Cervical spine ligamentum flavum gaps: MR characterisation and implications for interlaminar epidural injection therapy

FACTFINDERS FOR PATIENT SAFETY: Minimizing risks with cervical epidural injections

This series of FactFinders presents a brief summary of the evidence and outlines recommendations to minimize risks associated with cervical epidural injections. Evidence in support of the following facts is presented. Minimizing Risks with Cervical Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injections - 1) CILESIs should be performed at C6-C7 or below, with C7-T1 as the preferred access point due to the more generous dorsal epidural space at this level compared to the more cephalad interlaminar segments. This reduces the risk of the minor complication of dural puncture and the major complication of spinal cord injury due to inadvertent needle placement. 2) LF gaps are most prevalent in the midline cervical spine. This can result in diminished tactile feedback with loss of resistance (LOR), increasing the risk for inadvertent dural puncture or spinal cord injury. Based on current evidence, needle placement in the paramedian portion of the interlaminar space is safest to avoid LF gaps. 3) An optimal AP trajectory view and the physician's ability to discern engagement in the LF and subsequent LOR are crucial. Confirmation of minimal needle insertion depth relative to the ventral margin of the lamina with either a lateral or contralateral oblique (CLO) safety view is critical to minimize the risk of inadvertently inserting the needle too ventral. 4) There have been closed claims and case reports of patients who have suffered catastrophic neurologic injuries while receiving CILESIs under deep sedation. If sedation is administered, the least amount necessary should be utilized to ensure the patient can provide verbal feedback during the procedure. 5) CILESIs are an elective procedure; therefore, necessity and likelihood of benefit must be foremost considerations. Current guidelines recommend holding ACAP therapy before CILESIs due to the potentially catastrophic complications associated with epidural hematoma (EH) formation. However, there is also a risk of severe systemic complications with ceasing ACAP in specific clinical scenarios. The treating physician is obligated to determine if the procedure is indicated and can ultimately decide to delay the intervention or not perform the procedure if the benefit does not outweigh the risks. Minimizing Risks with Cervical Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections - the Role of Preprocedural Review of Advanced Imaging -- Variations in vascular anatomy may warrant a modified approach to CTFESI. Preprocedural review of cross-sectional imaging can provide critical information for safe injection angle planning specific to individual patients and may help to decrease the risk of unintended vascular events with potentially catastrophic outcomes. Safety of Multi-level or Bilateral Fluoroscopically-Guided Cervical Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections -- Safe performance of a CTFESI procedure requires the ability to detect inadvertent arterial injection. Contrast medium placed into the epidural space and/or along the exiting spinal nerves during an initial CTFESI may obscure the detection of inadvertent cannulation of a radiculomedullary artery by a subsequent CTFESI. While no available literature directly addresses the potential risk that exists with a multi-level or bilateral CTFESI, caution is still warranted.

Safety of cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injections

Background

In 2014 the FDA issued a drug safety warning that steroids in the epidural space may result in rare but serious neurological adverse events. The FDA identified 131 cases of neurological adverse events and most complications were related to cervical transforaminal epidural injections (TFESIs). These complications occurred before the standard use of non-particulate steroids. Many still consider cervical TFSEIs to be unsafe.

Objectives

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety of cervical TFESIs with non-particulate steroids.

Methods

A review was done of all cervical TFESIs from 2004 to 2021 at an academic institution when non-particulate steroids became more commonly used by reviewing CPT code 64479 linked to the performing physician. All treating physicians and department directors were queried about catastrophic complications (stroke, spinal cord injury, death or other). A secondary analysis was done on 200 consecutive cervical TFESIs looking at immediate and delayed side-effects documented by the nurse in recovery, day-after phone calls and clinic follow-up notes.

Results

From 2004 to 2021 the CPT code 64479 was used 6967 times, with 6241 cervical TFESIs and 726 thoracic TFESIs. No catastrophic complications occurred. In the subset analysis of 200 consecutive cervical TFESIs, 7 patients (3.5 %, 95 % CI 1.0-6.0) had a transient increase in pain, 18 (9 %, 95 % CI 5.0-13.0) had no change in pain and 171 (85.5 %, 95 % CI 80.6-90.4) had a decrease in pain. The average pain score among all participants dropped 3.7 (95 % 3.0-4.4) points. A 2-point drop was seen in 75.5 % (95 % CI 69.5-81.5) and a 3-point drop was seen in 62.5 % (95 % CI 59.1-65.9). Five of the seven patients with transient increased pain had an increase of ≥ 3 points on numerical rating scale. There was one of each of the following reported: insomnia, glucose >500, transient thumb numbness with pain, and hypertension. Two cases of headaches were reported.

Conclusion

This study supports the safety of cervical TFESIs with non-particulate steroids as recommended by consensus opinions from medical societies.

The Anatomy, Technique, Safety, and Efficacy of Image-Guided Epidural Access

Epidural steroid injections have demonstrable efficacy and safety in treatment of radicular pain syndromes; transforaminal access has greater evidence of efficacy than interlaminar approaches. The interventionalist must understand epidural and foraminal anatomy and imaging to insure delivery of medication to the target, the ventral epidural space at the site of neural compression. This obligates pre-procedural planning. When performed with appropriate risk mitigation strategies, epidural injections by either access are safe. For transforaminal access, the use of dexamethasone as the injectate, and infraneural approaches, provides safety advantages.

2. Cervical radicular pain

INTRODUCTION

Cervical radicular pain is pain perceived in the upper limb, caused by irritation or compression of a cervical spine nerve, the roots of the nerve, or both.

METHODS

The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of cervical radicular pain was retrieved and summarized.

RESULTS

The diagnosis is made by combining elements from the patient's history, physical examination, and supplementary tests. The Spurling and shoulder abduction tests are the two most common examinations used to identify cervical radicular pain. MRI without contrast, CT scanning, and in some cases plain radiography can all be appropriate imaging techniques for nontraumatic cervical radiculopathy. MRI is recommended prior to interventional treatments. Exercise with or without other treatments can be beneficial. There is scant evidence for the use of paracetamol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and neuropathic pain medications such as gabapentin, pregabalin, tricyclic antidepressants, and anticonvulsants for the treatment of radicular pain. Acute and subacute cervical radicular pain may respond well to epidural corticosteroid administration, preferentially using an interlaminar approach. By contrast, for chronic cervical radicular pain, the efficacy of epidural corticosteroid administration is limited. In these patients, pulsed radiofrequency treatment adjacent to the dorsal root ganglion may be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no gold standard for the diagnosis of cervical radicular pain. There is scant evidence for the use of medication. Epidural corticosteroid injection and pulsed radiofrequency adjacent to the dorsal root ganglion may be considered. [Correction added on 12 June 2023, after first online publication: The preceding sentence was corrected.].

American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine contrast shortage position statement

The medical field has been experiencing numerous drug shortages in recent years. The most recent shortage to impact the field of interventional pain medicine is that of iodinated contrast medium. Pain physicians must adapt to these changes while maintaining quality of care. This position statement offers guidance on adapting to the shortage.