scholarly journals Immediate and Acute Adverse Effects Following Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections with Dexamethasone

2015 ◽  
Vol 3;18 (3;5) ◽  
pp. 277-286
Author(s):  
Omar Hammam El Abd, MD
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Phone Calls ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Background: Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are widely used for the conservative treatment of radicular pain. The use of dexamethasone in TFESIs is relatively new; therefore, immediate and acute adverse effects that it may cause are not fully updated. Objective: To evaluate immediate and acute adverse effects following TFESI with dexamethasone. Study Design: Prospective, observational study. Setting: A spine center affiliated with a rehabilitation hospital. Methods: One hundred fifty consecutive patients receiving TFESI for the management of radicular and axial spinal pain at the cervical, lumbar, and sacral levels with dexamethasone using fluoroscopic guidance with digital subtraction technology were enrolled. The occurrence of adverse effects in patients in the 2-week time period following interventions was monitored through a set of questionnaires followed up by phone calls scheduled for 1 day, day 3, and day 14. Intensity and duration of side effects were recorded. Results: Of the 150 patients enrolled, 31 patients (19.5%) experienced adverse effects within the first 30 minutes following the intervention. The most common adverse effects were numbness and tingling in the limb, which developed in 19 patients (11.95%) followed by perineal pruritus that occurred in 7 cases (4.4%). Patients also reported experiencing adverse effects within the 3 days following intervention; most complained of headaches, insomnia, hiccups, flushing, and increased radicular pain. No major complications were noted. Limitations: The sample size enrolled might be too small to perceive possible rare side effects related to the procedure. The 2-week follow-up period is a limitation for evaluating late side effects. Conclusions: This study offers provision to interventionalists that TFESI with dexamethasone when performed by experienced hands and with proper technique has minor self-limited transient adverse effects that can be easily managed. Patients should be made aware of these adverse effects and their management. Further larger studies are needed to validate the safe use of dexamethasone and the safety of transforaminal epidural injections. Key words: Transforaminal epidural steroid injection, complications, dexamethasone

scholarly journals Epidural Steroids in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review

2007 ◽  
Vol 1;10 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 185-212
Author(s):  
Salahadin Abdi
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Nerve Root Pain ◽  
Epidural Steroid ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: Epidural injection of corticosteroids is one of the most commonly used interventions in managing chronic spinal pain. However, there has been a lack of well-designed randomized, controlled studies to determine the effectiveness of epidural injections. Consequently, debate continues as to the value of epidural steroid injections in managing spinal pain. Objective: To evaluate the effect of various types of epidural steroid injections (interlaminar, transforaminal, and caudal), in managing various types of chronic spinal pain (axial and radicular) in the neck and low back regions. Study Design: A systematic review utilizing the criteria established by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) for evaluation of randomized and non-randomized trials, and criteria of Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group for randomized trials were used. Methods: Data sources included relevant English literature performed by a librarian experienced in Evidence Based Medicine (EBM), as well as manual searches of bibliographies of known primary and review articles and abstracts from scientific meetings within the last 2 years. Three reviewers independently assessed the trials for the quality of their methods. Subgroup analyses were performed among trials with different control groups, with different techniques of epidural injections (interlaminar, transforaminal, and caudal), with different injection sites (cervical/thoracic, lumbar/sacral), and with timing of outcome measurement (short- and long-term). Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure is pain relief. Other outcome measures were functional improvement, improvement of psychological status, and return to work. Short-term improvement is defined as 6 weeks or less, and long-term relief is defined as 6 weeks or longer. Results: In managing lumbar radicular pain with interlaminar lumbar epidural steroid injections, the evidence is strong for short-term relief and limited for long-term relief. In managing cervical radiculopathy with cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections, the evidence is moderate. The evidence for lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections in managing lumbar radicular pain is strong for short-term and moderate for long-term relief. The evidence for cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injections in managing cervical nerve root pain is moderate. The evidence is moderate in managing lumbar radicular pain in post lumbar laminectomy syndrome. The evidence for caudal epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief, in managing chronic pain of lumbar radiculopathy and postlumbar laminectomy syndrome. Conclusion: There is moderate evidence for interlaminar epidurals in the cervical spine and limited evidence in the lumbar spine for long-term relief. The evidence for cervical and lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections is moderate for long-term improvement in managing nerve root pain. The evidence for caudal epidural steroid injections is moderate for long-term relief in managing nerve root pain and chronic low back pain. Key words: Spinal pain, low back pain, cervicalgia, epidural steroids, interlaminar, caudal, transforaminal, radiculopathy, axial pain, postlaminectomy syndrome, failed back surgery syndrome.

