Search

Background: Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are widely used to alleviate lumbosacral radicular pain. Knowledge of the therapeutic outcomes of TFESI allows clinicians to elucidate therapeutic plans for managing lumbosacral radicular pain. Deep learning (DL) can outperform traditional machine learning techniques and learn from unstructured and perceptual data. A convolutional neural network (CNN) is a representative DL model., Objectives: We developed and investigated the accuracy of a CNN model for predicting therapeutic outcomes after TFESI for controlling chronic lumbosacral radicular pain using T2-weighted sagittal lumbar spine magnetic resonance (MR) images as input data., Study Design: Imaging study using DL., Setting: At the spine center of a university hospital., Methods: We collected whole T2-weighted sagittal lumbar spine MR images from 503 patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain due to a herniated lumbar disc (HLD) and spinal stenosis. A "good outcome" was defined as a >= 50% reduction in the numeric rating scale (NRS-11) score at 2 months after TFESI vs the pretreatment NRS-11 score. A "poor outcome" was defined as a < 50% decrease in the NRS-11 score at 2 months after TFESI vs pretreatment., Results: In the prediction of therapeutic outcomes after TFESI on the validation dataset, the area under the curve was 0.827., Limitations: Our study was limited in that we used a small amount of lumbar spine MR imaging data to train the CNN model., Conclusions: We demonstrated that a CNN model trained, using whole lumbar spine sagittal T2-weighted MR images, could help determine outcomes after TFESI in patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain due to an HLD or spinal stenosis.

Background: Preoperative exposure to opioids has recently shown to be associated with poor outcomes after elective major surgery, but little is known as to how pretreatment opioid use affects results of interventional back pain management., Objective: We aimed to determine the effect of pretreatment opioid use on outcomes after interventional pain management procedures on patients with chronic back pain., Study Design: A retrospective study., Setting: Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at Satakunta Central Hospital (Satasairaala), Finland., Methods: A high-volume, single-center, quality register analysis was performed on patients who underwent interventional pain management for suspected facet-mediated chronic back pain as a part of a multidisciplinary pain management program. Chronic opioid use was defined as having a concurrent opioid prescription for 90 days., Results: A total of 797 patients underwent an intervention during the study period from August 1, 2019 through December 31, 2020. Pretreatment opioid use was present in 262 patients (33%). Patients with chronic back pain using opioids reported significantly more pain and discomfort before treatment as well as lowered working ability. Facet joint medial branch blocks resulted in significant improvement for both groups directly after the treatment as well as at 2-hours follow-up. However, the nonopioid group reported significantly more improvement at 2-days follow-up as well as at one month follow-up compared to opioid users. Opioid users reported nearly the same pain level at one-month follow-up as they did before treatment., Limitations: As a single-center analysis, these data may not be generalizable to other institutions. A retrospective study may include inevitable bias. The disease processes themselves may possibly predispose patients to different degrees of opoid use. Although we have identified preoperative opioid use as a risk factor for treatment failure, we were unable to determine the size of the association based on our statistical analysis and sample size. Pain intensity evaluation using the visual analog scale is inevitably subjective., Conclusion: Pretreatment opioid use is associated with greater pain discomfort, impairment, and reduced functional ability, as well as poorer long-term effect of interventional back pain treatment at one-month follow-up. In our study, opioid users reported the same positive effects of facet joint nerve blocks immediately after the treatment and 2 hours after the treatment, but a significantly smaller effect at one-month follow-up. This could indicate that opioid use may diminish the effects of pain treatments by affecting relearning, behavioral changes, and central pain modulation. These findings may help providers understand the effect of pretreatment opioid use on patient care, and its implications on hospital and societal costs.

Background: Symptomatic Tarlov cysts are a common cause of chronic pain. Many methods have been reported to treat this disease, with variable results. Most previous reports concerning the treatment methods of symptomatic Tarlov cysts were either sporadic case reports or series of limited cases., Objective: This study aimed to further optimize the management for patients with symptomatic Tarlov cysts (TCs) by analyzing the results of 82 patients who were treated with different strategies., Study Design: Three different strategies were applied to 82 patients with symptomatic TCs and their clinical effects were evaluated in 13 months to 12 years follow-up., Setting: A pain management practice, a medical center, major metropolitan city, China., Methods: From June 2003 to August 2015, a total number of 82 patients with symptomatic TCs were treated with 3 different methods (microsurgical cyst fenestration and imbrication, C-arm fluoroscopy guided percutaneous fibrin gel injection, and conservative management) in the first affiliated hospital of Chongqing Medical University. The pain severity was assessed according to visual analog scale (VAS), and imaging changes were evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Patient improvements in pain and neurologic function were evaluated during a follow-up the period of 13 months to 12 years., Results: All the patients who underwent microsurgical cyst fenestration and imbrication had either complete (7 patients, 50%) or substantial (7 patients, 50%) resolution of their preoperative symptoms and neurological deficits. However, 3 patients (21%) had cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage and 3 patients (21%) suffered from recurrent symptoms. In C-arm fluoroscopy guided percutaneous fibrin gel injection group, 34 patients (61%) had complete resolution and 22 patients had (39%) substantial resolution, and no CSF leakage or recurrence occurred. Only 3 patients (25%) got substantial resolution in the conservative management group, but 9 patients (75%) had aggravation., Limitations: An observational study with a relatively small sample size., Conclusions: C-arm fluoroscopy guided percutaneous fibrin gel injection therapy could be recommend as a better consideration for symptomatic TCs., Key Words: Tarlov cysts, C-arm fluoroscopy guided, fibrin gel, microsurgical cyst fenestration, conservative management.

