Key safety considerations when administering epidural steroid injections

Correlation between epidural space depth measured with ultrasound and MRI compared to clinical loss of resistance when performing lumbar epidural steroid injection

BACKGROUND

This prospective study assessed the accuracy of MRI and ultrasound (US) measurements as a preprocedural assessment tool for predicting clinical loss of resistance depth (CLORD) during fluoroscopy-guided lumbar epidural steroid injections (ESIs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty patients enrolled received lumbar ESIs at an academic chronic pain clinic. The MRI measurement calculated the distance between the skin and the posterior epidural space, while US measurements included transverse and parasagittal oblique views of the interlaminar space. The epidural space measurements were compared with the CLORD during the performance of the prone epidural injections. The differences in measurements were analyzed using two one-sided tests for equivalency with a 0.5 equivalency margin. The intraclass correlation coefficients between CLORD and the imaging modalities were estimated using mixed effects models.

RESULTS

MRI was equivalent to CLORD with a mean difference of -0.2 cm (95% CI -0.39 to -0.11). US transverse and US parasagittal oblique measurements were not equivalent to and underestimated CLORD with mean differences of -0.98 cm (90% CI -1.8 to -0.77) and -0.79 cm (90% CI -1.0 to -5.9), respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficients between MRI and CLORD were the highest at 0.85, compared with 0.65 and 0.73 for transverse and parasagittal oblique US views, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

MRI measurements are preferable over US for preprocedural assessment of patients receiving lumbar ESIs for predicting CLORD.

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.

[Injection treatment for cervical and lumbar syndromes : Special infiltration techniques]

Minimally invasive injection treatment is indicated particularly in cases of treatment-resistant, painful degenerative alterations of the cervical and lumbar spine, intervertebral disc displacement and radicular syndrome. Through the injections and the supplementation with further conservative, e.g., physical therapy and activating measures, the vicious circle of neural irritation and muscle tension and sympathetic nerve reactions can be interrupted.

[Injection treatment for cervical and lumbar syndromes: principles, indications and general performance]

An intensive conservative treatment that exhausts all treatment options should fundamentally be carried out before every surgical intervention in the region of the spinal column. The therapeutic measures are determined by the extent of the cervical or lumbar syndrome. As a rule, in cases of local complaints symptomatic measures with physiotherapy or digital healthcare applications are indicated. In cases of referred cervical and lumbar syndromes targeted injections can be employed. Before targeted injection treatment a detailed orthopedic clarification with respect to the intensity of local, radicular or pseudoradicular complaints must be carried out. When carrying out minimally invasive injection treatment specific prerequisites with respect to spatial, personnel and technical conditions must be fulfilled. The indications and contraindications must be strictly controlled.

An update on epidural steroid injections: is there still a role for particulate corticosteroids?

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) play an important role in the multifaceted management of neck and back pain. Corticosteroid preparations used in ESIs may be considered "particulate" or "non-particulate" based on whether they form a crystalline suspension or a soluble clear solution, respectively. In the past two decades, there have been reports of rare but severe and permanent neurological complications as a result of ESI. These complications have principally occurred with particulate corticosteroid preparations when using a transforaminal injection technique at cervical or thoracic levels, and only rarely in the lumbosacral spine. As a result, some published clinical guidelines and recommendations have advised against the use of particulate corticosteroids for transforaminal ESI, and the FDA introduced a warning label for injectable corticosteroids regarding the risk of serious neurological adverse events. There is growing evidence that the efficacy of non-particulate corticosteroids for pain relief and functional improvement after ESI is non-inferior to particulate agents, and that non-particulate injections almost never result in permanent neurological injury. Despite this, particulate corticosteroids continue to be routinely used for transforaminal epidural injections. More consistent clinical guidelines and societal recommendations are required alongside increased awareness of the comparative efficacy of non-particulate agents among specialists who perform ESIs. The current role for particulate corticosteroids in ESIs should be limited to caudal and interlaminar approaches, or transforaminal injections in the lumbar spine only if initial non-particulate ESI resulted in a significant but short-lived improvement.

Interventional Pain Procedures: A Narrative Review Focusing on Safety and Complications. Part 1 Injections for Spinal Pain

In recent years, there has been a considerable increase in the number of image-guided interventional procedures performed for the management of acute and chronic pain. Concomitantly, there has also been an increase in the complication rate related to these procedures. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the primary complications associated with commonly performed image-guided (fluoroscopic- or ultrasound-guided) interventional procedures. We conclude that although complications from interventional pain procedures can be mitigated to a certain degree, they cannot be eliminated altogether. In order to avoid adverse events, patient safety should be given considerable attention and physicians should be constantly aware of the possibility of developing complications.

Moderate and deep procedural sedation-the role of proper monitoring and safe techniques in clinical practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Interventional pain management procedures provide significant improvement to patient quality of life and functionality. In-office procedures are becoming an increasingly more common site of pain management intervention for patients with minimal risk of harm.

