Ultrasound-guided fluoroscopic-verified trans-foraminal lumbar dorsal root ganglion pulsed radiofrequency modulation for radicular pain relief: clinical and cadaveric evaluation of the technique

Background Ultrasound-guided lumbar pain interventions were thought to be difficult; the high acoustic impedance of bone hides the underling structures and needle path. Reviewing the sonoanatomy of the lumbar region using different planes and angles made better sonographic guidance for spine injections. The aim of this prospective study is to assess the accuracy and safety of ultrasound (US)-guided lumbar trans-foraminal pulsed radiofrequency of the dorsal root ganglion confirmed by fluoroscopic imaging in management of chronic radicular pain. Results Thirty-two patients, with 34 lumbar interventions, were included in the study. Thirty-one interventions out of 34 were performed successfully with overall accuracy of 91.18% and with minimal complications. The successful first trial placement of the cannula was calculated in 44.1% of interventions; multiple trials were needed in 47.1% while incorrect level was encountered in 8.8%. Visual analogue scale of pain and Oswestry Disability Index decreased significantly after intervention up to 3 months compared to the pre-intervention value. The analgesic consumption was reduced by mean of 73.44 ± 31.07% 1 month after intervention. Conclusions US-guided fluoroscopic-verified trans-foraminal PR of lumbar DRG is accurate, safe, and effective for CRP.

A Critical Look at the Data Supporting Ultrasound Guided Cervical Medial Branch Blocks

According to guidelines published by the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians in 2013 ‎1, ‎2, the current evidence for cervical facet joint injections is fair. Yet the volume of these procedures continues to rise ‎3. There is a need for a more critical appraisal of the benefit, technique and adverse effects associated with cervical spine injections. The systematic review and meta-analysis by Paredes et al ‎4 seeks to better assess the evidence for use of ultrasound (US) guidance with cervical medial branch blocks. This article is also a response to a recently published critique by Schneider et al ‎5 raising concerns about the paucity of evidence evaluating the safety, accuracy, and effectiveness of US-guided cervical spine procedures.

Unnecessary Cervical Epidural Injection in An Octogenarian

Background: Epidural spine injections (ESI) have no documented long-term efficacy. Furthermore, cervical ESI uniquely risk intramedullary injections with resultant neurological deficits (e.g. monoplegia to quadriplegia), and intravascular vertebral injections (e.g. which potentially contribute to stroke, brain stem infarction). Case Description: A patient in his mid-eighties presented with 1 year’s duration of neck pain without any accompanying numbness, tingling or weakness in the upper or lower extremities. He had no radiculopathy, myelopathy, or neurological deficit. Two years earlier, the patient sustained a myocardial infarction (MI), requiring over 5 stents and a defibrillator. At the time of presentation, he was still on a baby ASA (81 mg/day), on anti-hypertensives, and cholesterol-lowering medications. His non-contrast cervical CT scan (patient had a pacemaker/defibrillator and could not have an MR) from the summer of 2018 showed no significant spinal cord or nerve root compression at any level. Nevertheless, he was subjected to two cervical epidural injections in the early fall; his baby ASA was stopped 5 days prior to each of these injections. Notably, this placed him at increased risk of MI and/or stroke. When he was seen by neurosurgery, without any neurological deficit or significant cervical radiographic findings, he was referred back to neurology for continued conservative management. Conclusions: Patients are increasingly subjected to epidural cervical spinal injections that have no documented long-term efficacy, and expose them to significant risks/complications. This 80+ year-old patient, without a neurological deficit or significant cervical CT-documented pathology, underwent 2 cervical ESI that unnecessarily exposed him to potential cardiac-stent related thrombosis (e.g. stopping ASA for 5 days-a bona-fide requirement for ESI to avoid acute epidural hematomas).

Short-term Efficiency and Tolerance of Ketoprofen and Methylprednisolone in Acute Sciatica: A Randomized Trial

Objective Although anti-inflammatory drugs are commonly used in acute discogenic sciatica, data regarding their efficacy are scarce and controversial. We compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous ketoprofen and methylprednisolone with placebo in sciatica. Design Multicenter, double-blinded randomized controlled trial. Subjects Patients with confirmed discogenic acute sciatica, without neurologic deficit, were randomized into three arms. Methods Besides standard-of-care analgesic therapy, they received intravenous injections of methylprednisolone (60 mg/d) or ketoprofen (200 mg/d) or placebo for five days. The primary outcome was leg pain over five days. Secondary outcomes were clinical responses at days 3 and 5, lumbar pain, Straight Leg Raise Test and lumbar flexion index, analgesic consumption, realization of lumbar spine injections, and surgery during the study period. Results Fifty-four patients were randomized, and 50 completed the study. In patients admitted to the hospital for pain control with acute lumbar radicular pain due to intervertebral disc herniation and receiving an oral analgesic protocol including paracetamol, nefopam, tramadol, and morphine, there was no additional analgesic effect seen between groups. There was no significant difference in leg pain between the three groups over the study period. In the methylprednisolone group, however, we observed a higher rate of clinically relevant responses at day 3. No difference was observed on other secondary efficacy outcomes and safety. Conclusion No significant difference in leg pain was observed between groups. However, there was a higher proportion of patients relieved with intravenous methylprednisolone at day 3, compared with ketoprofen or placebo.