scholarly journals Comparison Immediate and Acute Adverse Effects Following Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections with Dexamethasone and Diluted Triamcinolone

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Behnam Hosseini ◽  
Fereshteh Baghizadeh ◽  
Seyed Mohammad Seyed Alshohadaei ◽  
Elahe Ehsanpour ◽  
Mohammad Qoreishi
Keyword(s):  
Modern Medicine ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Distilled Water ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Medicine Research ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Injection Process ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Background: Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (both lumbar and cervical) are used in many treatments. The use of this method in the control and treatment of radicular pain is intensively expanding. In this method, and for the purpose of implementing the injection process, the needle is inserted from the posterolateral of the spine and steroids injected. Steroids include a wide range of medications, many of which are used in modern medicine. Research on these drugs is still underway. The use of Dexamethasone in lumbar transforaminal epidural injections and the study of complications caused by it have been less studied. In some previous studies, use of this steroid for lumbar transforaminal epidural injections has been mentioned. Methods: The present study was conducted in Shohada-e-Tajrish Hospital in Tehran. Patients over 18 years of age who were afflicted with Lumbar stenosis Foraminal (Diagnosis by MRI) and had associated with Radio Kevlar pain were selected. These patients are divided into two groups of 14. In a group, 2.5 cc dexamethasone 8 mg / cc diluted with 2.5 cc distilled water was injected. In the second group, 2.5 cc triamcinolone 40 mg / cc was injected with 2.5 cc distilled water in a volume of 5 cc. In order to evaluate and compare the effects of these two steroids on the patients, the results of the questionnaire were evaluated by statistical techniques and software SPSS 21. Results: The results showed that the use of dexamethasone had far more successful effects than another drug. However, the above conclusion is a relative conclusion and absolute expression is not possible. Pharmaceutical manifestations are the result of patient reactions. Thus, doing similar research and comparing drug performance should be put on the agenda of various research and medical teams. Conclusion: Use of Dexamethasone had far more successful effects than Triamcinolone on epidural steroid injections.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Therapeutic Lumbar Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections in Managing Lumbar Spinal Pain

2012 ◽  
Vol 3;15 (3;5) ◽  
pp. E199-E245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Local Anesthetic ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Lower Extremity Pain ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Background: Among the multiple interventions used in managing chronic spinal pain, lumbar epidural injections have been used extensively to treat lumbar radicular pain. Among caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal, transforaminal epidural injections have gained rapid and widespread acceptance for the treatment of lumbar and lower extremity pain. The potential advantages of transforaminal over interlaminar and caudal, include targeted delivery of a steroid to the site of pathology, presumably onto an inflamed nerve root. However, there are only a few well-designed, randomized, controlled studies on the effectiveness of steroid injections. Consequently, multiple systematic reviews with diverse opinions have been published. Study Design: A systematic review of therapeutic transforaminal epidural injection therapy for low back and lower extremity pain. Objective: To evaluate the effect of therapeutic transforaminal lumbar epidural steroid injections in managing low back and lower extremity pain. Methods: The available literature on lumbar transforaminal epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain was reviewed. The quality assessment and clinical relevance criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria for observational studies. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to December 2011, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. The level of evidence was classified as good, fair, or poor based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief = up to 6 months and long-term > 6 months). Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake. Results: For this systematic review, 70 studies were identified. Of these, 43 studies were excluded and a total of 27 studies met inclusion criteria for methodological quality assessment with 15 randomized trials (with 2 duplicate publications) and 10 non-randomized studies. For lumbar disc herniation, the evidence is good for transforaminal epidural with local anesthetic and steroids, whereas it was fair for local anesthetics alone and the ability of transforaminal epidural injections to prevent surgery. For spinal stenosis, the available evidence is fair for local anesthetic and steroids. The evidence for axial low back pain and post lumbar surgery syndrome is poor, inadequate, limited, or unavailable. Limitations: The limitations of this systematic review include the paucity of literature. Conclusion: In summary, the evidence is good for radiculitis secondary to disc herniation with local anesthetics and steroids and fair with local anesthetic only; it is fair for radiculitis secondary to spinal stenosis with local anesthetic and steroids; and limited for axial pain and post surgery syndrome using local anesthetic with or without steroids. Key words: Spinal pain, chronic low back pain, lower extremity pain, transforaminal epidural steroids, radiculopathy, sciatica, steroids, local anesthetic

scholarly journals Interventional Techniques: Evidence-based Practice Guidelines in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain

