scholarly journals Variations of Technique in Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections and Periprocedural Practices by Interventional Pain Medicine Physicians in the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (22;5) ◽  
pp. E435-E440
Author(s):  
Lisa Doan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Image Guidance ◽  
Steroid Injection ◽  
The United States ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Pain Medicine ◽  
Needle Size ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Background: Interlaminar and transforaminal epidural steroid injections (ILESI and TFESI) are commonly performed procedures. However, the United States Food and Drug Administration has required the addition of drug warning labels for injectable corticosteroids. Updated evidence and scrutiny from regulatory agencies may affect practice patterns. Objective: To characterize TFESI practices as well as to provide an update on periprocedural practices for any type of epidural steroid injection (ESI), we surveyed pain medicine physicians in the United States. Study Design and Setting: This was a cross-sectional survey of pain medicine physicians in the United States. Methods: A web-based survey was distributed to pain medicine physicians in the United States selected from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accredited pain medicine fellowship program list as well as the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians membership database. Physicians were queried about TFESI practices, including needle size, use of image guidance, methods to detect vascular uptake, and preference for injectate. Results: A total of 249 responses were analyzed. Only a minority of respondents reported performing cervical TFESI. There were variations in needle size, methods to detect vascular uptake, and choice of injectate. There were also variations in monitoring practices. Limitations: The response rate is a limitation. Thus the results may not be representative of all US pain medicine physicians. Conclusions: Though all respondents used image guidance for TFESI, variations in other TFESI practices exist. There are also differences in periprocedural practices. Since the closure of this survey, a multisociety pain workgroup published recommendations regarding ESI practices. Our survey findings support the need for more evidence-based guidelines regarding ESI. Key words: Epidural steroid injections, transforaminal epidural steroid injection, steroids, local anesthetic, survey, interventional pain

scholarly journals Variations in Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injection Practice Patterns by Interventional Pain Management Physicians in the United States

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (21;1) ◽  
pp. E493-E499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Doan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Image Guidance ◽  
Practice Patterns ◽  
Steroid Injection ◽  
The United States ◽  
Needle Size ◽  
Interventional Pain Management ◽  
Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Background: Previous surveys have identified variations in practice patterns related to epidural steroid injections. Since then, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has required the addition of drug warning labels for injectable corticosteroids. Updated evidence, as well as scrutiny from regulatory agencies, may affect practice patterns. Objective: To provide an update on interlaminar epidural steroid injection (ILESI) practice patterns, we surveyed interventional pain management (IPM) physicians in the United States. Study Design and Setting: This was a cross-sectional survey of IPM physicians in the United States. Methods: A web-based survey was distributed to IPM physicians in the United States selected from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accredited pain medicine fellowship program list as well as the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians membership database. Physicians were queried about ILESI practices, including needle size, use of image guidance, level of injection, identification of the epidural space, and preference for injectate. Results: A total of 249 responses were analyzed. All respondents used image guidance for ILESI. There were variations in needle size, use of contrast, number of fluoroscopic views utilized, technique for identifying the epidural space, and choice of injectate. Limitations: The response rate is a limitation, thus the results may not be representative of all United States IPM physicians. Conclusions: Though all respondents used image guidance for ILESI, variations in other ILESI practices still exist. Since the closure of this survey, a multi-society pain workgroup published recommendations regarding ESI practices. Our survey findings support the need for more evidencebased guidelines regarding ESI. Key words: Epidural injection, epidural steroids, survey, low back pain, neck pain, technique

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

scholarly journals Conus Medullaris Syndrome Days After A Single Epidural Steroid Injection

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Rafid Kasir ◽  
◽  
Jad Khalil ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Cauda Equina ◽  
Conus Medullaris ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Chronic Lower Back Pain ◽  
Unique Case ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Lower Back ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Background: Epidural steroid injections (ESI) are commonly used in treatment of chronic lower back pain. Conus medullaris and cauda equina syndromes are rare complications of ESI. However, these typically occur after multiple injections within a few minutes to hours. Some reported cases are also transient, with patients completely regaining neurological function. We discuss a unique case of a patient developing conus medullaris syndrome over 24 hours after a single epidural steroid injection without resolution of symptoms.

