Percutaneous epidural neuroplasty: prospective evaluation of 0.9% NaCl versus 10% NaCl with or without hyaluronidase

Factors leading to open revision surgery after trans-sacral canal plasty for lumbar spine disease

Trans-sacral canal plasty (TSCP) is a minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery under local anaesthesia. TSCP is expected to be effective regardless of whether the patient has had previous surgery. However, there are cases in which open revision surgery is required after TSCP. This study aimed to identify risk factors for open revision surgery after TSCP in order to determine surgical indications and limitations. A retrospective case-control study was conducted in patients who underwent TSCP for lumbar spine disease. Data of 112 patients were analysed. During an observation period of 7-23 months, 34 patients (30.4%) required open revision surgery and 78 (69.6%) did not. The following patient background characteristics were investigated: age, sex, body mass index (BMI), diagnosis, history of spine surgery and the institution where the surgery was performed. Comorbidities were scored using the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index. Preoperative imaging parameters were investigated, including the lesion level (L4/5, L5/S1, other), presence of intervertebral instability, dural sac area, presence of bony stenosis and presence of epidural lipoma. Multivariate analysis revealed that intervertebral instability (odds ratio 2.56, confidence interval 1.00-6.51, p = 0.046) and a narrow dural sac area (odds ratio 0.98, confidence interval 0.97-0.99, p = 0.002) were significant risk factors for open revision surgery after TSCP.

1. Lumbosacral radicular pain

INTRODUCTION

Patients suffering lumbosacral radicular pain report radiating pain in one or more lumbar or sacral dermatomes. In the general population, low back pain with leg pain extending below the knee has an annual prevalence that varies from 9.9% to 25%.

METHODS

The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of lumbosacral radicular pain was reviewed and summarized.

RESULTS

Although a patient's history, the pain distribution pattern, and clinical examination may yield a presumptive diagnosis of lumbosacral radicular pain, additional clinical tests may be required. Medical imaging studies can demonstrate or exclude specific underlying pathologies and identify nerve root irritation, while selective diagnostic nerve root blocks can be used to confirm the affected level(s). In subacute lumbosacral radicular pain, transforaminal corticosteroid administration provides short-term pain relief and improves mobility. In chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment adjacent to the spinal ganglion (DRG) can provide pain relief for a longer period in well-selected patients. In cases of refractory pain, epidural adhesiolysis and spinal cord stimulation can be considered in experienced centers.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of lumbosacral radicular pain is based on a combination of history, clinical examination, and additional investigations. Epidural steroids can be considered for subacute lumbosacral radicular pain. In chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, PRF adjacent to the DRG is recommended. SCS and epidural adhesiolysis can be considered for cases of refractory pain in specialized centers.

Involvement of the spinal γ-aminobutyric acid receptor in the analgesic effects of intrathecally injected hypertonic saline in spinal nerve-ligated rats

Background

: Hypertonic saline is used for treating chronic pain; however, clinical studies that aid in optimizing therapeutic protocols are lacking. We aimed to determine the concentration of intrathecally injected hypertonic saline at which the effect reaches its peak as well as the underlying γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptor-related antinociceptive mechanism.

Methods

: Spinal nerve ligation (SNL; left L5 and L6) was performed to induce neuropathic pain in rats weighing 250-300 g. Experiment 1: one week after implanting the intrathecal catheter, 60 rats were assigned randomly to intrathecal injection with 0.45%, 0.9%, 2.5%, 5%, 10%, and 20% NaCl, followed by behavioral testing at baseline and after 30 minutes, 2 hours, 1 day, and 1 week to determine the minimal concentration which produced maximal analgesia. Experiment 2: after determining the optimal intrathecal hypertonic saline concentration, 60 rats were randomly divided into four groups: Sham, hypertonic saline without pretreatment, and hypertonic saline after pretreatment with one of two GABA receptor antagonists (GABAA [bicuculline], or GABAB [phaclofen]). Behavioral tests were performed at weeks 1 and 3 following each treatment.

Results

: Hypertonic saline at concentrations greater than 5% alleviated SNL-induced mechanical allodynia and had a significant therapeutic effect, while showing a partial time- and dose-dependent antinociceptive effect on thermal and cold hyperalgesia. However, pretreatment with GABA receptor antagonists inhibited the antinociceptive effect of 5% NaCl.

Conclusions

: This study indicates that the optimal concentration of hypertonic saline for controlling mechanical allodynia in neuropathic pain is 5%, and that its analgesic effect is related to GABAA and GABAB receptors.

Efficacy of Percutaneous Adhesiolysis in Managing Low Back and Lower Extremity Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Chronic refractory low back and lower extremity pain recalcitrant to conservative management and epidural injections secondary to postsurgery syndrome, spinal stenosis, and disc herniation are sometimes managed with percutaneous adhesiolysis. Consequently, this systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the efficacy of percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing low back and lower extremity pain.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was performed. A comprehensive literature search of multiple databases from 1966 to July 2022, including manual searches of the bibliography of known review articles was performed. Quality assessment of the included trials, meta-analysis, and best evidence synthesis was performed. The primary outcome measure was a significant reduction in pain (short term up to 6 months and long term more than 6 months).