Background: There have been many studies proving the effectiveness of lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) for the treatment of radicular pain. Dexamethasone has been suggested as an alternative to particulate steroids. However, no controlled trials have investigated the effect of different injected volumes for a same dose of dexamethasone., Objective: To compare the effects of a high-volume injectate with those of a low-volume injectate using the same dose of dexamethasone for 2 groups in lumbar TFESI., Study Design: A prospective, randomized, active control trial., Setting: The outpatient clinic of a single academic medical center., Methods: A total of 66 patients were randomized to receive lumbar transforaminal epidural dexamethasone injections with either a low-volume injectate (3 mL, N = 30) or a high-volume injectate (8 mL, N = 32). The primary outcome measures for this study were the incidence of the patients achieving meaningful pain relief and a reduction on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS, range 0-100) at 4 weeks after the procedure. The definition of "meaningful pain relief" was ≥ 50% from baseline. The secondary outcomes included the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ, range 0-24) score and adverse effects. The outcomes were assessed 4 weeks after the procedure., Results: Four weeks after the procedure, in the DL8 group, the incidence of achieving meaningful pain relief was higher compared with DL3 group (19, 59.4% vs. 9, 30%, P = 0.024). Both groups demonstrated a significant improvement in their VAS and RMDQ scores (P < 0.05). The VAS of the high-volume injectate group (DL8) was significantly lower than that of the low-volume injectate group (DL3) (33.3 ± 25 vs. 46.3 ± 25, P = 0.036). There was no significant difference in the RMDQ score between the 2 groups., Limitations: We enrolled a small number of patients and did not check the long-term outcomes., Conclusions: Injectate at a volume of 8 mL was more effective than injectate at a volume of 3 mL for radicular pain in a lumbar transforaminal steroid injection, although both of the injectates contained the same dose of dexamethasone.

Background: Pain emanating from the sacroiliac (SI) joint can have variable radiation patterns. Single physical examination tests for SI joint pain are inconsistent with multiple tests increasing both sensitivity and specificity., Objective: To evaluate the use of fluoroscopy in the diagnosis of SI joint pain., Study Design: Prospective double blind comparison study., Setting: Pain clinic and radiology setting in urban Veterans Administration (VA) in New Orleans, Louisiana., Methods: Twenty-two adult men, patients at a southeastern United States VA interventional pain clinic, presented with unilateral low back pain of more than 2 months' duration. Patients with previous back surgery were excluded from the study. Each patient was given a Gapping test, Patrick (FABERE) test, and Gaenslen test. A second blinded physician placed each patient prone under fluoroscopic guidance, asking each patient to point to the most painful area. Pain was provoked by applying pressure with the heel of the palm in that area to determine the point of maximum tenderness. The area was marked with a radio-opaque object and was placed on the mark with a fluoroscopic imgage. A site within 1 cm of the SI joint was considered as a positive test. This was followed by a diagnostic injection under fluoroscopy with 1 mL 2% lidocaine. A positive result was considered as more than 2 hours of greater than 75% reduction in pain. Then, in 2-3 days this was followed by a therapeutic injection under fluoroscopy with 1 mL 0.5% bupivacaine and 40 mg methylprednisolone., Results: Each patient was reassessed after 6 weeks. The sensitivity and specificity in addition to the positive and negative predictive values were determined for both the conventional examinations, as well as the examination under fluoroscopy. Finally, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was constructed to evaluate test performance. The sensitivity and specificity of the fluoroscopic examination were 0.82 and 0.80 respectively; Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 0.93 and 0.57 respectively. The area under ROC curve was 0.812 which is considered a "good" test; however the area under ROC for the conventional examination were between 0.52-0.58 which is considered "poor to fail"., Limitations: Variation in anatomy of the SI joint, small sample size., Conclusions: Multiple structures of the SI joint complex can result in clinical symptoms of pain. These include intra-articular structures (degenerative arthritis, and inflammatory conditions) as well as extra-articular structures (ligaments, muscles, etc.).

Background: Spinal zygapophysial, or facet, joints are a source of axial spinal pain and referred pain in the extremities. Conventional clinical features and other noninvasive diagnostic modalities are unreliable in diagnosing zygapophysial joint pain., Study Design: A systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of spinal facet joint nerve blocks., Objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of spinal facet joint nerve blocks in chronic spinal pain., Methods: A methodological quality assessment of included studies was performed using Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies (QAREL). Only diagnostic accuracy studies meeting at least 50% of the designated inclusion criteria were utilized for analysis. The level of evidence was classified as Level I to V based on the grading of evidence utilizing best evidence synthesis. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and other electronic searches published from 1966 through March 2015, Cochrane reviews, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles., Outcome Measures: Studies must have been performed utilizing controlled local anesthetic blocks. The criterion standard must have been at least 50% pain relief from baseline scores and the ability to perform previously painful movements., Results: The available evidence is Level I for lumbar facet joint nerve blocks with the inclusion of a total of 17 studies with dual diagnostic blocks, with at least 75% pain relief with an average prevalence of 16% to 41% and false-positive rates of 25% to 44%. The evidence for diagnosis of cervical facet joint pain with cervical facet joint nerve blocks is Level II based on a total of 11 controlled diagnostic accuracy studies, with significant variability among the prevalence in a heterogenous population with internal inconsistency. The prevalence rates ranged from 36% to 67% with at least 80% pain relief as the criterion standard and a false-positive rate of 27% to 63%. The level of evidence for the diagnostic accuracy of thoracic facet joint nerve blocks is Level II with 80% or higher pain relief as the criterion standard with a prevalence ranging from 34% to 48% and false-positive rates ranging from 42% to 48%., Limitations: The shortcomings of this systematic review include a paucity of literature related to the thoracic spine, continued debate on an appropriate gold standard, appropriateness of diagnostic blocks, and utility., Conclusion: The evidence is Level I for the diagnostic accuracy of lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, Level II for cervical facet joint nerve blocks, and Level II for thoracic facet joint nerve blocks in assessment of chronic spinal pain.

