Spine Intervention Society Position Statement on Best Practices for Epidural Steroid Injections in the Setting of a Preservative-Free Dexamethasone Shortage

Pain Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (7) ◽  
pp. 1277-1280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Belinda Duszynski
2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (8) ◽  
pp. 809-813 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan Clements ◽  
Darrell Vydra ◽  
Daniel M. Cushman ◽  
Ameet Nagpal ◽  
Jonathan Julia ◽  
...  

BackgroundEpidural steroid injections (ESIs) are a frequently used treatment for refractory radicular spinal pain. ESIs, particularly transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI), may provide pain relief and delay the need for surgery. Corticosteroid agent and diluent choices are known to impact the safety of ESIs. In particular, the risk of embolization with particulate corticosteroids has led to recommendations for non-particulate steroid use by the Multisociety Pain Workgroup. Additionally, there is in vitro evidence that ropivacaine can crystalize in the presence of dexamethasone, potentially creating a particulate-like injectate. Despite widespread use and known risk mitigation strategies, current practice trends related to steroid and diluent choices are unknown.ObjectiveIdentify the use of particulate versus non-particulate corticosteroids for epidural steroid injections in the cervical and lumbar spine, as well as local anesthetics commonly used as diluents during these procedures.MethodsCross-sectional survey study of 314 physician members of the Spine Interventional Society.Results41% and 9% of providers reported using particulate corticosteroids during lumbar TFESIs and cervical TFESI, respectively. Four per cent of providers reported the use of ropivacaine in cervical TFESIs. Forty-four per cent of respondents reported using anesthetic in cervical interlaminar ESIs. 21% of providers report using high volumes (> 4.5 mL) during cervical interlaminar ESIs.ConclusionCurrent trends, as assessed by this survey study, indicate substantial variability in steroid and diluent choice for ESIs. Patterns were identified that may impact patient safety including the continued use of particulate corticosteroids for TFESIs and the use of ropivacaine during TFESIs by a subset of respondents.


PM&R ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (6) ◽  
pp. 576-579 ◽  
Author(s):  
Venu Akuthota ◽  
Charles Argoff ◽  
William C. Watters

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott E. Glaser ◽  
Rinoo Shah

Transforaminal epidural steroid injections have been shown to be associated with catastrophic neurologic complications secondary to spinal cord infarction. The reflexive, ad hoc response of practitioners to these injuries has been to recommend risk minimization strategies to prevent embolism of the injected particulate steroids and to use nonparticulate steroids. This focus on distal embolism as the sole or primary cause of catastrophic outcomes lacks conclusive supporting evidence and does not suffice to protect the patient from paraplegia as it fails to address the root cause of the complications. A root cause analysis of the procedure provides evidence that the injection technique itself—the “safe triangle”—creates a risk of arterial damage and sequelae leading to ischemia of the spinal cord. The evidence is strong that the only way to mitigate or eliminate the risk of paraplegia is to use a different technique to perform transforaminal injections: the Kambin triangle approach. This change in technique is the only definitive solution that addresses the root cause of these catastrophic sequelae associated with transforaminal epidural steroid injections. Key Words: Artery of Adamkiewicz, ischemic spinal cord injury, Kambin triangle, safe triangle, transforaminal epidural injection


2009 ◽  
Vol 6;12 (6;12) ◽  
pp. E355-E368
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti

Background: Speculated causes of post lumbar surgery syndrome include epidural fibrosis, acquired stenosis, and facet joint pain among other causes. Even though fluoroscopically directed caudal epidural injections and facet joint interventions are effective in some patients, others continue to suffer with chronic persistent pain. Percutaneous adhesiolysis with target delivery of medications has been demonstrated to be effective in these patients. However, the evidence for percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing post surgery syndrome has been questioned, coupled with a paucity of controlled trials. Study Design: A randomized, equivalence, controlled trial. Setting: An interventional pain management practice, a specialty referral center, a private practice setting in the United States. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis in patients with chronic low back and lower extremity pain in post surgery syndrome and compare with fluoroscopically directed caudal epidural steroid injections. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to one of 2 groups: Group I (60 patients) receiving caudal epidural injections with catheterization up to S3 with local anesthetic, steroids, and 0.9% sodium chloride solution serving as the control group, and Group II (60 patients) receiving percutaneous adhesiolysis with targeted delivery of lidocaine, 10% hypertonic sodium chloride solution, and non-particulate Betamethasone serving as the intervention group. Randomization was performed by computer-generated random allocation sequence by simple randomization. Outcomes Assessment: Multiple outcome measures were utilized including the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), the Oswestry Disability Index 2.0 (ODI), employment status, and opioid intake with assessment at 3, 6, and 12 months post treatment. Significant pain relief was described as 50% or more, whereas significant improvement in the disability score was defined as a reduction of 40% or more. Results: Significant pain relief (≥ 50%) and functional status improvement was recorded in 73% of patients in Group II versus 12% in Group I (P < 0.001). The average procedures per year were 3.5 with an average total relief of 42 out of 52 weeks in Group II and 2.2 procedures with total relief per year of 13 weeks in Group I (P < 0.001). Limitations: The results of this study are limited by potentially inadequate double blinding, by the lack of a placebo group, and the preliminary report of one-year follow-up. Conclusions: Percutaneous adhesiolysis in chronic function-limiting, recalcitrant low back pain in post lumbar surgery syndrome demonstrated effectiveness in 73% of the patients. Key words: Post lumbar surgery syndrome, post lumbar laminectomy syndrome, chronic low back pain, epidural adhesions, epidural steroid injections, percutaneous adhesiolysis, epidural fibrosis, spinal stenosis, randomized trial, comparative effectiveness


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document