RESULTS

The search identified 26 publications, with 9 trials meeting the inclusion criteria. The results of dual-arm and single-arm analyses showed significant improvement in pain and function at 12 months. Opioid consumption was also significantly reduced at 6 months with dual-arm analysis, whereas single-arm analysis showed a significant decrease from baseline to treatment at the 3-, 6-, and 12-month analyses. At 1 year follow-up, seven of seven trials were positive for improvements in pain relief, function, and diminution of opioid use.

DISCUSSION

Based on the present systematic review of nine RCTs, the evidence level is I to II, with moderate to strong recommendation for percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing low back and lower extremity pain. The limitations of the evidence include paucity of literature, lack of placebo-controlled trials, and the majority of the trials studying post lumbar surgery syndrome.

CONCLUSION

The evidence is level I to II or strong to moderate based on five high-quality and two moderate-quality RCTs, with 1 year follow-up that percutaneous adhesiolysis is efficacious in the treatment of chronic refractory low back and lower extremity pain.

Validity of outcome measures used in randomized clinical trials and observational studies in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis

It is unclear whether outcome measures used in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) have been validated for this condition. Cross-sectional analysis of studies for DLSS included in systematic reviews (SA) and meta-analyses (MA) indexed in the Cochrane Library. We extracted all outcome measures for pain and disability. We assessed whether the studies provided external references for the validity of the outcome measures and the quality of the validation studies. Out of 20 SA/MA, 95 primary studies used 242 outcome measures for pain and/or disability. Most commonly used were the VAS (n = 69), the Oswestry Disability Index (n = 53) and the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (n = 22). Although validation references were provided in 45 (47.3%) primary studies, only 14 validation studies for 9 measures (disability n = 7, pain and disability combined n = 2) were specifically validated in a DLSS population. The quality of the validation studies was mainly poor. The Zurich Claudication Questionnaire was the only disease specific tool with adequate validation for assessing treatment response in DLSS. To compare results from clinical studies, outcome measures need to be validated in a disease specific population. The quality of validation studies need to be improved and the validity in studies adequately cited.

Contralateral retrodiscal transforaminal approach for percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis: A technical description and retrospective comparative study

OBJECTIVES

Retrodiscal transforaminal (RdTF) epidural steroid injection (ESI) is clinically comparable to conventional transforaminal ESI and can avoid catastrophic complications. However, it poses a risk of inadvertent intradiscal, intravascular, and intrathecal injections. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis (PEA) using the contralateral (Contra)-RdTF approach.

METHODS

The electronic medical records of 332 patients with unilateral lumbar radiculopathy due to foraminal disk pathology were reviewed. Patients were categorized into two groups: Group A (ESI using the RdTF approach) and Group B (PEA using the Contra-RdTF approach). Effective pain relief (EPR; ≥50% pain relief from baseline) in patients was evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) at 4 and 12 weeks after the procedure. The presence of unintended fluoroscopic findings and complications was recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients were enrolled in the final analysis: 81 in Group A and 38 in Group B. Both groups showed lesser VAS scores after 4 and 12 weeks than at baseline (p < 0.05). However, the proportion of patients with EPR was significantly greater in Group B after 12 weeks (p = 0.015). No complications, including intrathecal injection, infectious discitis, and neurologic deterioration, were reported. However, inadvertent intradiscal and intravascular injections were reported to be significantly higher in Group A than in Group B (14.8% and 0%, respectively; p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Although applications of this study are limited by its retrospective design, the results suggest that PEA using the Contra-RdTF approach is feasible because it can achieve EPR and avoid unintended fluoroscopic findings.

The role of percutaneous neurolysis in lumbar disc herniation: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Recalcitrant disc herniation may result in chronic lumbar radiculopathy or sciatica. Fluoroscopically directed epidural injections and other conservative modalities may provide inadequate improvement in some patients. In these cases, percutaneous neurolysis with targeted delivery of medications is often the next step in pain management.

Methods

An evidence-based system of methodologic assessment, namely, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used. Multiple databases were searched from 1966 to January 2021. Principles of the best evidence synthesis were incorporated into qualitative evidence synthesis. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with significant pain relief and functional improvement (≥ 50%). Duration of relief was categorized as short-term (< 6 months) and long-term (≥ 6 months).

Results

This assessment identified one high-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT) and 5 moderate-quality non-randomized studies with an application of percutaneous neurolysis in disc herniation. Overall, the results were positive, with level II evidence.

Conclusions

Based on the present systematic review, with one RCT and 5 nonrandomized studies, the evidence level is II for percutaneous neurolysis in managing lumbar disc herniation.