Instituting drug holidays for chronic opioid using patients is becoming commonplace for pain practitioners initiating procedures such as intrathecal pump or spinal cord stimulator trials. As such, pain practitioners need to be adept in their management of acute opioid withdrawal. Successfully weaning an opioid dependent patient off of chronic opioids requires a thorough knowledge of the available adjuvants to assist in this process. However, that selection can become exhausted by adjuvant side effects or by ineffective attenuation of opioid withdrawal symptoms. In that case, novel drugs, or novel application of currently available medications must be sought after to assist in the drug holiday. We present a case in which refractory muscle spasms secondary to opioid withdrawal were successfully treated with an over-the-counter supplement that is not typically used for the attenuation of opioid withdrawal symptoms. In a patient intolerant to the side effects of clonidine, we were able to successfully wean chronic opiates by treating refractory muscle spasms with the serotonin precursor, 5-hydroxytryptophan (5-HTP). We hypothesize that our success with this medication gives further credence to the role of serotonin in opioid withdrawal somatic symptomatology, and supports the need for future research to clarify the role of serotonin precursors or serotonin modulating drugs as potential alternatives in those unable to follow standard treatment protocols.

Background: Pain interventionists can interrupt pain through anesthetic blockade of neural transmission to virtually any part of the body. Temporary pain relief can be achieved by the direct application of targeted anesthetic. Diagnostically, nerve blocks help identify specific pain generators, refine differential diagnosis, and disrupt the neural transmission mechanisms to stop pain generation peripherally., Objective: This study of patients with chronic spine pain was conducted to test the hypothesis that decreasing pain through interventional techniques coupled with cognitive motivational counseling can be highly effective in reducing chronic pain interference, reliance on prescription opioids, and enhancing overall function and quality of life., Study Design: Retrospective case series., Setting: Rehabilitation center., Patients: This study involved a retrospective cohort of 78 consecutive patients with spine pain that underwent interventional procedures and cognitive motivational counseling, as well as a comparison group of 77 consecutive patients that underwent interventional procedures only., Outcome Measures: Pain intensity (DoD VAS), Functional capacity (DoD SS), Global Appraisal (PGIC), Pain site measurement (Drawing), and prescription medication use questionnaires were administered at initial evaluation and after treatment. Pre- and post-treatment changes were compared using paired t-tests. Chi-squared analysis was performed pre- and post-treatment for medication use., Results: The pre- and post-treatment scores for pain intensity, function, and global appraisal demonstrated significant response to treatment (P < 0.001) for the combined interventional and cognitive motivational group (P < 0.001) and the interventional only group (P < 0.05). Compared to initial intake, opioid (P < 0.01), benzodiazepine (P < 0.01), muscle relaxant (P < 0.05), and antidepressant/antianxiolytic (P < 0.05) use only decreased for the combined interventional and cognitive motivational group., Limitations: This is a retrospective study using medical records and patient self-reported symptoms with possible missed coding and no true random selection, assignment, or genuine control group comparison., Conclusion: This study's results support the hypothesis that a combined interventional and cognitive motivational counseling treatment program can be effective in decreasing spine pain, reducing prescription pain medication use, and improving overall quality of life in chronic spine pain patients.

On April 23, 2014, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a letter of warning that injection of corticosteroids into the epidural space of the spine may result in rare, but serious adverse events, including "loss of vision, stroke, paralysis, and death." The advisory also advocated that patients should discuss the benefits and risks of epidural corticosteroid injections with their health care professionals, along with the benefits and risks associated with other possible treatments. In addition, the FDA stated that the effectiveness and safety of the corticosteroids for epidural use have not been established, and the FDA has not approved corticosteroids for such use. To raise awareness of the risks of epidural corticosteroid injections in the medical community, the FDA's Safe Use Initiative convened a panel of experts including pain management experts to help define the techniques for such injections with the aim of reducing preventable harm. The panel was unable to reach an agreement on 20 proposed items related to technical aspects of performing epidural injections. Subsequently, the FDA issued the above referenced warning and a notice that a panel will be convened in November 2014. This review assesses the inaccuracies of the warning and critically analyzes the available literature. The literature has been assessed in reference to alternate techniques and an understanding of the risk factors when performing transforaminal epidural injections in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar regions, ultimately resulting in improved safety. The results of this review show the efficacy of epidural injections, with or without steroids, in a multitude of spinal ailments utilizing caudal, cervical, thoracic, and lumbar interlaminar approaches as well as lumbar transforaminal epidural injections . The evidence also shows the superiority of steroids in managing lumbar disc herniation utilizing caudal and lumbar interlaminar approaches without any significant difference as compared to transforaminal approaches, either with local anesthetic alone or local anesthetic and steroids combined. In conclusion, the authors request that the FDA modify the warning based on the evidence.

Background: Reports of prevalence of spinal pain indicate the prevalence of thoracic pain in approximately 13% of the general population compared to 32% of the population with neck pain and 43% of the population with low back pain during the past year. Even though, thoracic pain is less common than neck or low back pain, the degree of disability resulting from thoracic pain disorders seems to be similar to other painful conditions. Interventions in managing chronic thoracic pain are also less frequent, leading to the paucity of literature about various interventions in managing chronic thoracic pain. Thoracic intervertebral discs and thoracic facet joints have been shown to be pain generators, even though thoracic radicular pain is very infrequent. Thoracic epidural injections are one of the commonly performed procedures in managing thoracic pain. The efficacy of thoracic epidural injections has not been well studied., Study Design: A randomized, double-blind, active controlled trial., Setting:   Private interventional pain management practice and specialty referral center in the United States., Objective: The primary objective was to assess the effectiveness of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections in providing effective pain relief and improving function in patients with chronic mid and/or upper back pain., Methods: One hundred and ten patients were randomly assigned into 2 groups with 55 patients in each group receiving either local anesthetic alone (Group I) or local anesthetic with steroids (Group II). Randomization was performed by computer-generated random allocation sequence by simple randomization., Outcomes Assessment: Outcomes were assessed utilizing Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) 2.0, employment status, and opioid intake. The patients experiencing greater than 3 weeks of significant improvement with the first 2 procedures were considered as successful. Others were considered as failed participants. Significant improvement was defined as a decrease of greater than 50% NRS scores and ODI scores with measurements performed at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post treatment., Results: Significant improvement was seen in 71% in Group I and 80% in Group II at the end of 2 years with all participants; however, improvement was seen in 80% and 86% when only successful patients were considered. Therapeutic procedural characteristics showed 5 to 6 procedures per 2 years with total average relief of 80 weeks in Group I and 78 weeks in Group II in the successful patient category; whereas, it was 71 and 72 weeks when all patients were considered., Limitations: Limitations of this assessment include lack of a placebo group., Conclusions: Based on the results of this trial, it is concluded that chronic thoracic pain of non-facet joint origin may be managed conservatively with thoracic interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids.