RECENT FINDINGS

Moderate and deep sedation techniques can be used in patients with high anxiety, complex pharmacotherapy, or a low pain threshold. Proper guidance and oversight by an attending anesthesiologist, in addition to appropriate monitoring, are key. Epidural steroid injection complications rates have been cited at 2.4%, with the most common complications noted as persistent pain and flushing.

SUMMARY

Serious complication errors can be avoided with proper supervision and monitoring. The adherence to published societal recommendations and guidelines for indications of when to use moderate to deep sedation techniques, and appropriate supervision and monitoring methods, can avoid errors in interventional pain management procedures.

Confluent abscesses in autochthonous back muscles after spinal injections : A case report and narrative review of the literature on low back pain and spinal injections

Injection therapy is a frequently used method for the treatment of subacute and chronic low back pain (LBP) despite scant evidence for its effectiveness. To date there are relatively few studies comparing this method with other treatments. Moreover, there are many possible side effects associated with injection therapies, some of which are potentially life threatening. We present the case of a 59-year-old woman admitted to the emergency department with confluent abscess formations of autochthonous back muscles and staphylococcal sepsis caused by injection therapy performed by a general practitioner for LBP. The findings of this case report emphasize a careful selection of patients for this type of treatment and a multidisciplinary approach to treatment of LBP.

[Application of image-guided injection for cervical and lumbar syndromes]

The X‑ray image-guided injection methods are an important tool for the treatment of cervical and lumbar pain syndromes. For the application of these methods it is necessary to have a differentiated consideration of cervical and lumbar pain syndromes. This leads to a decoding of complaints to assignable pain generators, which enables a targeted injection method. Depending on the origin of pain, injections are placed at the nerve root or the joints. Thus, the vicious cycle of pain can be stopped. A correct technical procedure is of enormous importance. Particular attention must be paid to the pharmacological effects and special complications. A monitoring and precautionary measures are mandatory.

Adhesive arachnoiditis following lumbar epidural steroid injections: a report of two cases and review of the literature

Lumbar epidural steroid injections (LESIs) are commonly used for managing lower back pain (LBP) and radicular pain. LESIs are generally considered safe with only rare serious complication. One very rare complication that is frequently cited in the literature is adhesive arachnoiditis. However, a literature search failed to detect even one published manuscript, clearly documenting LESI induced arachnoiditis. This article presents two patients who received a transforaminal L5–S1 and two L3–L4 interlaminar LESIs. Although the presented patients developed clear radiological (MRI) findings of arachnoiditis, they were not accompanied by any improvement or deterioration in their clinical condition. The article also reviews the literature on the prevalence, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and clinical features of adhesive arachnoiditis. Literature suggests that adhesive arachnoiditis following LESIs is a rare entity, which – as seen in our patients – has clear radiological characteristics but uncertain pathogenesis. It has a large spectrum of clinical presentation, ranging from an incidental finding to a serious neurological sequela. In at least some patients with adhesive arachnoiditis following LESI, the radiological and clinical findings may fail to correlate with each other. In light of the fact that LESI is one of the most commonly performed procedures for managing LBP, clinicians should be aware of this rare yet existing entity.

Steroids Spinal Injections

Spinal pain is a common condition leading to significant disability and high cost. Spinal injections have been demonstrated to be effective short-term treatments with cost-utility superior to numerous other treatments, including surgical procedures. Appropriate patient selection-based on clinical and imaging finding-and the use of image guidance associated with technical precautions improve the safety and effectiveness of spinal injection and overall patient outcomes.

Therapeutic lumbar facet joint nerve blocks in the treatment of chronic low back pain: cost utility analysis based on a randomized controlled trial

Background

Related to escalating health care costs and the questionable effectiveness of multiple interventions including lumbar facet joint interventions, cost effectiveness or cost utility analysis has become the cornerstone of evidence-based medicine influencing coverage decisions.

Methods

Cost utility of therapeutic lumbar facet joint nerve blocks in managing chronic low back pain was performed utilizing data from a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial with a 2-year follow-up, with direct payment data from 2016. Based on the data from surgical interventions, utilizing the lowest proportion of direct procedural costs of 60%, total cost utility per quality adjusted life year (QALY) was determined by multiplying the derived direct cost at 1.67.

Results

Patients in this trial on average received 5.6 ± 2.6 procedures over a period of 2 years, with average relief over a period of 2 years of 82.8 ± 29.6 weeks with 19 ± 18.77 weeks of improvement per procedure. Procedural cost for one-year improvement in quality of life showed USD $2,654.08. Estimated total costs, including indirect costs and drugs with multiplication of direct costs at 1.67, showed a cost of USD $4,432 per QALY.

Conclusions

The analysis of therapeutic lumbar facet joint nerve blocks in the treatment of chronic low back pain shows clinical effectiveness and cost utility at USD $2,654.08 for the direct costs of the procedures, and USD $4,432 for the estimated overall cost per one year of QALY, in chronic persistent low back pain non-responsive to conservative management.