Adjuvant administration of hypertonic saline in lumbar epidural intervention may be associated with successful response in patients with probable neuropathic radicular pain Screened by Douleur Neuropathique 4

Background: Chronic lumbar radicular pain often accompanies neuropathic pain. The treatment may follow a screening for probable neuropathic pain rather than the definitive diagnosis, which is often difficult in daily practice. However, interventional management may have limited effects on symptoms in patients with neuropathic radicular pain refractory to conservative treatments. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the factors associated with successful responses after lumbar epidural intervention in patients with chronic lumbar neuropathic radicular pain determined by Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 221 chronic lumbar radicular pain patients using a DN4 questionnaire prior to the epidural interventional procedure. The patients were divided into two groups according to the DN4 questionnaire: <4-point DN4 and ≥4 DN4. The numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain intensity, changes in physical functional status, and the use of pain medication were obtained before and 1 month after the procedure. Successful responder was defined based on robust combination of outcome parameters. The factors associated with successful response were analyzed using univariate and multivariate regression. Results: We found 170 (76.9%) patients with DN4 <4 and 51 (23.1%) with a score ≥4. Among the total 221 patients, 129 (58.4%) were successful responders and 92 (41.6%) were non-responders regardless of DN4 score. We observed a significantly lower proportion of successful responders among patients with a DN4 score ≥4 (22, 43.1%) than patients with a score <4 (107, 62.9%) (P=0.012). After adjusting in multivariate regression analysis, the DN4 score was independently associated with response after lumbar epidural intervention (odds ratio [OR]=0.838; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.718-0.978; P=0.025). In subgroup logistic regression analysis according to the DN4 score, adjuvant administration of hypertonic saline during epidural interventions in patients with a DN4 score ≥4 (OR=3.71; CI=1.142-12.457; P=0.029) was associated with the success of the lumbar epidural procedure at 1 month. Conclusion: The adjuvant use of hypertonic saline in lumbar epidural interventions may be effective at least 1 month after the intervention in patients with probable neuropathic lumbar radicular pain ≥4 using the DN4.

Percutaneous Fenestration of a Spinal Arachnoid Web Using an Intrathecal Catheter: Effect on Cerebrospinal Fluid Flow and Clinical Status

Background

Spinal arachnoid webs are a rare anatomic entity manifesting as neuropathic back pain, compressive myelopathy, radiculopathy, and hydrocephalus. Typical treatments include hemilaminectomy or full laminectomy with durotomy and microsurgical resection, which can result in secondary scarring and recurrent blockage of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) flow perpetuating the cycle.

Case Description

A 66-year-old woman presented with progressively worsening gait and memory. Magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated an arachnoid web in the high thoracic region, causing CSF flow obstruction and hydrocephalus. A standard lumbar drainage catheter was introduced percutaneously into the lumbar thecal sac and advanced in a cephalad direction, across the arachnoid web, to the high thoracic region. The patient underwent continuous CSF drainage through this catheter for a total of 3 days, displaying measurable clinical improvement that persisted at the 3-month follow-up visit. Phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated interval reconstitution of dorsal synchronous CSF flow at the second thoracic vertebral level, both on day 3 and at the 3-month control imaging study.

Conclusions

This minimally invasive approach seems useful in achieving restoration of spinal fluid flow at the thoracic region when the underlying blockage results from an arachnoid web and leads to quantifiable clinical improvement.

Clinical Effectiveness of Percutaneous Epidural Neuroplasty According to the Type of Single-Level Lumbar Disc Herniation : A 12-Month Follow-Up Study

Objective

To determine whether the outcomes of percutaneous epidural neuroplasty (PEN) are influenced by the type of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and evaluate the effectiveness of PEN in patients with single-level LDH.

Methods

This study included 430 consecutive patients with single-level LDH who underwent PEN. Before treatment, the LDH type was categorized as bulging, protrusion, extrusion, and sequestration, while Pfirrmann grades were assigned according to imaging findings. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain and success rates (Odom’s criteria) were assessed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment.

Results

The mean preoperative VAS scores for back and leg pain were 6.90 and 4.23, respectively; these decreased after PEN as follows : 2.25 and 1.45, respectively, at 1 month; 2.61 and 1.68, respectively, at 3 months; 2.28 and 1.48, respectively, at 6 months; and 2.88 and 1.48, respectively, at 12 months (p<0.001). The decrease in VAS scores for leg pain was significantly greater in the extrusion and sequestration groups than in the other two groups (p<0.05); there were no other significant differences among groups. More than 70% patients exhibited good or excellent 12-month outcomes according to Odom’s criteria. Subsequent surgery was required for 59 patients (13.7%), with a significantly higher rate in the extrusion (25.0%) and sequestration (30.0%) groups than in the bulging (7.3%) and protrusion (13.8%) groups (p<0.05). Nevertheless, subsequent surgery was not required for >70% patients with extrusion or sequestration. Patients with Pfirrmann grades 1–3 (14.0–21.5%) showed a significantly higher rate of subsequent surgery than those with Pfirrmann grade 0 (4.9%; p<0.05).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that PEN is an effective treatment for back and leg pain caused by single-level LDH, with the outcomes remaining unaffected by the LDH type.