Background: Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are a mainstay in the treatment of spine pain. Though this commonly performed procedure is generally felt to be safe, devastating complications following inadvertent intra-arterial injections of particulate steroid have been reported. The use of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) has been suggested as a means of detecting intra-arterial needle placements prior to medication injection., Objective: To examine the efficacy of DSA in detecting intra-arterial needle placements during TFESI., Study Design: Prospective cohort study evaluating the impact of DSA on detecting intra-arterial needle placements during TFESI., Methods: We enrolled 150 consecutive patients presenting to a university-affiliated spine center with discogenic and/or radicular symptoms affecting the cervical, lumbar, and sacral regions. For each injection, prior to imaging with DSA, traditional methods for vascular penetration detection were employed, including the identification of blood in the needle hub (flash), negative aspiration of blood prior to injection, and live fluoroscopic injection of contrast. Once these tests were performed and negative for signs of intra-arterial needle placement, DSA imaging was utilized prior to medication administration for identification of vascular flow., Results: A total number of 222 TFESI were performed, 41 injections at the cervical levels (18.47%), 113 at the lumbar levels (50.9%), and 68 at the sacral levels (30.36%). Flash was observed in 13 injections performed (5.85% of the total number of injections): one (0.45%) in the cervical, 2 (0.9%) in the lumbar, and 10 (4.5%) in the sacral levels. In 11 TFESI blood aspiration was obtained (4.95% of all injections): 3 (1.3%) in cervical, 4 (1.8%) in lumbar, and 4 (1.8%) in sacral injections. Live fluoroscopy during contrast injection detected 46 (20.72%) intravascular flow patterns: 7 (3.1%) cervical, 17 (7.6%) lumbar, and 22 (9.9%) sacral. DSA identified an additional 5 intravascular injections after all previous steps had resulted in negative vascular penetration signs, which accounted for 2.25% of all injections., Limitations: This is a prospective, single-center study with a relatively small number of patients and no control group., Conclusion: DSA detected additional 5.26% intravascular needle placements following traditional methods. Our findings also support other studies that conclude TFESI are generally a safe procedure. We recommend that special attention should be paid to the sacral injections as vascular penetration was statistically higher than at other levels.

Cancer patients with severe refractory pain are often managed with implantable drug delivery systems (IDDS). The only drugs with US Food and Drug Administration approval for intrathecal use are morphine, ziconotide, and baclofen. Other drugs used and mixed include, hydromorphone, bupivacaine, sufentanil, and fentanyl. These patients often undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for disease-related monitoring and diagnoses. Although uncommon, IDDS can fail to resume normal functioning after MRI, potentially causing complications. The magnetic field of an MRI will temporarily stop the rotor of the pump motor and suspend drug delivery for the duration of the MRI exposure. The pump should resume normal operation when removed from the MRI magnetic field, but there is a potential for a delay in the return of proper drug infusion and a delay in the logging of motor stall events after an MRI in the SynchroMed II pumps. A 57-year-old man who underwent multiple MRIs with an implanted IDDS experienced 2 separate memory failures leading to multiple complications. After the first pump malfunction, the patient developed withdrawal symptoms and was treated in the emergency department. The first time, a memory reset resolved the problem. The second time, 29 months later, the patient was admitted to the hospital to manage withdrawal symptoms and the pump had to be exchanged with a new device. Post-MRI pump interrogation should be performed on all patients with IDDS to ensure proper functioning of the pump. Special attention should be paid to patients receiving baclofen, as acute withdrawal can be very serious, even deadly.

Epidural corticosteroid injection is a commonly used approach for managing back pain of several etiologies. The risk of clinical complications from systemic absorption is felt to be rare. Ritonavir is a protease inhibitor whose potent cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibition is exploited for pharmacologic boosting in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. It has been associated with systemic hypercortisolism when used in combination with nasal and inhaled corticosteroids. This is a case series describing 2 patients with HIV on ritonavir-containing regimens who developed iatrogenic hypercortisolism following epidural injection of triamcinolone acetonide. The 2 patients developed cushingoid symptoms, with detectable serum triamcinolone acetonide levels weeks after their epidural injections. Their symptoms took several weeks to resolve, in one case necessitating a change to an HIV regimen that did not contain ritonavir. Iatrogenic hypercortisolism is a rarely reported, but potentially devastating complication of injectable corticosteroids. Individuals receiving ritonavir-based therapy appear to be at increased risk for this process due to pharmacologic boosting of the corticosteroid. The preponderance of reported cases of iatrogenic hypercortisolism following injectable corticosteroids has involved triamcinolone acetonide, which may be due to the relatively rapid absorption characteristics and high serum levels of this compound compared with other preparations. For individuals on ritonavir-containing HIV therapy, we recommend close coordination with the involved HIV clinicians prior to use of injectable corticosteroids, and avoidance of injections with triamcinolone acetonide whenever possible. Choosing an alternative corticosteroid preparation to triamcinolone acetonide may reduce the risk of systemic absorption, though more research is needed to confirm this hypothesis.

