Primary studies included in this systematic review

loading
9 articles (9 References) Revert Studify

Primary study

Unclassified

A prospective evaluation of iodinated contrast flow patterns with fluoroscopically guided lumbar epidural steroid injections: the lateral parasagittal interlaminar epidural approach versus the transforaminal epidural approach.

Journal Anesthesia and analgesia
Year 2008
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 4 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (4 references)

Loading references information
BACKGROUND: Lumbar midline interlaminar and transforaminal (TF) epidural steroid injections are treatments for low back pain with radiculopathy secondary to degenerative disk disease. Since pain generators are located anteriorly in the epidural space, ventral epidural spread is the logical target for placement of antiinflammatory medications. In this randomized, prospective, observational study, we compared contrast flow patterns in the epidural space using the parasagittal interlaminar (PIL) and transforaminal approaches with continual fluoroscopic guidance. METHODS: Sixty adult patients with low back pain and unilateral radiculopathy from herniated or degenerated discs were enrolled. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups: TF or PIL (30 in each). All procedures were performed using continual fluoroscopic guidance and 5 mL of contrast. Contrast spread was rated (primary outcome measure) by the interventionalist. Spread was scored 0-2, with 0 = no anterior spread; 1 = anterior spread, same level as needle insertion; and 2 = anterior spread at > or = 1 segmental level. The secondary outcome measure was analgesia at 2 wk, 1, 3, and 6 mo. RESULTS: One hundred percent (29 of 29) patients in the PIL group and 75% (21 of 28) patients in the TF group demonstrated anterior epidural spread. The mean spread grade was 1.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.83-2.0) in the PIL group and 1.46 (95% CI, 1.17-1.46) in the TF group (P = 0.003). Mean fluoroscopy time was 28.96 s (95% CI, 23.9-34.1 s) in the PIL group and 46.25 s (95% CI, 36.27-56.23 s) in the TF group (P = 0.003). Visual analog scale scores were equivalent between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The PIL approach is superior to the TF approach for placing contrast into the anterior epidural space with reduction in fluoroscopy times and an improved spread grade. With increasing attention to neurological injury associated with TF, the PIL approach may be more suitable for routine use.

Primary study

Unclassified

The efficacy of lumbar epidural steroid injections in patients with lumbar disc herniations.

Authors Ackerman WE , Ahmad M
Journal Anesthesia and analgesia
Year 2007
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 5 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (5 references)

Loading references information
INTRODUCTION: Lumbar epidural steroid injection can be accomplished by one of three methods: caudal (C), interlaminar (IL), or transforaminal (TF). In this study we sought to determine the efficacy of these techniques for the management of radicular pain associated with lumbar disk herniations. METHODS: Ninety patients aged 18-60 years with L5-S1 disk herniations and radicular pain were randomly assigned to one of these groups to have epidural steroid injection therapy every 2 wk for a maximum of three injections. Pain relief, disability, and activity levels were assessed. RESULTS: Pain relief was significantly more effective with TF injections. At 24 wk from the initiation of this study, pain relief was as follows: C: complete pain relief: 1/30, partial pain relief: 16/30, and no relief: 13/30; IL: complete pain relief: 3/30, partial pain relief: 15/30, and no relief: 12/30; and TF: complete pain relief: 9/30, partial pain relief: 16/30, and no relief: 5/30. CONCLUSIONS: The TF route of epidural steroid placement is more effective than the C or IL routes. We attribute this observation to a higher incidence of steroid placement in the ventral epidural space when the TF method is used.

Primary study

Unclassified

The efficacy of corticosteroids in periradicular infiltration for chronic radicular pain: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

Authors Ng L , Chaudhary N , Sell P
Journal Spine
Year 2005
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 11 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (11 references)

Loading references information
STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind controlled trial. OBJECTIVES: To determine the treatment effect of corticosteroids in periradicular infiltration for chronic radicular pain. We also examined prognostic factors in relation to the outcome of the procedure. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Various studies have examined the therapeutic value of periradicular infiltration using treatment agents consisting of local anesthetic and corticosteroids for radicular pain, secondary to lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis. There is currently no randomized trial to determine the efficacy of a single injection of corticosteroids for chronic radicular pain. METHODS: Eligible patients with radicular pain who had unilateral symptoms who failed conservative management were randomized for a single injection with bupivacaine and methylprednisolone or bupivacaine only. Outcome measures included the Oswestry Disability Index, visual analogue score for back pain and leg pain, claudication walking distance, and the patient's subjective level of satisfaction of the outcome. RESULTS: We recruited 43 patients in the bupivacaine and methylprednisolone group and 43 patients in the bupivacaine only group. The follow-up rate is 100%. Five patients had early termination of the trial for discectomy and further root block. There is no statistically significant difference in the outcome measures between the groups at 3 months (change of the Oswestry Disability Index [P = 0.68], change in visual analogue score [back pain, P = 0.68; leg pain, P = 0.94], change in walking distance [P = 0.7]). Duration of symptoms has a statistically significant negative association with the change in Oswestry Disability Index (P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Clinical improvement occurred in both groups of patients. Corticosteroids did not provide additional benefit.

Primary study

Unclassified

Efficacy of transforaminal versus interspinous corticosteroid injectionin discal radiculalgia - a prospective, randomised, double-blind study.