Evaluation of the efficacy of epiduroscopic adhesiolysis in failed back surgery syndrome

Background/aim

We aimed to compare the results of the treatment of the patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) by mechanical lysis and steroid hylase injection via epiduroscopy due to their stabilization status and to detect the effect of pathological diagnostic markers on prognosis and ongoing treatment protocol.

Materials and methods

Eighty-two patients with FBSS symptoms were included. Two groups were composed as group I (stabilized) and group II (nonstabilized). All patients were evaluated using the oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores before and after treatment at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months and using the patient satisfaction scale at 12 months following treatment. Epidural scar tissue visual and mechanical signs were also recorded.

Results

Mean VAS scores were 7.8 and 3.28 points in group I (P < 0.001) and 7.51 and 2.74 points in group II (P < 0.001) at the beginning and at 12 months, respectively. Mean ODI scores were 34.05 and 22.16 points in group I (P < 0.001) and 30.74 and 19.46 points in group II (P < 0.001) at the beginning and at 12 months. VAS and ODI scores decreased significantly in both groups, but were more significant in the nonstabilized group (P < 0.001). Moderate or severe fibrous tissue was observed in 86.58% of the patients and patient satisfaction scores were very good or good in 78.06% of the patients. During the procedure, a dura rupture developed in four patients in the stabilization group and in two patients in the nonstabilization group; however, none of these patients developed a spinal headache and no significant permanent complication arose.

Conclusion

We suggest that epidural adhesiolysis, hyaluronidase, and steroid injection in patients with FBSS chronic low back pain and/or radicular symptoms may give reliable information about the quality of life, accuracy of diagnosis, and the possible course of the present findings and may be more effective in nonstabilized patients

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Trans-Sacral Epiduroscopic Laser Decompression Compared to Percutaneous Epidural Neuroplasty

Percutaneous epidural neuroplasty (PEN) is an effective and safe procedure for herniated lumbar disc (HLD). Although PEN has an advantage of adhesiolysis, this procedure cannot decompress the protruded disc. Recently, trans-sacral epiduroscopic laser decompression (SELD) for HLD has been introduced as a promising alternative methodology. This study evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of SELD compared to PEN, as well as the change in protruded disc volume after SELD through pre- and postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in patients with HLD. Thirty consecutive patients underwent SELD (SELD group), and 45 patients underwent PEN (PEN group). The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for leg pain; Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12); preoperative and postoperative 4-, 12-, and 24-week Macnab criteria; and preoperative and 24-week postoperative lumbar spinal MRIs after SELD were obtained. There was no significant difference in age, sex, duration of symptoms, and the distributions of disc level between the two groups (all P > 0.05). Between the SELD and PEN groups, preoperative VAS, ODI, and SF-12 scores had no significant differences. However, the VAS, ODI, and SF-12 scores improved significantly after the procedures by postoperative week 24 in each group (all P < 0.05). Furthermore, improvements of VAS, ODI, SF-12, and success rate of Macnab criteria in the SELD group were better than those in the PEN group (all P < 0.05). The protruded disc volume after SELD decreased significantly (P=0.034). All clinical and functional outcomes of patients undergoing SELD and PEN for HLD improved following the procedures. Notably, SELD was superior to PEN regarding the degree of improvement in clinical and functional outcomes. Therefore, we suggest that SELD can be used as an effective alternative to PEN to provide improved clinical and functional outcomes in patients with HLD.

Factors for Predicting Favorable Outcome of Percutaneous Epidural Adhesiolysis for Lumbar Disc Herniation

Background. Lower back pain is a common reason for disability and the most common cause is lumbar disc herniation. Percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis has been applied to relieve pain and increase the functional capacity of patients who present this condition. Objectives. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated the factors which predict the outcome of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis in patients who were diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation. Methods. Electronic medical records of patients diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation who have received percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis treatment were reviewed. The primary outcome was the factors that were associated with substantial response of ≥4 points or ≥50% of pain relief in the numerical rating scale pain score 12 months after the treatment. Results. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the presence of high-intensity zone (HIZ) at magnetic resonance imaging was a predictor of substantial response to percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis for 12 months (P = 0.007). The presence of a condition involving the vertebral foramen was a predictor for unsuccessful response after 12 months (P = 0.02). Discussion and Conclusion. The presence of HIZ was a predictor of favorable long-term outcome after percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis for the treatment of lower back pain with radicular pain caused by lumbar disc herniation.