Background: There is a paucity of literature on the use of epidural injections for the treatment of chronic mid and upper back pain due to disc herniation and radiculitis, axial or discogenic pain, spinal stenosis, post surgery syndrome, and post thoracotomy pain syndrome., Study Design: A systematic review of therapeutic thoracic epidural injection therapy for chronic mid and upper back pain., Objective: The objective of this systematic review is to determine the effects of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids, with or without fluoroscopy, and for various conditions including disc herniation and radiculitis, axial or discogenic pain, spinal stenosis, post thoracic surgery syndrome, and post thoracotomy pain syndrome., Methods: The available literature on thoracic interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids in managing various types of chronic mid and upper back pain was reviewed. The quality assessment and clinical relevance criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and the criteria developed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria for observational studies. The level of evidence was classified as good, fair, or limited (or poor) based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to March 2012, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles., Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief = up to 6 months and long-term > 6 months). Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake., Results: For this review, 17 studies were identified, including studies examining adverse reactions. Only 2 studies were included: one randomized trial and one non-randomized or observational study. The results of this systematic review evaluating the effectiveness of thoracic epidural injections with or without steroids in managing chronic thoracic pain shows fair evidence with one randomized trial in patients with various causes; whereas the evidence is limited based on one non-randomized study evaluating chronic pain in post thoracotomy syndrome., Limitations: The limitations of this study include paucity of evidence., Conclusion: The evidence based on this systematic review for thoracic epidural injection in treating chronic thoracic pain is considered fair and limited for post thoracotomy pain.

Background: Chronic, persistent low back and lower extremity pain is often caused by spinal stenosis. Surgery and other interventions, including epidural injections, have been used to relieve this pain. However, there is little in the medical literature to support interlaminar, or transforaminal epidural injections under fluoroscopy for managing lumbar pain of central spinal stenosis, while the caudal epidural approach has been studied., Study Design: A randomized, double-blind, active, control trial., Setting: A private, interventional pain management practice, specialty referral center in the United States., Objective: This study sought to determine if low back and lower extremity pain secondary to lumbar central stenosis can be managed and long-lasting pain relief can be achieved with interlaminar epidural injections of local anesthetic, with or without steroids., Methods: The study comprised 2 groups: one that received local anesthetic only and another received local anesthetic combined with nonparticulate betamethasone. A total of 120 patients were randomized by a computer-generated random allocations sequence to one of the 2 groups. The results of 30 patients in each group were assessed., Outcomes Assessment: Sixty patients were included in this analysis. Outcomes measurements were taken at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months post-treatment. Measurements taken were Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), the Oswestry Disability Index 2.0 (ODI), employment status and opioid intake. A decrease in both the NRS and ODI of  >/= 50% was considered significant., Results: Significant pain relief and improvement in ODI scores were seen in both groups at 12 months. Group I's significant pain relief was 70%; Group II's was 63%. The significant ODI improvement in Group I was 70%; in Group II it was 60%. Group I patients on average received 3.8 procedures a year; Group II patients received 4.0 procedures a year in successful group. Over 52 weeks in the successful group, total relief for Group I was 40.8 ± 11.7 weeks; for Group II it was 37.1 ± 12.6 weeks. Combined pain relief and functional status improvement were seen in 80% of patients in Group I and 72% in Group II in successful group., Limitations: The lack of a placebo group and preliminary results are limitations., Conclusion: Patients might benefit from receiving lumbar interlaminar injections with or without steroids for lumbar central spinal stenosis., Clinical Trial: NCT00681447.

Background: The proportion of patients suffering from thoracic pain secondary to thoracic disorders is relatively small compared to low back and neck pain. Furthermore, thoracic interventions are not performed as often as in cervical and lumbar regions. In addition, there is a paucity of literature regarding thoracic intervertebral discs and thoracic disc herniation as causative structures of thoracic pain., Study Design: A randomized, double-blind, active controlled trial., Setting: A private practice, interventional pain management and specialty referral center in the United States., Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections in providing effective pain relief in managing chronic mid and upper back pain secondary to disc herniation or radiculitis and discogenic pain with local anesthetic alone or with steroids., Methods: Inclusion criteria consisted of patients who either had disc herniation or radiculitis, or patients with discogenic pain proven by controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks not to be caused by facet joint pain. Patients were assigned to one of 2 groups. One group received injections containing local anesthetic only; the other group, local anesthetic mixed with non-particulate betamethasone. Randomization was performed by computer-generated random allocations sequence by simple randomization., Outcomes Assessment: Participant outcomes were measured at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months post-treatment with the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), the Oswestry Disability Index 2.0 (ODI), employment status, and opioid intake. Decrease of >/= 50% of NRS scores and Oswestry scores were considered significant., Results: A total of 40 participants are included in this preliminary report with 20 participants in each group. Significant pain relief (>/= 50%) and reduction (by at least 50%) in ODI from baseline was seen at 12 months in 80% of patients in Group I and 85% in Group II., Limitations: This is a preliminary report and there was no placebo group. Overall, 80% of participants in Group I (who received injections without steroids) and 85% in Group II (who received injections with steroids) with thoracic pain secondary to disc herniation or radiculitis and discogenic pain might benefit from thoracic interlaminar epidural injections., Clinical Trial: NCT01071369.

