Lumbar Radiculopathy

The aim of this study was to describe and update current knowledge of manual therapy accuracy in treating cervical and lumbar radiculopathy, to identify the limitations in current studies, and to suggest areas for future research. The study was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews. A comprehensive literature review was conducted using PubMed and Web of Science databases up to April 2020. The following inclusion criteria were used: (1) presence of radiculopathy; (2) treatment defined as manual therapy (i.e., traction, manipulation, mobilization); and (3) publication defined as a Randomized Controlled Trial. The electronic literature search resulted in 473 potentially relevant articles. Finally, 27 articles were accepted: 21 on cervical (CR) and 6 in lumbar radiculopathy (LR). The mean PEDro score for CR was 6.6 (SD 1.3), and for LR 6.7 (SD 1.6). Traction-oriented techniques are the most frequently chosen treatment form for CR and are efficient in reducing pain and improving functional outcomes. In LR, each of the included publications used a different form of manual therapy, which makes it challenging to summarize knowledge in this group. Of included publications, 93% were either of moderate or low quality, which indicates that quality improvement is necessary for this type of research.

Download Full-text

Variations in selective nerve root block technique

Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England ◽

10.1308/003588413x13629960048073 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 95 (7) ◽

pp. 515-518 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

NC Eastley ◽

V Spiteri ◽

ML Newey

Keyword(s):

Local Anaesthetic ◽

Nerve Root ◽

Lumbar Radiculopathy ◽

Vertebral Disc ◽

Injection Techniques ◽

Nerve Root Blocks ◽

Tip Position ◽

The Uk ◽

Selective Nerve Root Block ◽

Prolapsed Disc

Introduction Much literature reports on selective nerve root blocks (SNRBs) in cases of lumbosacral radiculopathy. Unfortunately, authors only inconsistently reveal the exact needle tip position relative to the causative pathology at the time of injection. Different injection sites may provide different symptomatic benefits. We investigated the variation in injection techniques of practitioners working in the UK. Methods A clinical scenario was devised depicting a patient with radiculopathy secondary to an L4/5 vertebral disc prolapse. Participants were questioned on their chosen management of this patient, focusing particularly on SNRB technique. Questionnaires were sent to spinal surgeons, pain management specialists and musculoskeletal radiologists. Results A total of 100 responses were detailed enough for inclusion. The majority (83%) of respondents reported they would inject local anaesthetic and steroids, 4% would inject local anaesthetic alone and 13% would inject a different substance. Over half (53%) would target the L5 nerve root, 26% the L4 nerve root, 12% the prolapsed disc itself and 9% two separate vertebral levels. Variation was also noted in needle tip location relative to the neural sheath. Conclusions When treating lumbar radiculopathy, there are apparent variations in the use and positioning of SNRBs for a given level of disc pathology. Needle tip position may have a direct influence on clinical outcome following SNRBs. Caution is therefore required when considering the validity of previously published studies investigating SNRBs and different injectates.

Download Full-text