Efficacy of Percutaneous Adhesiolysis in the Treatment of Lumbar Post Surgery Syndrome

Context

Lumbar post-surgery syndrome is common and often results in chronic, persistent pain and disability, which can lead to multiple interventions. After failure of conservative treatment, either surgical treatment or a nonsurgical modality of treatment such as epidural injections, percutaneous adhesiolysis is often contemplated in managing lumbar post surgery syndrome. Recent guidelines and systematic reviews have reached different conclusions about the level of evidence for the efficacy of epidural injections and percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing lumbar post surgery syndrome. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy of all 3 percutaneous adhesiolysis anatomical approaches (caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal) in treating lumbar post-surgery syndrome.

Evidence Acquisition

Data Sources: A literature search was performed from 1966 through October 2014 utilizing multiple databases. Study Selection: A systematic review of randomized trials published from 1966 through October 2014 of all types of epidural injections and percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing lumbar post-surgery syndrome was performed including methodological quality assessment utilizing Cochrane review criteria, Interventional Pain Management Techniques–Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM–QRB), and grading of evidence using 5 levels of evidence ranging from Level I to Level V. Data Extraction: The search strategy emphasized post-surgery syndrome and related pathologies treated with percutaneous adhesiolysis procedures.

Results

The search criteria yielded 16 manuscripts on percutaneous adhesiolysis assessing post-surgery syndrome. Of these, only 4 randomized trials met inclusion criteria for methodological quality assessment, 3 of them were of high quality; and the fourth manuscript was of low quality. Based on these 3 randomized controlled trials, 2 of them with one-day procedure and one with a 3-day procedure, the level of evidence for the efficacy of percutaneous adhesiolysis is Level II based on best evidence synthesis.

Conclusions

Based on this systematic review, percutaneous adhesiolysis is effective in managing patients with lumbar post-surgery syndrome after the failure of conservative management including fluoroscopically directed epidural injections.

The effects of a forceful transforaminal epidural steroid injection on radicular pain: a preliminary study

Background

Lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) are performed to provide symptom relief in patients with radicular pain. Recent articles suggested that injected volume itself have analgesic effects and higher volumes are associated with better outcomes. To date, few studies have been conducted to investigate the effects of volume. Therefore, well-designed controlled studies were necessary to confirm the effect of volume itself on pain relief. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a forceful saline injection on lumbar TFESI using non-particulate steroids.

Methods

Fifty consecutive patients with lumbar radicular pain were enrolled. The participants were allocated into one of two groups: dexamethasone with volume (Group DV) and dexamethasone alone (Group DO). The volume was delivered by a forceful injection of 5ml of normal saline. The primary end-point for this study was a VAS pain score and modified MacNab score indicating the rate of effectiveness at the four-week follow-up.

Results

There were no significant post-procedural VAS differences between two groups (P = .252). The effectiveness rate among the patients was 47.8% in DV group, 34.8% in DO group, measured by modified MacNab score. The difference was not statistically significant (P = .117).

Conclusions

A forceful saline injection did not have a significant effect during the treatment of radicular pain. Further studies with greater volumes and with additional techniques would offer a more conclusive perspective.

A novel balloon-inflatable catheter for percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis and decompression

Epidural adhesions cause pain by interfering with the free movement of the spinal nerves and increasing neural sensitivity as a consequence of neural compression. To remove adhesions and deliver injected drugs to target sites, percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis (PEA) is performed in patients who are unresponsive to conservative treatments. We describe four patients who were treated with a newly developed inflatable balloon catheter for more effective PEA and relief of stenosis. In the present patients, treatments with repetitive epidural steroid injection and/or PEA with the Racz catheter or the NaviCath did not yield long-lasting effects or functional improvements. However, PEA and decompression with the inflatable balloon catheter led to maintenance of pain relief for more than seven months and improvements in the functional status with increases in the walking distance. The present case series suggests that the inflatable balloon catheter may be an effective alternative to performing PEA when conventional methods fail to remove adhesions or sufficiently relieve stenosis.

Epidural lysis of adhesions

As our population ages and the rate of spine surgery continues to rise, the use epidural lysis of adhesions (LOA) has emerged as a popular treatment to treat spinal stenosis and failed back surgery syndrome. There is moderate evidence that percutaneous LOA is more effective than conventional ESI for both failed back surgery syndrome, spinal stenosis, and lumbar radiculopathy. For cervical HNP, cervical stenosis and mechanical pain not associated with nerve root involvement, the evidence is anecdotal. The benefits of LOA stem from a combination of factors to include the high volumes administered and the use of hypertonic saline. Hyaluronidase has been shown in most, but not all studies to improve treatment outcomes. Although infrequent, complications are more likely to occur after epidural LOA than after conventional epidural steroid injections.

Efficacy of epidural neuroplasty versus transforaminal epidural steroid injection for the radiating pain caused by a herniated lumbar disc

Objective

To compare the treatment effects of epidural neuroplasty (NP) and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) for the radiating pain caused by herniated lumbar disc.

