswertry Back Disability Index. Results. There was a statistically significant difference in the visual analog score between those treated with dexamethasone and those given triamcinolone. The two groups did not differ significantly on the McGill Pain Questionnaire, or the Oswestry Disability Index before and after treatment. Conclusion. In this study, dexamethasone and triamcinolone treatments were shown to have different effects on low back pain with sciatica, with triamcinolone being more effective than dexamethsone in lumbar radiculopathy.

Background. Lumbar spinal stenosis is a common condition that causes axial low back pain, radicular pain, and neurogenic claudication. Epidural steroid injections are commonly used for the treatment of radicular symptoms and neurogenic claudication associated with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. No prior study has evaluated whether transforaminal or interlaminar epidural steroid injections produce better clinical outcomes. Design. Retrospective case control study. Methods. For each technique, 19 patients were retrospectively identified who received their first fluoroscopically guided epidural steroid injection for radicular and neurogenic claudication symptoms caused by lumbar spinal stenosis over a 12-month interval. All patients had corresponding MRI findings and had failed previous non-invasive therapies. Outcomes included the visual analog scale (VAS, 0–10 scale) immediately before the injection, immediately after the injection, and upon follow up at 4–6 weeks. Surgery rates and number of repeat injections over a 3 year period were also analyzed. The patient groups were matched for age and level of stenosis on MRI. Results. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in pre injection to follow up VAS scores (P = 0.919). The difference between number of repeat injections between the interlaminar and transforaminal groups was not statistically significant (0.91—mean 2.47 and 2.58, respectively). Both the interlaminar and transforaminal groups experienced statistically significant improvement in VAS scores from before the injection to after the injection, and on follow up. Low numbers underwent surgery (11% in the interlaminar group vs 15% in the transforaminal group, not significant, P = 0.63). Conclusions. In the current study, neither transforaminal nor interlaminar steroid injections resulted in superior short term pain improvement or fewer long term surgical interventions or repeat injections when compared with each other.

Objective. To present two case reports of a rare but devastating injury after image-guided, lumbar transforaminal injection of steroids, and to explore features in common with previously reported cases. Background. Image (fluoroscopic and computed tomography [CT])-guided, lumbar transforaminal injections of corticosteroids have been adopted as a treatment for radicular pain. Complications associated with these procedures are rare, but can be severe. Case Reports. An 83-year-old woman underwent a fluoroscopically guided, left L3–L4, transforaminal injection of betamethasone (Celestone Soluspan). A 79-year-old man underwent a CT-guided, right L3–L4, transforaminal injection of methylprednisolone (DepoMedrol). Both patients developed bilateral lower extremity paralysis, with neurogenic bowel and bladder, immediately after the procedures. Magnetic resonance imaging scans were consistent with spinal cord infarction. There was no evidence of intraspinal mass or hematoma. Conclusion. These cases consolidate a pattern emerging in the literature. Distal cord and conus injury can occur following transforaminal injections at lumbar levels, whether injection is on the left or right. This conforms with the probability of radicular-medullary arteries forming an arteria radicularis magna at lumbar levels. All cases used particulate corticosteroids, which promotes embolization in a radicular artery as the likely mechanism of injury. The risk of this complication can be reduced, and potentially eliminated, by the utilization of particulate free steroids, testing for intra-arterial injection with digital subtraction angiography, and a preliminary injection of local anesthetic.

Background. The incidence of spinal epidural abscess has increased in the past decades. Traditionally, management was based on surgical decompression. More recent studies have shown conservative management has successful outcomes in selected patients. Case Report. We present a case, in which an elderly woman presented with new onset radicular pain and mild leukocytosis more than a week after a complicated revision of an intrathecal catheter in place for management of chronic axial low back pain. Magentic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a posterior epidural abscess from T12 to L2. Two Touhy needles were placed in the epidural space with fluoroscopic guidance for drainage of the abscess. A catheter was then advanced into the epidural space for irrigation with saline and an antibiotic solution. Intravenous antibiotics were continued for a total of 6 weeks. Radicular pain resolved immediately post-procedure. Serial MRIs also showed decreasing size of the abscess. Conclusion. Posterior spinal epidural abscesses may be successfully treated by way of the two Touhy needle and catheter technique for drainage and irrigation. This procedure should be reserved for patients that present with no neurological deficits or deemed nonsurgical candidates. Patients should continue on prolonged intravenous antibiotics and be monitored closely for clinical deterioration and undergo serial follow-up MRIs.