Comparison of Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection with Interlaminar Lumbar Inj. Epidural in Spinal Stenosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (8) ◽  
pp. 1877-1879
Author(s):  
Muhammad Akram ◽  
Faheem Mubashir Farooqi ◽  
Shumaila Jabbar
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Oswestry Disability Index ◽  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Group I ◽  
Group Ii ◽  
Epidural Steroid ◽  
Caudal Epidural

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis is a condition caused by narrowing of spinal canal. Steroid injection either lumbar or caudal can improve the functional outcome and low back pain. Aim: To compare the outcome of caudal epidural steroid injection with lumbar epidural steroid injection in treating spinal stenosis in patients suffering from sciatica. Methods: In this prospective study 338 patients having low backache due to spinal stenosis with sciatica were included from June 2013 to December 2014. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group I and II. Patients in Group I (160 patients) received caudal epidural steroid injections while the patients in Group II (178 patients) received lumbar epidural steroid injections. Visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was used to assess outcome of the Caudal and Lumbar steroid injections and was measured at 2 weeks, at 3months, and improvement was declared if VAS decrease ≥50% of baseline and Oswestry disability index decrease ≥40% at 3 months. Results: In group I, there were 70(43.75%) males and 90(56.25%) females, while in group II there were 98(55.1%) males and 80(44.9%) females. The mean age of the patients in group I was 46.46±10.37 (18-75 years) years and was 43.77±15.27 years (18-75 years) in group II (P=0.0619). The change in pain score (>50%) was observed in 159 (89.33%) in group II compared with 121 (75%) in group I (P=0.0008). Conclusion: Lumbar epidural of steroids injections are more effective then caudal epidural injection of steroids in treating spinal stenosis. MeSH words: Caudal epidural, Lumbar epidural, Sciatica

scholarly journals Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection under Fluoroscopy in Management of Chronic Low Back Pain with or without Radiculopathy

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-7
Author(s):  
Rupak Bhattarai ◽  
Bandana Paudel ◽  
Sangeeta Subba ◽  
Kumud Pyakurel ◽  
Bijay K. C. ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Epidural Steroid ◽  
Caudal Epidural

Background: Low back pain with or without radiculopathy is most common presentations of chronic pain. Caudal epidural steroid injection is one of the treatment modalities of this type of pain syndromes. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted in 100 patient who presented in our pain clinic. These patients were given caudal epidural steroid injections under fluoroscopy guidance with 60 mg depo-methylprednisolone added to 0.5% lignocaine making a volume of 10 ml. All these patients were asked to follow up at pain clinic at 1 month, 3 months & 6 months to assess the visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), Straight leg Raise test (SLRT) & Patient satisfaction scale. Results: There was significant reduction in VAS score in one month, three months and six months follow up after caudal epidural steroid injection. The 50% reduction in pain was seen in 72 patients, 69 patients and 62 patients in one month, three months and six months respectively. The mean VAS score were 7.84 before pre-injection, 4.32 at one hour, 4.06 at one month, 4.18 at 3 months and 4.64 at 6 months after the procedure.The mean ODI were 35.16 before pre-injection, 32.12 at one hour, 28.14 at one month, 28.57 at 3 months and 28.68 at 6 months after the procedure. Conclusion: Caudal epidural steroid injections causes significant relief in pain symptoms of backache with or without radiculopathy and increases the quality of life.  

scholarly journals Flushing Following Interlaminar Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injection with Dexamethasone

2010 ◽  
Vol 5;13 (5;9) ◽  
pp. 481-484
Author(s):  
Chong H. Kim
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Interlaminar Approach ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Background: Epidural steroid injections are commonly used in managing radicular pain. Most complications related to epidural injections are minor and self-limited. Flushing is considered as one such minor side effect. Flushing has been studied using various steroid preparations including methylprednisone, triamcinolone, and betamethasone but its frequency has never been studied using dexamethasone. Objective: This study evaluates the frequency of flushing associated with fluoroscopyguided lumbar epidural steroid injections using dexamethasone. Study Design: Retrospective cohort design study. Patients presenting with low back pain were evaluated and offered a fluoroscopically guided lumbar epidural steroid injection using dexamethasone via an interlaminar approach as part of a conservative care treatment plan. Setting: University-based Pain Management Center. Intervention: All injections were performed consecutively over a 2-month period by one staff member using 16 mg (4 mg/mL) of dexamethasone. A staff physician specifically asked each participant about the presence of flushing following the procedure prior to discharge on the day of injection and again on follow-up within 48 hours after the injections. The answers were documented as “YES” or “NO.” Results: A total of 150 participants received fluoroscopically guided interlaminar epidural steroid injection. All participants received 16 mg (4 mg/mL) of dexamethasone with 2 mL of 0.2% ropiviciane. Overall incidence of flushing was 42 out of 150 cases (28%). Of the 42 participants who experienced flushing, 12 (28%) experienced the symptom prior to discharge following the procedure. Twenty-seven of the 42 (64%) were female (P < 0.05). All the participants who experienced flushing noted resolution by 48 hours. No other major side effects or complications were noted. Limitations: Follow-up data were solely based on subjective reports by patients via telecommunication. Follow-up time was limited to only 48 hours, which overlooks the possibility that more participants might have noted flushing after the 48 hour limit. Conclusions: Flushing is commonly reported following epidural steroid injections. With an incidence of 28%, injections using dexamethasone 16 mg by interlaminar epidural route appear to be associated with more flushing reaction than previously reported with other steroid preparations. Additionally, female participants are more likely to experience flushing though the reactions seem to be self-limiting with resolution by 48 hours. Key words: flushing, side effects, epidural, back pain, lumbar, steroid, dexamethasone, injections.