Methods

Thirty-two patients diagnosed with herniated lumbar disc through magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography were included in this study. Fourteen patients received an epidural NP and eighteen patients had a TFESI. The visual analogue scale (VAS) and functional rating index (FRI) were measured before the treatment, and at 2 weeks, 4 weeks and 8 weeks after the treatment.

Results

In the epidural NP group, the mean values of the VAS before the treatment, and at 2 weeks, 4 weeks and 8 weeks after the treatment were 7.00±1.52, 4.29±1.20, 2.64±0.93, 1.43±0.51 and those of FRI were 23.57±3.84, 16.50±3.48, 11.43±2.44, 7.00±2.15. In the TFESI group, the mean values of the VAS before the treatment, and at 2 weeks, 4 weeks and 8 weeks after the treatment were 7.22±2.05, 4.28±1.67, 2.56±1.04, 1.33±0.49 and those of FRI were 22.00±6.64, 16.22±5.07, 11.56±4.18, 8.06±1.89. During the follow-up period, the values of VAS and FRI within each group were significantly reduced (p<0.05) after the treatment. But there were no significant differences between the two groups statistically.

Conclusion

Epidural NP and TFESI are equally effective treatments for the reduction of radiating pain and for improvement of function in patients with a herniated lumbar disc. We recommend that TFESI should be primarily applied to patients who need interventional spine treatment, because it is easier and more cost-effective than epidural NP.

Clinical outcomes of epidural neuroplasty for cervical disc herniation

Cervical disc herniation is a common disorder characterized by neck pain radiating to the arm and fingers as determined by the affected dermatome. This condition has a favorable prognosis, but pain can have a serious detrimental impact on daily activities. Epidural neuroplasty has been applied as a treatment option for cervical disc herniation; however, no study has addressed the clinical outcomes. This retrospective study evaluated the clinical outcomes of epidural neuroplasty on 128 patients for the treatment of cervical disc herniation. To measure pain-related disabilities over time, the changes of pain scores in neck and arm were evaluated using a numerical rating scale (NRS) and the neck disability index (NDI). Compared with preprocedural values, the pain NRS of neck and arm demonstrated significant improvement at day 1, and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure (P < 0.001). Likewise, the NDI was significantly reduced at 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure (P < 0.001). There were no serious complications. Cervical epidural neuroplasty shows good clinical outcomes in the treatment of cervical disc herniation and can be considered a treatment modality for cervical disc herniation refractory to conservative treatment.

Assessment of effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis and caudal epidural injections in managing post lumbar surgery syndrome: 2-year follow-up of a randomized, controlled trial

Background

The literature is replete with evaluations of failed surgery, illustrating a 9.5%–25% reoperation rate. Speculated causes of post lumbar surgery syndrome include epidural fibrosis, acquired stenosis, recurrent disc herniation, sacroiliac joint pain, and facet joint pain among other causes.

Methods

Patients (n = 120) were randomly assigned to two groups with a 2-year follow-up. Group I (control group, n = 60) received caudal epidural injections with catheterization up to S3 with local anesthetic (lidocaine 2%, 5 mL), nonparticulate betamethasone (6 mg, 1 mL), and 6 mL of 0.9% sodium chloride solution. Group II (intervention group, n = 60) received percutaneous adhesiolysis of the targeted area, with targeted delivery of lidocaine 2% (5 mL), 10% hypertonic sodium chloride solution (6 mL), and nonparticulate betamethasone (6 mg). The multiple outcome measures included the Numeric Rating Scale, the Oswestry Disability Index 2.0, employment status, and opioid intake with assessments at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months posttreatment. Primary outcome was defined as 50% improvement in pain and Oswestry Disability Index scores.

Results

Significant improvement with at least 50% relief with pain and improvement in functional status was illustrated in 82% of patients at the 2-year follow-up in the intervention group compared to 5% in the control group receiving caudal epidural injections. The average number of procedures over a period of 2 years in Group II was 6.4 ± 2.35 with overall total relief of approximately 78 weeks out of 104 weeks.

Conclusion

The results of this study show significant improvement in 82% of patients over a period of 2 years with an average of six to seven procedures of 1-day percutaneous adhesiolysis in patients with failed back surgery syndrome.

Assessment of effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing chronic low back pain secondary to lumbar central spinal canal stenosis

BACKGROUND

Chronic persistent low back and lower extremity pain secondary to central spinal stenosis is common and disabling. Lumbar surgical interventions with decompression or fusion are most commonly performed to manage severe spinal stenosis. However, epidural injections are also frequently performed in managing central spinal stenosis. After failure of epidural steroid injections, the next sequential step is percutaneous adhesiolysis and hypertonic saline neurolysis with a targeted delivery. The literature on the effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing central spinal stenosis after failure of epidural injections has not been widely studied.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective evaluation.

SETTING

An interventional pain management practice, a specialty referral center, a private practice setting in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis in patients with chronic low back and lower extremity pain with lumbar central spinal stenosis.