2007 ◽  
Vol 1;10 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 7-111
Author(s):  
ASIPP ASIPP
Keyword(s):  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Interventional Techniques ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

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

Repeat epidural steroid injections for radicular pain due to lumbar or cervical disc herniation

2018 ◽  
Vol 100-B (10) ◽  
pp. 1364-1371 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Joswig ◽  
A. Neff ◽  
C. Ruppert ◽  
G. Hildebrandt ◽  
M. N. Stienen
Keyword(s):  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Cervical Disc Herniation ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Arm Pain ◽  
One Year ◽  
Epidural Steroid

AimsThe aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of repeat epidural steroid injections as a form of treatment for patients with insufficiently controlled or recurrent radicular pain due to a lumbar or cervical disc herniation.Patients and MethodsA cohort of 102 patients was prospectively followed, after an epidural steroid injection for radicular symptoms due to lumbar disc herniation, in 57 patients, and cervical disc herniation, in 45 patients. Those patients with persistent pain who requested a second injection were prospectively followed for one year. Radicular and local pain were assessed on a visual analogue scale (VAS), functional outcome with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) or the Neck Pain and Disability Index (NPAD), as well as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-12).ResultsA second injection was performed in 17 patients (29.8%) with lumbar herniation and seven (15.6%) with cervical herniation at a mean of 65.3 days (sd 46.5) and 47 days (sd 37.2), respectively, after the initial injection. All but one patient, who underwent lumbar microdiscectomy, responded satisfactorily with a mean VAS for leg pain of 8.8 mm (sd 10.3) and a mean VAS for arm pain of 6.3 mm (sd 9) one year after the second injection, respectively. Similarly, functional outcome and HRQoL were improved significantly from the baseline scores: mean ODI, 12.3 (sd 12.4; p < 0.001); mean NPAD, 19.3 (sd 24.3; p = 0.041); mean SF-12 physical component summary (PCS) in lumbar herniation, 46.8 (sd 7.7; p < 0.001); mean SF-12 PCS in cervical herniation, 43 (sd 6.8; p = 0.103).ConclusionRepeat steroid injections are a justifiable form of treatment in symptomatic patients with lumbar or cervical disc herniation whose symptoms are not satisfactorily relieved after the first injection. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1364–71.

scholarly journals What Is the Role of Epidural Steroid Injections in Lumbar Spinal Disease with Moderate Disability?

2016 ◽  
Vol 4;19 (4;5) ◽  
pp. 293-298
Author(s):  
Jae-Young Hong
Keyword(s):  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Spinal Disease ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
One Year ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Epidural steroid injections have been gaining popularity as an alternative to surgical treatment of radicular pain with associated spinal derangement. To determine the effectiveness and indications of lumbar epidural steroid injections in patients with or without surgery, we performed a prospective observational study. We gathered data from 262 degenerative short-segment spinal disease patients (affected at one or 2 levels) with greater than 12 weeks of medication-resistant radicular pain without neurological deficits but with moderate disability (visual analog scale < 6.5; Oswestry Disability Index < 35). All patients received initial fluoroscopically guided transforaminal epidural steroid injections of the affected vertebral level(s) corresponding to their symptoms. Those with inadequate responses or who wanted subsequently surgery underwent decompression surgery. Clinical and demographic characteristics were assessed to compare the differences between the groups. Results: Of the 262 patients who received epidural steroid injections, 204 did not have operations for up to one year. However, 58 patients experienced inadequate relief of pain or wanted operations and therefore underwent surgery. At baseline, the 2 groups had similar mean disability indices and pain scores, as well as gender ratios, ages, and durations of symptoms (P > 0.05). In the patients who underwent surgery, the mean disability and pain scores were not significantly decreased after injection compared to those in the injection-alone group, although the scores for the injection plus surgery patients decreased significantly after surgery (P < 0.05). In contrast, patients who underwent epidural steroid injection alone experienced a significant decrease in disability and pain after injection, and that persisted up to one year of follow-up (P < 0.05). Epidural steroid injection can decrease the pain and disability in the majority of a moderate disability group for up to one year, although a significant number of patients underwent surgery regardless of injection. We recommend epidural steroid injection as a first-line treatment in patients with moderate disability that can be converted to surgery without significant delay. Key words: Epidural steroid injection, spinal surgery, lumbar spinal disease, lumbar radiculopathy, lumbar radicular pain

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document