scholarly journals Vertebral Osteomyelitis: A Potentially Catastrophic Outcome after Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injection

2008 ◽  
Vol 5;11 (10;5) ◽  
pp. 693-697 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas T. Simopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Staphylococcus Aureus ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus ◽  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Methicillin Resistant ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Background and Objective: Epidural steroid injections are commonly used to palliate the symptoms of spinal stenosis. Deep tissue infection is a known potential complication of these injections. There have been no previous published cases of osteomyelitis without epidural abscess after such injections. We present a case in an elderly patient who presented only with persistent axial low back pain following a lumbar epidural steroid injection (LESI). We emphasize early patient evaluation, consideration of infectious predisposing factors, sterile technique, and skin disinfectant. Design: Open-label case report. Case description: A 77-year-old diabetic male with a history of radicular pain related to lumbar spinal stenosis was treated successfully several years prior with a series of lumbar epidural steroid injections (LESI) and was re-treated with LESIs for recurrent symptoms. Following his second epidural injection, he presented with back pain and induration at the injection site without fever or neurological deficits. Urgent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed a soft tissue abscess extending close to the epidural space around the corresponding L4/L5 vertebral level. The patient recovered after incision and drainage of the abscess which was associated with an osteomyelitis of the L4 and L5 vertebral spine. The causative organism was methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus. Conclusion: This case demonstrates that even with proper aseptic techniques, immune-compromised patients who are colonized with an aggressive micro-organism may develop a potentially catastrophic infectious complication if subtle persistent symptomatic complaints are not promptly and carefully evaluated. Key words: osteomyelitis, epidural steroid injection, methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)

scholarly journals Comparison of Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection with Interlaminar Lumbar Epidural Injection in treating Spinal Stenosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (9) ◽  
pp. 2168-2170
Author(s):  
Muhammad Akram ◽  
Faheem Mubashir Farooqi ◽  
Tauseef Ahmad Baluch ◽  
Shumaila Jabbar
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Epidural Injection ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Steroid Injections ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injections ◽  
Group I ◽  
Group Ii ◽  
Epidural Steroid ◽  
Caudal Epidural

Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis is a condition caused by narrowing of spinal canal. Steroid injection either lumbar or caudal can improve the functional outcome and low back pain. Aim: To compare the outcome of caudal epidural steroid injection with lumbar epidural steroid injection in treating spinal stenosis in patients suffering from sciatica. Methods: In this prospective study 338 patients having low backache due to spinal stenosis with sciatica were included from June 2013 to December 2014. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group I and II. Patients in Group I (160 patients) received caudal epidural steroid injections while the patients in Group II (178 patients) received lumbar epidural steroid injections. Visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was used to assess outcome of the Caudal and Lumbar steroid injections and was measured at 2 weeks, at 3months, and improvement was declared if VAS decrease ≥50% of baseline and Oswestry disability index decrease ≥40% at 3 months. Results: In group I, there were 70(43.75%) males and 90(56.25%) females, while in group II there were 98(55.1%) males and 80(44.9%) females. The mean age of the patients in group I was 46.46±10.37 (18-75 years) years and was 43.77±15.27 years (18-75 years) in group II (P=0.0619). The change in pain score (>50%) was observed in 159 (89.33%) in group II compared with 121 (75%) in group I (P=0.0008). Conclusion: Lumbar epidural of steroids injections are more effective then caudal epidural injection of steroids in treating spinal stenosis. MeSH words: Caudal epidural, Lumbar epidural, Sciatica

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document