METHODS

Seventy patients were recruited. The initial phase of the study was randomized, double-blind with a comparison of percutaneous adhesiolysis with caudal epidural injections. The 25 patients from the adhesiolysis group continued with follow-up, along with 45 additional patients, leading to a total of 70 patients. All patients received percutaneous adhesiolysis and appropriate placement of the Racz catheter, followed by an injection of 5 mL of 2% preservative-free lidocaine with subsequent monitoring in the recovery room. In the recovery room, each patient also received 6 mL of 10% hypertonic sodium chloride solution, and 6 mg of non-particulate betamethasone, followed by an injection of 1 mL of sodium chloride solution and removal of the catheter.

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, 18 and 24 months post treatment. The primary outcome measure was 50% or more improvement in pain scores and ODI scores.

RESULTS

Overall, a primary outcome or significant pain relief and functional status improvement of 50% or more was seen in 71% of patients at the end of 2 years. The overall number of procedures over a period of 2 years were 5.7 ± 2.73.

LIMITATIONS

The lack of a control group and a prospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant relief and functional status improvement as seen in 71% of the 70 patients with percutaneous adhesiolysis utilizing local anesthetic steroids and hypertonic sodium chloride solution may be an effective management strategy in patients with chronic function limiting low back and lower extremity pain with central spinal stenosis after failure of conservatie management and fluoroscopically directed epidural injections.

Use of an angiographic catheter in place of the Racz epidural catheter in the lysis of epidural space adhesions. A technical note

This technical note describes lysis of adhesions in the epidural space with the use of a 5F vascular catheter inserted on a 0.35-inch guide passed through the sacral foramen. Commonly employed in the administration of anesthetics, a vascular catheter can be advantageously used in place of the Racz epidural catheter, with a potential reduction in damage to the nerve structures of the sacral canal.

[Federal Court of Justice verdict on the Racz catheter]

New ground operations involve the risk of liability for various reasons, and this applies both to the treatment and to the conduct of the interview to give the patient the necessary information. When the appropriate standards are observed, however, both sources of error can be avoided. Basically, methods that break new ground are allowed and come under the heading of doctors' freedom to choose the therapy. It is only when the new method involves a higher risk than the conventional method that there must be specific reasons (e.g. a better prognosis) justifying the novel method. If the side-effects of a method are not yet adequately known, however, as for the minimally invasive epidural catheter technique (Racz method) used in the case considered by the Federal Court of Justice, the attendant doctor is required to perform constant, and if necessary immediate, monitoring examinations to ensure that such side effects are not present or to react without delay if any do occur. The carefulness standard of the "prudent doctor" must be applied in these circumstances. It is also important that the patient is informed on the novel nature of the procedure (and the risks inherent in it, which may not yet be well known).

[Facet blockade, peridural and periradicular pain therapy]

More than 80% of vertebrogenic lumbar pain is unspecific and can only be attributed to a specific anatomic structure with difficulty. The pain can emanate from the intervertebral discs, intervertebral and sacroiliac (SI) joints, musculature, and ligaments. In a maximum of 7% of cases, the pain is radicular (4% due to intervertebral discs and 3% caused by stenoses). In 7-15% of cases, the pain's origin is located in the region of the vertebral joints and in up to 15% in the region of the SI joint. Although the overwhelming majority of pain has no clear structural cause, infiltrations of medications and nerve blockades are frequently employed. The efficacy of these procedures has however not been verified in controlled studies with the exception of epidural injection of corticosteroids for radicular pain. Epidural and epiradicular application of corticosteroids appear to be effective for radicular pain, at least on a short-term basis, although controlled studies have yielded controversial results. The difficulty lies partly in the exact placement at the affected root for applying the medication. This is hardly possible with a caudal injection, while with a lumbar peridural injection and periradicular injections it is only possible under X-ray control or even better CT guidance.

Outcome of invasive treatment modalities on back pain and sciatica: an evidence-based review

Within the framework of evidence-based medicine high-quality randomised trials and systematic reviews are considered a necessary prerequisite for progress in orthopaedics. This paper summarises the currently available evidence on surgical and other invasive procedures for low back pain. Results of systematic reviews conducted within the framework of the Cochrane Back Review Group were used. Data were gathered from the latest Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 2. The Cochrane reviews were updated using the evidence summary on surgery and other invasive procedures from the COST B13 European Guidelines for the Management of Acute and Chronic Non-Specific Low Back Pain. Facet joint, epidural, trigger point and sclerosant injections have not clearly been shown to be effective and can consequently not be recommended. There is no scientific evidence on the effectiveness of spinal stenosis surgery. Surgical discectomy may be considered for selected patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc prolapses that fail to resolve with the conservative management. Cognitive intervention Combined with exercises is recommended for chronic low back pain, and fusion surgery may be considered only in carefully selected patients after active rehabilitation programmes during 2 years time have failed. Demanding surgical fusion techniques are not better than the traditional posterolateral fusion without internal fixation.