Objective. A number of case presentations of catastrophic outcomes after cervical epidural injections have occurred after both interlaminar and transforaminal injection techniques. Practitioners in pain medicine need guidance to avoid these complications Design. A systematic search of the MEDLINE database, electronically available pain journals, and recent pain and spine meeting abstracts was searched for articles relevant to cervical spine interventional procedure complications. Results. A representative case of cervical radicular pain is presented to illustrate key differences of radicular pain presenting in the cervical area from those in the lumbar area Although cervical interlaminar epidural complications more likely involve direct neurological trauma to the spinal cord or spinal nerve, the mechanism for injury after transforaminal epidural corticosteroid injections is less clear. Many investigators hypothesize that particulate steroids may be the primary cause, in that these particles may occlude segmental medullary feeding arteries that reinforce the longitudinal anterior spinal artery supply to the spinal cord. Anatomical nomenclature of spinal cord blood supply and variants of normal are presented. Conclusions. Specific examples of potential injury avoidance strategies are discussed, including: 1) the use of nonparticulate steroid preparations; 2) needle bevel/size and other technical considerations; 3) preprocedural planning and sedation considerations; 4) test dosing with local anesthetics; and 5) imaging considerations, including the use of digital subtraction to better define angiographic patterns. Recommendations for the conduct of cervical epidural injection procedures are discussed.

Background. Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) have demonstrated efficacy and effectiveness in treatment of radicular pain. Despite little evidence of efficacy/effectiveness, interlaminar epidural steroid injections (ILESI) are advocated by some as primary therapy for radicular pain due to purported greater safety. Objective. To assess immediate and delayed adverse event rates of TFESI and ILESI injections at three academic medical centers utilizing International Spine Intervention Society practice guidelines. Methods. Quality assurance databases from a Radiology and two physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) practices were interrogated. Medical records were reviewed, verifying immediate and delayed adverse events. Results. There were no immediate major adverse events of neurologic injury or hemorrhage in 16,638 consecutive procedures in all spine segments (14,956 TFESI; 1,682 ILESI). Vasovagal reactions occurred in 1.2% of procedures, more frequently ( P = 0.004) in TFESI (1.3%) than ILESI (0.5%). Dural punctures occurred in 0.06% of procedures, more commonly after ILESI (0.2% vs 0.04%, P = 0.006). Delayed follow up on PM&R patients (92.5% and 78.5, next business day) and radiology patients (63.1%, 2 weeks) identified no major adverse events of neurologic injury, hemorrhage, or infection. There were no significant differences in delayed minor adverse event rates. Central steroid response (sleeplessness, flushing, nonpositional headache) was seen in 2.6% of both TFESI and ILESI patients. 2.1% of TFESI and 1.8% of ILESI patients reported increased pain. No long-term sequelae were seen from any immediate or delayed minor adverse event. Conclusions. Both transforaminal and ILESI are safely performed with low immediate and delayed adverse event rates when informed by evidence-based procedural guidelines. By demonstrating comparable safety, this study suggests that the choice between ILESI and TFESIs can be based on documented efficacy and effectiveness and not driven by safety concerns.

Background. Chronic low back pain patients have a high rate of psychopathology, comprised mainly of depression, anxiety, and high levels of neuroticism. We previously found that psychopathology is associated with increased placebo analgesia in this patient group. Objective. To better understand this finding in the context of other known predictors of placebo response (such as expectations for relief), we performed a detailed analysis of expectations and other possible covariates. Design. We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, crossover-designed trial of intravenous morphine vs. placebo in 60 subjects with chronic low back pain and discogenic abnormalities. Patients were stratified into three groups of psychiatric symptom severity (Low, Moderate, and High), based on composite scores on depression, anxiety for pain, and neuroticism scales. Subjects were given intravenous morphine and placebo in random order on separate visits, and completed serial pain ratings over 3 h at each session. Results. With 20 subjects per group, there were small, but significant differences between groups in baseline pain ratings. No differences were found between groups in age, gender, and radicular pain. Patients with low psychological symptomatology reported 7.7% total pain relief with placebo compared with 23.4% in the Moderate group and 23.5% in the High group ( P < 0.05). Expectations were not significantly different between groups, but in the High group expectation levels predicted placebo analgesia ( P < 0.001). Neuropathic pain quality was also a predictor ( P < 0.05). Conclusions. This study indicates that high and moderate levels of psychopathology are associated with heightened placebo analgesia in chronic low back pain patients. Expectations were only an influence in the high psychopathology group, and neuropathic pain affects placebo responses. These findings have implications for future research characterizing placebo responders.