Background: Thoracic facet joints have been implicated as the source of chronic pain in the mid back or upper back in 34% to 42% of patients when the modified criteria of the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) is utilized. Various therapeutic techniques utilized in managing chronic thoracic pain of facet joint origin include intraarticular injections, medial branch blocks, and radiofrequency neurotomy of thoracic medial branch nerves., Study Design: A randomized, double-blind, active controlled trial., Setting: A private practice, interventional pain management setting, and a specialty referral center setting in the United States., Objective: To determine the clinical effectiveness of therapeutic local anesthetic medial branch blocks with or without steroid in managing chronic function-limiting mid back or upper back pain of facet joint origin., Methods: The study was performed in an interventional pain management private practice, a tertiary referral center, in the United States. A total of 100 participants were included, with 50 participants in each of the local anesthetic and steroid groups. All of the participants met the diagnostic criteria of thoracic facet joint pain by means of comparative, controlled diagnostic blocks and the inclusion criteria. Group I participants received thoracic medial branch blocks with bupivacaine, whereas Group II participants received thoracic medial branch blocks with bupivacaine and non-particulate betamethasone., Outcomes Assessment: Outcomes measures included numeric rating scores (NRS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), opioid intake, and return to work status at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. Significant pain relief was defined as >/= 50% pain relief and/or a positive change in ODI scores., Results: In Group I and Group II 90% of participants showed significant pain relief and functional improvement at 12 months. The majority of the participants experienced significant pain relief of 47.2 ± 10.1 weeks in Group I and 46.3 ± 8.4 weeks in Group II, requiring approximately 3.5 treatments per year with an average relief of 15.8 ± 10.5 in Group I and 13.6 ± 3.6 weeks in Group II per episode of treatment., Limitations: Study limitations include the lack of a placebo group., Conclusions: Therapeutic thoracic medial branch blocks, with or without steroid, may provide a management option for chronic function-limiting mid back or upper back pain of facet joint origin., Clinical Trial: NCT00355706.

Background: Post lumbar surgery syndrome represents a cluster of nomenclature and syndromes following spine surgery wherein the expectations of the patient and spine surgeon are not met, with persistent pain following lumbar surgery. Multiple causes have been speculated to cause pain after lumbar surgery. Epidural steroid injections are most commonly used in managing post surgical pain in the lumbar spine. However, there is a paucity of evidence of epidural injections in managing chronic low back pain with or without lower extremity pain in post surgery syndrome., Study Design: A randomized, double-blind, active controlled trial., Setting: An interventional pain management practice, a specialty referral center, a private practice setting in the United States., Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of caudal epidural injections in patients with chronic low back and lower extremity pain after surgical intervention with post lumbar surgery syndrome., Methods: One-hundred forty patients were randomly assigned to one of 2 groups; Group I patients received caudal epidural injections with local anesthetic (lidocaine 0.5%), whereas Group II patients received caudal epidural injections with 0.5% lidocaine 9 mL mixed with 1 mL of 6 mg non-particulate Celestone. Randomization was performed by computer-generated random allocation sequence by simple randomization., Outcomes Assessment: Multiple outcome measures were utilized which included the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), the Oswestry Disability Index 2.0 (ODI), employment status, and opioid intake with assessment at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months post-treatment. Significant pain relief and disability reduction were described as 50% or more reduction in scores from baseline., Results: Combined pain relief (>/=50%) and disability reduction was recorded in 53% of the patients in the local anesthetic group, and 59% of patients in the local anesthetic and steroid group with no significant differences noted with or without steroid over a period of one-year. However, the data from the successful group showed improvement in 70% of patients in Group I and 75% of patients in Group II. The average procedures per year were 4 with an average total relief per year of 38.1 ± 14.5 weeks in Group I and 38.4 ± 13.2 weeks in Group II over a period of 52 weeks in the successful group., Limitations: The results of this study are limited by the lack of a placebo group and one-year outcomes., Conclusion: Caudal epidural injections in chronic function-limiting low back pain in post surgery syndrome without facet joint pain may be effective in a significant proportion of patients with improvement in functional status and significant pain relief., Clinical Trial: NCT00370799.

Background: Methylprednisolone is one of the most commonly used steroids for management of chronic back pain via epidural injection. Its inadvertent injection into the intrathecal space is associated with complications such as adhesive arachnoiditis., Objective: The present study aimed to assess the clinical and histological changes associated with the injection of methylprednisolone into the intrathecal space of dogs., Study Design: A randomized, double blind, controlled animal trial., Methods: After approval by the animal research ethics committee, 14 dogs were studied in a randomized double blind controlled trial. They were assigned to one of 2 groups: Group I received 1 mL of 0.9% normal saline; Group II received 1 mL (1.15mg/kg) of methylprednisolone into the intrathecal space. Animals were clinically evaluated for 21 days, and then sacrificed. The lumbar and sacral portions of their spinal cords were removed for histological examination., Results: In Group I, there were no clinical or histological changes. All animals in Group II showed no clinical changes but all exhibited histological changes in the spinal cord. The main histological changes consisted of meningeal thickening and lymphocytic infiltrates in the blood vessels. In 3 animals, adhesion of pia, arachnoid, and dura matter was noted and the nerve roots were surrounded by fibrosis. In one animal, necrosis of the spinal cord was evident., Limitations: The limitations of the present study include: small sample of animals (n=14), relative short clinical follow-up (21 days), and use of a commercially available drug solution, which is not preservative free., Conclusion: The present study demonstrated that the intrathecal administration of commercially available methylprednisolone was responsible for causing histological changes in the spinal cord and meninges of the animals studied.

