Comments on the article “Selective nerve root blocks vs. caudal epidural injection for single level prolapsed lumbar intervertebral disc – A prospective randomized study”

Abstract Background Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common degenerative condition associated with old age. Its incidence continues to increase with the rapidly aging population in China. Treatment for LSS usually begins with conservative treatments, as some patients refuse surgical procedures or have surgery contraindications. Caudal epidural steroid injections (CESIs) and selective nerve root blocks (SNRBs) are two commonly used conservative treatments for LSS, which have proven to be effective at relieving LSS symptoms in many studies. However, there are no randomized controlled trials comparing these two procedures. We planned the first study to assess which one of these two procedures is more effective in treating LSS. We will compare the efficacy of these two treatment methods in terms of duration of symptom relief and recurrence rate. We hope our findings will help clinicians choose an optimal treatment for LSS patients. Methods/design We plan to conduct a 1-year randomized controlled trial that will include a total of 76 subjects. They will be randomly divided into two groups: group A (patients will receive CESIs) and group B (patients will receive SNRBs). Two days before the procedure, we will assess these patients using the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) pain scale, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain. One day, 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after the procedure, we will assess the condition of these patients again with the NRS and ODI. Discussion We hope our findings will lay the foundation for the design of further comprehensive studies and help clinicians make a choice between CESIs and SNRBs for LSS patients. Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR1900028038. Registered on 8 December 2019

Download Full-text

Transforaminal Epidural Injection of Dexamethasone vs Methylprednisolone in Reducing Low Back Pain and Disability in Prolapsed Lumbar Intervertebral Disc in Manipur, India: A RCT

JOURNAL FOR CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH ◽

10.7860/jcdr/2021/48704.15370 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Kanti Rajkumari ◽

Akoijam Joy Singh ◽

Longjam Nilachandra Singh ◽

Margaret Chabungbam ◽

C Sreejith ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Low Back Pain ◽

Back Pain ◽

Intervertebral Disc ◽

Steroid Injection ◽

Epidural Injection ◽

P Value ◽

Low Back ◽

Lumbar Intervertebral Disc ◽

Transforaminal Epidural Injection ◽

Epidural Steroid

Introduction: Treatment for Low Back Pain (LBP) due to Prolapsed Intervertebral Disc (PIVD) includes conservative management, Epidural Steroid Injection (ESI), and surgery. Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection (TFESI) is a more recently described approach. All corticosteroid preparations used for TFESI are particulate except dexamethasone and betamethasone sodium phosphate. But while comparing methylprednisolone with dexamethasone, the latter has more potent anti-inflammatory action with least likelihood of causing embolic events and is also less expensive. Aim: To compare the efficacy of transforaminal epidural injection of dexamethasone and methylprednisolone in reducing LBP and disability in prolapsed lumbar intervertebral disc amongst the indigenous population of Manipur, India. Materials and Methods: This was a randomised controlled study on 80 patients with PIVD attending Outpatient Department (OPD) at physical medicine and rehabilitation was conducted from September 2016 to August 2018. A single dose of lumbar TFESI with dexamethasone in the study group and methylprednisolone in the control were given under C-arm guidance. The outcome variables Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for function were measured at one week, one month and six months. Statistical tests like t-test, Chi-square test were used for intra group and inter group analysis. Results: In the total sample of 80 patients, 40 (15 males and 25 females, mean age: 38.28±8.55 years) were categorised as Dexamethasone patients and 40 (17 males and 23 females; mean age: 39.28±7.80 years) as methylprednisolone patients, there were significant improvement in mean score of VAS and ODI in both the groups (p-value <0.05). At six months, both treatment groups maintained initial observed improvements, with no significant differences between groups on the VAS {95% Confidence Interval (CI), -0.02 to 0.4; p-value=0.07} and ODI (95% CI,-0.21 to 3.43; p-value=0.08). Conclusion: Non-particulate steroid dexamethasone was similar in efficacy to the particulate steroid methylprednisolone in lumbar TFESI. However, in view of the greater safety profile of dexamethasone, it is suggested that dexamethasone may be used as the preferred agent in lumbar TFESI.

Download Full-text