Objectives. Cervical transforaminal epidural injections of corticosteroids have been used in the treatment of radicular pain. Particulate agents have been associated with rare adverse neurological outcomes. It is unknown whether nonparticulate preparations are any less effective than particulate preparations. Therefore, a study was designed to determine whether there is a basis for promoting a theoretically safer nonparticulate corticosteroid preparation. Design. Volunteer patients were randomized to receive a single cervical transforaminal epidural injection with one of two corticosteroid preparations. Setting. This study was undertaken in a private practice setting. Patients. Those with single-level, unilateral radicular pain with advanced imaging demonstrating single-level neural compression. Interventions. Patients received a single cervical transforaminal epidural injection with either dexamethasone or triamcinolone. Outcome Measures. Ratings were obtained by an independent unbiased assessor at 4 weeks via a telephone interview. A visual analog pain scale was used preprocedurally and a verbal integer scale was used at 4 weeks to assess the severity of the patient's radicular pain. As a secondary outcome measure, a patient-specified functional outcome measure was obtained. Results. Both groups exhibited statistically and clinically significant improvements in pain at 4 weeks. Although the triamcinolone group exhibited a somewhat greater improvement, the difference between groups was not significantly different. Conclusion. The study found that the effectiveness of dexamethasone was slightly less than that of triamcinolone, but the difference was neither statistically nor clinically significant. A theoretically safer nonparticulant agent appears to be a valid alternative to particulate agents that have been used to date, and which have been associated with hazard.

Objective. The primary objective is to document the first case report of discitis after a lumbar epidural corticosteroid injection. The second objective is to analyze the case report literature to identify clinical features and trends of patients with infectious complications after spinal injections. Design. Single case report. A MEDLINE and EMBASE literature search was conducted using key words from the names of commonly performed spinal procedures, including epidural corticosteroid, selective nerve root, transforaminal epidural, facet joint, and sacroiliac joint injections. Setting. Pain medicine clinic at a tertiary medical center. Patient. A 64-year-old man with an 8-year history of left lower extremity radicular pain and recurrent pulmonary infections was referred for a lumbar epidural corticosteroid injection. Six weeks following the injection, the patient returned with a 4-week history of worsening right-sided paraspinous pain without associated recurrent pneumonia. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed a right-sided L5-S1 disc extrusion with discitis and a right L5-S1 discectomy was performed. Cultures of disc material and blood showed growth of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, and a transesophageal echocardiogram showed no evidence of endocarditis. The patient received 6 weeks of intravenous antibiotics and he had symptomatic recovery at 3-month follow-up. Results. Including our patient, the literature search identified 27 case reports of infectious complications. Similar clinical features and significant trends were evident in five categories including predisposing factors, symptom presentation, diagnostic evaluation, etiological organisms, and treatment outcomes. Conclusions. The identified clinical features and trends could prove useful to the practitioner when an infectious complication is suspected or has occurred.

Phantom limb pain has been well described in the literature. However, new-onset lumbar radicular pain superimposed on baseline lower extremity phantom pain is a clinical scenario that can be challenging to recognize. Furthermore, literature on recognition and treatment of phantom radiculopathy is all but lacking. We present a patient who experienced new-onset lumbar radiculopathy superimposed on her phantom pain that was successfully treated with fluoroscopic interlaminar and transforaminal epidural steroid injections.

Objective. To explore the outcome differences of lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) according to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings in patients with lumbar radicular pain. Design. Retrospective study. Setting. Single university-based interventional pain management unit. Patients. Fifty-nine patients who had lumbar radicular pain with a recent lumbar MRI and three-month follow-up were included. Methods. MRI findings were reviewed for the following items: herniation type (bulging, protrusion, extrusion), herniation location (central, subarticular, foraminal, extraforaminal), high intensity zone (HIZ), and nerve root impingement (NRI). Pain severity was evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) at time of before injection, then two weeks and three months after. Results. Pain scores improved significantly in each group ( P