Journal Clinical rheumatology
Year 2003
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 2 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (2 references)

Loading references information
A prospective, randomised, double-blind study was carried out to compare the respective efficacies of transforaminal and interspinous epidural corticosteroid injections in discal radiculalgia. Thirty-one patients (18 females, 13 males) with discal radicular pain of less than 3 months' duration were consecutively randomised to receive either radio-guided transforaminal or blindly performed interspinous epidural corticosteroid injections. Post-treatment outcome was evaluated clinically at 6 and 30 days, and then at 6 months, but only by mailed questionnaire. At day 6, the between-group difference was significantly in favour of the transforaminal group with respect to Schober's index, finger-to-floor distance, daily activities, and work and leisure activities on the Dallas pain scale. At day 30, pain relief was significantly better in the transforaminal group. At month 6, answers to the mailed questionnaire still showed significantly better results for transforaminal injection concerning pain, daily activities, work and leisure activities and anxiety and depression, with a decline in the Roland-Morris score. In recent discal radiculalgia, the efficacy of radio-guided transforaminal epidural corticosteroid injections was higher than that obtained with blindly-performed interspinous injections.

Primary study

Unclassified

Transforaminal epidural steroid injections in lumbosacral radiculopathy: a prospective randomized study.

Authors Vad VB , Bhat AL , Lutz GE , Cammisa F
Journal Spine
Year 2002
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 11 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (11 references)

Loading references information
STUDY DESIGN: A prospective study randomized by patient choice from the private practice of a single physician affiliated with a major teaching hospital was conducted. OBJECTIVES: To compare transforaminal epidural steroid injections with saline trigger-point injections used in the treatment of lumbosacral radiculopathy secondary to a herniated nucleus pulposus. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Epidural steroid injections have been used for more than half a century in the management of lumbosacral radicular pain. At this writing, however, there have been no controlled prospective trials of transforaminal epidural steroid injections in the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy secondary to a herniated nucleus pulposus. METHODS: Randomized by patient choice, patients received either a transforaminal epidural steroid injection or a saline trigger-point injection. Treatment outcome was measured using a patient satisfaction scale with choice options of 0 (poor), 1 (fair), 2 (good), 3 (very good), and 4 (excellent); a Roland-Morris low back pain questionnaire that showed improvement by an increase in score; a measurement of finger-to-floor distance with the patient in fully tolerated hip flexion; and a visual numeric pain scale ranging from 0 to 10. A successful outcome required a patient satisfaction score of 2 (good) or 3 (very good), improvement on the Roland-Morris score of 5 or more, and pain reduction greater than 50% at least 1 year after treatment. The final analysis included 48 patients with an average follow-up period of 16 months (range, 12-21 months). RESULTS: After an average follow-up period of 1.4 years, the group receiving transforaminal epidural steroid injections had a success rate of 84%, as compared with 48% for the group receiving trigger-point injections (P < 0.005). CONCLUSION: Fluoroscopically guided transforaminal injections serve as an important tool in the nonsurgical management of lumbosacral radiculopathy secondary to a herniated nucleus pulposus.

Publication Thread

Karppinen (provisional publication thread name)

This thread includes 2 references

Publication Thread

Riew (provisional publication thread name)

This thread includes 2 references

Primary study

Unclassified

Efficacy of nerve root versus interspinous injections of glucocorticoids in the treatment of disk-related sciatica. A pilot, prospective, randomized, double-blind study.

Journal Joint, bone, spine : revue du rhumatisme
Year 2000
Links Pubmed

This article is included in 2 Systematic reviews Systematic reviews (2 references)

Loading references information
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Pilot study comparing the short-term efficacy on pain and functional impairment of nerve root sheath versus interspinous glucocorticoid injections in patients admitted to a French rheumatology department for disk-related sciatica or femoral neuralgia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty patients with refractory nerve root pain (sciatica, n = 29; femoral neuralgia, n = 1) for a mean of four months were randomized to nerve root injection (n = 17) or interspinous injection (n = 13) of the same mixture of 0.10 g of lidocaine hydrochloride and 3.75 mg of cortivazol. Both injection methods were performed under analgesia and benzodiazepine sedation to maintain double blinding. Each patient was evaluated daily during the first seven days of bed rest in the hospital, then after discharge on postinjection day 28. RESULTS: Prompt pain relief was obtained in both groups. On day 1, the mean pain scale score (0-100) fell from 70 +/- 3.9 to 26 +/- 5.6 in the nerve root group and from 63 +/- 4 to 23 +/- 4.7 in the interspinous group. These results were sustained on D7 and D28. CONCLUSIONS: The unusually high level of efficacy of glucocorticoid injection in our study may be ascribable in part to strong placebo and Hawthorne effects and in part to the intrinsic effects of the injections. Whether nerve root injection is superior over interspinous injection remains unproven.

Primary study

Unclassified

Transforaminal nerve root sleeve injection with corticosteroids, hyaluronidase, and local anesthetic in the failed back surgery syndrome.

Authors Devulder J
Journal Journal of spinal disorders
Year 1998
Links Pubmed

This article is included in 1 Systematic review Systematic reviews (1 reference)

Loading references information
Millions of patients with chronic sciatica are still treated with epidural corticosteroids. The efficacy of epidural corticosteroids remains questionable, especially in the chronic failed back surgery syndrome (CFBSS). The affected nerve root sleeve(s) are localized with the help of fluoroscopy and contrast dye. Local anesthetic diluted in 1,500 U hyaluronidase and 40 mg methylprednisolone is injected. Twenty patients with CFBSS, a small retrospective pilot study group, were treated. The success rate is evaluated using a verbal pain rating scale, 1 month and 3 months after the last injection. Initially, 12 patients obtained very good pain relief, sustained for >3 months in 11 patients. In one patient, pain returned after >1 month. No complications were observed. This technique is worthwhile for patients with CFBSS and where epidural fibrosis is suspected to be the pain origin.