[Chronic radiculopathy. Use of minimally invasive percutaneous epidural neurolysis according to Racz]

Treatment of chronic low back pain exhibiting radicular symptoms poses a clinical problem that has not yet been solved. The technique of percutaneous minimally invasive neurolysis described by Racz is being performed increasingly to treat chronic radiculopathy. A total of 61 patients with corresponding symptomatology after screening for inclusion and exclusion criteria in the region of the lumbar spinal nerve were treated with the Racz catheter technique. Distinct clinical improvement was observed at the 3- and 6-month follow-ups after percutaneous minimally invasive epidural neurolysis. Subjective pain perception, quantified by the McNab score, clearly improved after 3 as well as 6 months. With the exception of partial catheter shearing in two cases and one occurrence of infection, no relevant side effects were noted. The Racz catheter technique for treatment of chronic radiculopathy following disk surgery is suitable with minimal side effects.

Low Back Pain: From Algorithm to Cost-Effectiveness?

Low back pain is one of the most important burdens for the patient, the health-care provider, and society. Treatment selection should target the appropriate use of the available health-care resources with the highest probability of success. When conventional treatment fails to provide satisfactory pain reduction and improvement of the quality of life, more interventional techniques can be envisioned. The degree of invasiveness of the different treatment modalities varies as well as the costs. A stepwise approach to chronic low back pain may reduce the economic burden with optimal use of the less invasive treatments. In this review, we discuss the treatment algorithm with special attention to the interventional pain management techniques. We also describe the results of a cost evaluation for the management of low back pain in Belgium compared with that in the Netherlands, two neighboring countries with different social security systems.

[ISRCTN 16558617] A randomized, controlled trial of spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis in chronic refractory low back and lower extremity pain

BACKGROUND

Postoperative epidural fibrosis may contribute to between 5% to 60% of the poor surgical outcomes following decompressive surgery. Correlations have been reported between epidural scarring and radicular pain, poor surgical outcomes, and a lack of any form of surgical treatment. The use of spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis in recent years in the management of chronic refractory low back and lower extremity pain has been described.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized, double-blind trial was conducted to determine the outcome of spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis to reduce pain and improve function and psychological status in patients with chronic refractory low back and lower extremity pain. A total of 83 patients were evaluated, with 33 patients in Group I and 50 patients in Group II. Group I served as the control, with endoscopy into the sacral level without adhesiolysis, followed by injection of local anesthetic and steroid. Group II received spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis, followed by injection of local anesthetic and steroid.

RESULTS

Among the 50 patients in the treatment group receiving spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis, significant improvement without adverse effects was shown in 80% at 3 months, 56% at 6 months, and 48% at 12 months. The control group showed improvement in 33% of the patients at one month and none thereafter. Based on the definition that less than 6 months of relief is considered short-term and longer than 6 months of relief is considered long-term, a significant number of patients obtained long-term relief with improvement in pain, functional status, and psychological status.

CONCLUSION

Spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis with targeted delivery of local anesthetic and steroid is an effective treatment in a significant number of patients with chronic low back and lower extremity pain without major adverse effects.

Management of chronic low back pain

Treatment for chronic low back pain (pain persisting for over 3 months) falls into three broad categories: monotherapies, mulitidisciplinary therapy, and reductionism. Most monotherapies either do not work or have limited efficacy (eg, analgesics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, muscle relaxants, antidepressants, physiotherapy, manipulative therapy and surgery). Multidisciplinary therapy based on intensive exercises improves physical function and has modest effects on pain. The reductionist approach (pursuit of a pathoanatomical diagnosis with the view to target-specific treatment) should be implemented when a specific diagnosis is needed. While conventional investigations do not reveal the cause of pain, joint blocks and discography can identify zygapophysial joint pain (in 15%-40%), sacroiliac joint pain (in about 20%) and internal disc disruption (in over 40%). Zygapophysial joint pain can be relieved by radiofrequency neurotomy; techniques are emerging for treating sacroiliac joint pain and internal disc disruption.

Epidural lysis of adhesions and myeloscopy

Chronic low back pain is one of the most common ailments in modern medicine, with as many as 79% of patients with acute pain continuing to suffer with chronic or recurrent low back pain 1 year after its onset. Lumbar epidural fibrosis and post-lumbar laminectomy syndrome are increasingly recognized as being responsible for persistent low back pain. Estimations show that approximately 5% to 40% of lumbar surgeries result in failed back surgery syndrome. Epidural adhesiolysis with myeloscopy is an interventional technique based on the premise that the three-dimensional visualization of the contents of the epidural space provides the physician with the ability to directly visualize the structures, perform appropriate adhesiolysis, and administer drugs specifically to the target. This review describes pathophysiologic aspects, purposes and goals, rationale and indications, complications, and effectiveness of epidural lysis of adhesions with myeloscopy.