The value of short-term pain relief in predicting the 1-month outcome of ‘indirect’ cervical epidural steroid injections

2016 ◽  
Vol 159 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holger Joswig ◽  
Armin Neff ◽  
Christina Ruppert ◽  
Gerhard Hildebrandt ◽  
Martin Nikolaus Stienen
2018 ◽  
Vol 160 (5) ◽  
pp. 935-943 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holger Joswig ◽  
Armin Neff ◽  
Christina Ruppert ◽  
Gerhard Hildebrandt ◽  
Martin Nikolaus Stienen

2017 ◽  
Vol 107 ◽  
pp. 764-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holger Joswig ◽  
Armin Neff ◽  
Christina Ruppert ◽  
Gerhard Hildebrandt ◽  
Martin Nikolaus Stienen

2016 ◽  
Vol 96 ◽  
pp. 323-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holger Joswig ◽  
Armin Neff ◽  
Christina Ruppert ◽  
Gerhard Hildebrandt ◽  
Martin Nikolaus Stienen

2018 ◽  
Vol 59 (12) ◽  
pp. 1508-1516
Author(s):  
Stefan Ignjatovic ◽  
Reza Omidi ◽  
Rahel A Kubik-Huch ◽  
Suzanne Anderson ◽  
Frank J Ahlhelm

Background Compared with other available injection techniques for lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections (LTFESIs), the traditionally performed subpedicular approach is associated with a higher risk of spinal cord infarction, a rare but catastrophic complication. Purpose To assess the short-term efficacy of the retroneural approach for computed tomography (CT)-guided LTFESIs with respect to different needle-tip positions. Material and Methods This retrospective analysis included 238 patients receiving 286 CT-guided LTFESIs from January 2013 to January 2016. Short-term outcomes in terms of pain relief were assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS) at baseline and 30 min after. The needle-tip location was categorized as extraforaminal, junctional, or foraminal relative to the neural foramen. Additionally, the distance from the needle tip to the nerve root was measured. Results A mean pain reduction of 3.22 points (±2.17 points) on the VAS was achieved. The needle-tip location was extraforaminal in 48% (136/286), junctional in 42% (120/286), and foraminal in 10% (28/286) of the cases. The mean distance from the needle tip to the nerve root was 3.83 mm (±3.37 mm). There was no significant correlation between pain relief and needle-tip position in relation to the neural foramen. Therapy success was not dependent on the distance between the needle tip and the nerve root. No major complications were observed. Conclusion In our population treated with LTFESIs, the retroneural approach was shown to be an effective technique, with no significant differences in pain relief following different needle-tip positions.


Pain Medicine ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 379-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Avraam Ploumis ◽  
Pavlos Christodoulou ◽  
Kirkham B. Wood ◽  
Dimitrios Varvarousis ◽  
James L. Sarni ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 1;10 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 7-111
Author(s):  
ASIPP ASIPP

Background: The evidence-based practice guidelines for the management of chronic spinal pain with interventional techniques were developed to provide recommendations to clinicians in the United States. Objective: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic spinal pain, utilizing all types of evidence and to apply an evidence-based approach, with broad representation by specialists from academic and clinical practices. Design: Study design consisted of formulation of essentials of guidelines and a series of potential evidence linkages representing conclusions and statements about relationships between clinical interventions and outcomes. Methods: The elements of the guideline preparation process included literature searches, literature synthesis, systematic review, consensus evaluation, open forum presentation, and blinded peer review. Methodologic quality evaluation criteria utilized included the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) criteria, and Cochrane review criteria. The designation of levels of evidence was from Level I (conclusive), Level II (strong), Level III (moderate), Level IV (limited), to Level V (indeterminate). Results: Among the diagnostic interventions, the accuracy of facet joint nerve blocks is strong in the diagnosis of lumbar and cervical facet joint pain, whereas, it is moderate in the diagnosis of thoracic facet joint pain. The evidence is strong for lumbar discography, whereas, the evidence is limited for cervical and thoracic discography. The evidence for transforaminal epidural injections or selective nerve root blocks in the preoperative evaluation of patients with negative or inconclusive imaging studies is moderate. The evidence for diagnostic sacroiliac joint injections is limited. The evidence for therapeutic lumbar intraarticular facet injections is moderate for short-term and long-term improvement, whereas, it is limited for cervical facet joint injections. The evidence for lumbar and cervical medial branch blocks is moderate. The evidence for medial branch neurotomy is moderate. The evidence for caudal epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief in managing chronic low back and radicular pain, and limited in managing pain of postlumbar laminectomy syndrome. The evidence for interlaminar epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term relief and limited for long-term relief in managing lumbar radiculopathy, whereas, for cervical radiculopathy the evidence is moderate. The evidence for transforaminal epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term and moderate for long-term improvement in managing lumbar nerve root pain, whereas, it is moderate for cervical nerve root pain and limited in managing pain secondary to lumbar post laminectomy syndrome and spinal stenosis. The evidence for percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis is strong. For spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis, the evidence is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. For sacroiliac intraarticular injections, the evidence is limited. The evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy for sacroiliac joint pain is limited. The evidence for intradiscal electrothermal therapy is moderate in managing chronic discogenic low back pain, whereas for annuloplasty the evidence is limited. Among the various techniques utilized for percutaneous disc decompression, the evidence is moderate for short-term and limited for long-term relief for automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy, and percutaneous laser discectomy, whereas it is limited for nucleoplasty and for DeKompressor technology. For vertebral augmentation procedures, the evidence is moderate for both vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty. The evidence for spinal cord stimulation in failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome is strong for shortterm relief and moderate for long-term relief. The evidence for implantable intrathecal infusion systems is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. Conclusion: These guidelines include the evaluation of evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in managing chronic spinal pain and recommendations for managing spinal pain. However, these guidelines do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. These guidelines also do not represent a “standard of care.” Key words: Interventional techniques, chronic spinal pain, diagnostic blocks, therapeutic interventions, facet joint interventions, epidural injections, epidural adhesiolysis, discography, radiofrequency, disc decompression, vertebroplasty, kyphoplasty, spinal cord stimulation, intrathecal implantable systems


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document