Background: Epidural steroid injections are commonly used in managing radicular pain. Most complications related to epidural injections are minor and self-limited. Flushing is considered as one such minor side effect. Flushing has been studied using various steroid preparations including methylprednisone, triamcinolone, and betamethasone but its frequency has never been studied using dexamethasone., Objective: This study evaluates the frequency of flushing associated with fluoroscopy-guided lumbar epidural steroid injections using dexamethasone., Study Design: Retrospective cohort design study. Patients presenting with low back pain were evaluated and offered a fluoroscopically guided lumbar epidural steroid injection using dexamethasone via an interlaminar approach as part of a conservative care treatment plan., Setting: University-based Pain Management Center., Intervention: All injections were performed consecutively over a 2-month period by one staff member using 16 mg (4 mg/mL) of dexamethasone. A staff physician specifically asked each participant about the presence of flushing following the procedure prior to discharge on the day of injection and again on follow-up within 48 hours after the injections. The answers were documented as "YES" or "NO.", Results: A total of 150 participants received fluoroscopically guided interlaminar epidural steroid injection. All participants received 16 mg (4 mg/mL) of dexamethasone with 2 mL of 0.2% ropiviciane. Overall incidence of flushing was 42 out of 150 cases (28%). Of the 42 participants who experienced flushing, 12 (28%) experienced the symptom prior to discharge following the procedure. Twenty-seven of the 42 (64%) were female (P < 0.05). All the participants who experienced flushing noted resolution by 48 hours. No other major side effects or complications were noted., Limitations: Follow-up data were solely based on subjective reports by patients via telecommunication. Follow-up time was limited to only 48 hours, which overlooks the possibility that more participants might have noted flushing after the 48 hour limit., Conclusions: Flushing is commonly reported following epidural steroid injections. With an incidence of 28%, injections using dexamethasone 16 mg by interlaminar epidural route appear to be associated with more flushing reaction than previously reported with other steroid preparations. Additionally, female participants are more likely to experience flushing though the reactions seem to be self-limiting with resolution by 48 hours.

Interventional pain management is an evolving field, with a primary focus on the safety of the patient. One major source of risk to patients is intraarterial or intraneural injections. Interventional pain physicians have considerable interest in identifying techniques which avoid these complications. A recent article has reviewed complications associated with interventional procedures and concluded that the complications were due to deviation from a specific prescribed protocol. One of the cases reviewed went to jury trial and the record of that case is in the public domain. Two of the authors of the recent review were expert witnesses in the trial. They provided conflicting testimony as to alleged violations of the standard of care. Their criticisms also differed from a third criticism contained in the article as well as the protocol being advocated in the article, thus contravening the claim that there is one prescribed protocol which must be followed. The definition of standard of care varies amongst jurisdictions, but is generally defined as either that care which a reasonably well-trained physician in that specialty would provide under similar circumstances or as what would constitute reasonable medical care under the circumstances presented. Analysis of the case which went to trial indicates that there is not one prescribed protocol which must be followed; the definition of standard of care is broader than that. Interventional pain management is an evolving field and the standard of care is broadly defined.

Background: Hyaluronidase is an enzyme additive used in local anaesthesia and interventional pain reducing procedures such as adhesiolysis of epidural scar tissue after spinal surgery. Only a limited number of studies describe the influence of drugs on hyaluronidase activity. Postulated effects and effectiveness of hyaluronidase are only based on clinical observations., Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the influence of the combined drugs on the activity of hyaluronidase under standardized conditions and to verify the effectiveness of the enzyme., Design: An ELISA-based microtiter-technique is used to evaluate the activity of hyaluronidase in combination with local anaesthetics, corticosteroids, NaCl 10%, and iodinated contrast media., Methods: Microtiter plates were coated with biotinylated hyaluronate and incubated with hyaluronidase in combination with the above-mentioned drugs. The activity of hyaluronidase was determined by an avidin-peroxidase-based procedure using an ELISA reader. Incubations were carried out at room temperature as well as at 37 degrees C., Results: The data show that drugs affect the activity of hyaluronidase in different ways. Iodinated contrast media, NaCl (10%), and the absence of corticosteroids reduce hyaluronidase activity. In contrast, higher activities were detected at a lower NaCl concentration (0.9%). We cannot attribute a significant influence to local anaesthetics., Conclusions: Hyaluronidase is effective in all combinations with drugs. To get the maximum effect calculated use of accompanying drugs is necessary.

Background: Even though the prevalence of thoracic pain has been reported to be 15% of the general population and up to 22% of the population in interventional pain management settings, the role of thoracic discs as a cause of chronic thoracic and extrathoracic pain has not been well researched. The intervertebral discs, zygapophysial or facet joints, and other structures including the costovertebral and costotransverse joints have been identified as a source of thoracic pain., Objective: To systematically assess the quality of clinical studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of provocation thoracic discography., Study Design: A systematic review of provocation thoracic discography., Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of thoracic discography with respect to chronic, function limiting, thoracic or extrathoracic pain. Studies meeting the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) methodologic quality criteria with scores of 50 or higher were included for the assessment of the level of evidence. Level of evidence was based on the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria for the assessment of accuracy of diagnostic studies. Based on the level of evidence, recommendations were made according to Guyatt et al's criteria., Results: The clinical value of thoracic provocation discography is limited (Level II-3) with 2C/weak recommendation derived from low quality or very low quality evidence indicating that other alternatives may be equally reasonable., Conclusion: Based on the available evidence for this systematic review, thoracic provocation discography is provided with a weak recommendation for the diagnosis of discogenic pain in the thoracic spine, if conservative management has failed. This is qualified by the need to appropriately evaluate and diagnose other causes of chronic thoracic pain including pain originating from thoracic facet joints.

Background: Caudal epidural steroid injections are commonly utilized to help reduce radicular pain in lumbar spinal stenosis. There have been studies done to evaluate the effectiveness of this procedure non-fluoroscopically guided. Search revealed no prospective studies evaluating the effectiveness of fluoroscopically guided caudal epidural injections on patients with bilateral radicular pain from degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis., Objective: To evaluate the therapeutic benefit of fluoroscopically guided caudal epidural steroid injections in the treatment of bilateral radicular pain from symptomatic Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (DLSS)., Design: This prospective cohort study was performed on 34 patients with bilateral radicular pain from lumbar spinal stenosis who received fluoroscopically guided caudal epidural injections at a multidisciplinary spine center as they did not improve with conservative care. The patients' degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis was confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging and classified as mild, moderate, or severe. The patients were evaluated by an independent observer and completed questionnaires, prior to initial injection, at 6 weeks, 6 months and 12 months after the injections., Outcome Measures: Visual analog scale, patient satisfaction scale, standing/walking tolerance scale and Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire., Results: A total of 34 patients met our inclusion criteria and were followed at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months. Sixty-five percent of patients at 6 weeks, 62% at 6 months, and 54% at 12 months had a successful outcome, reporting at least a >50% reduction between pre-injection and post injection visual analog pain scores. Fifty nine percent of patients had an improved walking tolerance at 6 weeks (p <0.0001), 56% at 6 months (p <0.0001), and 51% at 12 months (p=0.0005). Fifty percent of patients had an improved standing tolerance at 6 weeks (p= 0.0002), 54% at 6 months (p < 0.0001), and 51% at 12 months (p=0.0005). The patient satisfaction scale revealed 64% of patients felt completely or somewhat better at 6 weeks, 59% at 6 months and 52% at 12 months. Owestry low back pain disability questionnaire scores showed statistically significant improvement from initial scores to 6 weeks (p < 0.0001), initial to 6 months (p= 0.0095), and initial to 12 months (p=0.00015). The outcome was statistically significant even in severe stenotic patients when comparing initial mean scores to 12 month mean scores in standing tolerance (p =0.2956), walking tolerance (p=0.0250), and VAS (p= 0.0199)., Conclusion: Fluoroscopically guided caudal epidural steroid injections may help reduce bilateral radicular pain and improve standing and walking tolerance in patients with DLSS.

Background: Epidural injection of corticosteroids is one of the most commonly used interventions in managing chronic spinal pain. However, there has been a lack of well-designed randomized, controlled studies to determine the effectiveness of epidural injections. Consequently, debate continues as to the value of epidural steroid injections in managing spinal pain., Objective: To evaluate the effect of various types of epidural steroid injections (interlaminar, transforaminal, and caudal), in managing various types of chronic spinal pain (axial and radicular) in the neck and low back regions., Study Design: A systematic review utilizing the criteria established by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for evaluation of randomized and non-randomized trials, and criteria of Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group for randomized trials were used., Methods: Data sources included relevant English literature performed by a librarian experienced in Evidence Based Medicine (EBM), as well as manual searches of bibliographies of known primary and review articles and abstracts from scientific meetings within the last 2 years. Three reviewers independently assessed the trials for the quality of their methods. Subgroup analyses were performed among trials with different control groups, with different techniques of epidural injections (interlaminar, transforaminal, and caudal), with different injection sites (cervical/thoracic, lumbar/sacral), and with timing of outcome measurement (short- and long-term)., Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure is pain relief. Other outcome measures were functional improvement, improvement of psychological status, and return to work. Short-term improvement is defined as 6 weeks or less, and long-term relief is defined as 6 weeks or longer., Results: In managing lumbar radicular pain with interlaminar lumbar epidural steroid injections, the evidence is strong for short-term relief and limited for long-term relief. In managing cervical radiculopathy with cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections, the evidence is moderate. The evidence for lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections in managing lumbar radicular pain is strong for short-term and moderate for long-term relief. The evidence for cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injections in managing cervical nerve root pain is moderate. The evidence is moderate in managing lumbar radicular pain in post lumbar laminectomy syndrome. The evidence for caudal epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief, in managing chronic pain of lumbar radiculopathy and postlumbar laminectomy syndrome., Conclusion: There is moderate evidence for interlaminar epidurals in the cervical spine and limited evidence in the lumbar spine for long-term relief. The evidence for cervical and lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections is moderate for long-term improvement in managing nerve root pain. The evidence for caudal epidural steroid injections is moderate for long-term relief in managing nerve root pain and chronic low back pain.

Background: A 2-year review of literature from October 2004 to December 2006 was completed to update current scientific evidence on diagnostic utility of facet joint injections. Diagnostic injections are employed to diagnose facet joint pain because available techniques cannot identify the pain generating structure in patients with chronic spinal pain. There is no physical examination technique, laboratory test, or imaging modality that can precisely identify the spinal structure causing pain, distinguish the culprit from a variety of potential targets, and predict response to a therapeutic intervention. Zygapophysial joint injections, commonly called facet injections (intraarticular joint injections and medial branch blocks) are local anesthetic injections of the facet joint or its nerve supply. These are diagnostic procedures used to determine if pain is arising from facet joints, distinguish painful from nonpainful joints and prognosticate response to therapeutic facet joint interventions. Diagnostic injections must meet the cardinal features of a diagnostic test i.e., accuracy, safety, and reproducibility. Accuracy is based on comparison with a "gold standard" to confirm presence or absence of a disease. There is, however, no available gold standard to measure presence or absence of pain. Hence, there is a degree of uncertainty concerning the accuracy of diagnostic facet joint injections., Objectives: Evaluate and update available evidence (2004 to 2006) relating to clinical utility of facet joint injections (intraarticular and medial branch blocks) in diagnosing chronic spinal pain of facet joint origin., Study Design: Review of the literature for clinical studies on efficacy and utility of facet joint/nerve injections in diagnosing facet joint pain according to Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and Quality Assessment Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS) criteria. The level of evidence was classified as conclusive (Level I), strong (Level II), moderate (Level III), or limited (Level IV)., Methods: Computerized database search (2004 to 2006) of PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Knowledge was conducted to identify studies on facet joint pain and diagnostic interventions. Abstracts, reviews, book chapters, case reports, studies based on single blocks or blocks without radiologic control, and studies describing techniques were excluded. Prospective studies were given priority over retrospective studies., Results: There is no change in the strength of evidence for facet joint diagnostic injections. There is strong evidence for controlled comparative local anesthetic facet joint injections or medial branch blocks in the diagnosis of neck and low back pain and moderate evidence in the diagnosis of pain arising from thoracic facet joints., Conclusion: The evidence obtained from literature review suggests that controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks of facet joints (medial branch or dorsal ramus) are reproducible, reasonably accurate and safe. The sensitivity, specificity, false-positive rates, and predictive values of these diagnostic tests for neck and low back pain have been validated and reproduced in multiple studies.