Epidural interlaminar injections in severe degenerative lumbar spine: fluoroscopy should not be a luxury

Objective

To assess technical efficacy, accuracy, and safety of epidural (interlaminar) injections performed blindly in patients with a severely degenerated lumbar spine.

Methods

Over 12 consecutive months, 138 patients with a severe degenerative lumbar spine underwent epidural (interlaminar) injection as therapy for low back pain and neuralgia. Patients had already undergone a blind epidural infiltration with minimum or no pain reduction. The session was repeated in the angiography suite. Patients were placed in the lateral decubitus position. The injection was performed without image guidance by an anaesthesiologist; the target level was defined before the beginning of the procedure. Once air resistance loss was felt it was presumed that the needle was inside the epidural space. Verification of needle position was performed by injection of 1–3 mL of iodinated contrast medium under fluoroscopy in a lateral projection.

Results

Correct needle position inside the epidural space was documented in 82/138 cases (59.4%); unexpected extraepidural location was seen in 56/138 cases (40.6%). Target level was reached in 96/138 cases (69.6%); in 42/138 cases (30.4%) the needle was positioned in a non-target level. In 5/138 (3.6%) cases, there was inadvertent intradural position of the needle. Image guidance was subsequently used for correct positioning of the needle, which was feasible in all cases.

Conclusion

Blind interlaminar epidural injections lack the accuracy of exact needle location that imaging guidance offers in approximately 40% of cases, when there is difficult spine anatomy and the initial epidural approach has failed to provide pain relief. Image guidance for interlaminar epidural injection ensures accurate needle placement, enhancing the safety and efficacy of the procedure.

Particulate versus non-particulate corticosteroids for transforaminal nerve root blocks: Comparison of outcomes in 494 patients with lumbar radiculopathy

PURPOSE

We set out to compare outcomes in CT-guided lumbar transforaminal nerve root block patients receiving either particulate or non-particulate corticosteroids.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective comparative effectiveness outcomes study on two cohorts of lumbar radiculopathy patients. 321 received particulate and 173 non-particulate corticosteroids at CT-guided transforaminal lumbar nerve root injections. The particulate steroid was used from October 2009 until May 2014 and the non-particulate steroid was used from May 2014. Pain levels were collected at baseline using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) and at 1 day, 1 week and 1 month. Overall 'improvement' was assessed using the Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at these same time points (primary outcome). The proportions of patients 'improved' were compared between the two groups using the Chi-square test. The NRS change scores were compared using the unpaired t-test.

RESULTS

A significantly higher proportion of patients treated with particulate steroids were improved at 1 week (43.2 % vs. 27.7 %, p = 0.001) and at 1 month (44.3 % vs. 33.1 %, p = 0.019). Patients receiving particulate steroids also had significantly higher NRS change scores at 1 week (p = 0.02) and 1 month (p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Particulate corticosteroids have significantly better outcomes than non-particulate corticosteroids.

KEY POINTS

• Better pain relief is achieved with particulate steroids. • Significantly more patients report overall 'improvement' with particulate steroids. • Significantly more patients report 'worsening' at 1 week with non-particulate steroids.

[Injection therapy for cervical and lumbar syndromes]

In cervical and lumbar pain syndromes special injections are key for effective pain therapy. Depending on the origin of pain injections are placed at the nerve root or the joints. Thus, the vicious cycle can be stopped. A correct technical procedure is of enormous importance. Because pharmacological effects and special complications are possible, monitoring and precautions are mandatory.

Assessing the Agreement Between Radiologic and Clinical Measurements of Lumbar and Cervical Epidural Depths in Patients Undergoing Prone Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injection

BACKGROUND

Fluoroscopy-guided epidural steroid injection (ESI) commonly is performed to treat radicular pain yet can lead to adverse events if the needle is not advanced with precision. Accurate preoperative assessment of the distance from the skin to the epidural space holds the potential for reducing the risks of adverse effects from ESI. It was hypothesized that the distance from the skin to the epidural space as measured on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) would agree with the distance traveled by a Tuohy needle to reach the epidural space during midline, interlaminar ESI. This study compared the final needle depth measurement at the point of loss of resistance (LOR) from cervical or lumbar ESI to the distance from the skin to the anterior and posterior borders of the epidural space on the associated cervical and lumbar preoperative MRI.

METHODS

This retrospective chart review analyzed the procedure notes, MRI, and demographic data of patients who received a prone, interlaminar ESI at an outpatient chronic pain clinic between June 1, 2013, and June 1, 2015. The following data were collected: body mass index (BMI), age, sex, intervertebral level of the ESI, and LOR depth. We then measured the distance from the skin surface to the anterior border of the ligamentum flavum (ligamentum flavum depth [LFD]) and dura (dura depth [DD]) on MRI. A total of 335 patients were categorized into the following patient subgroups: age ≥65 years, age <65 years, BMI ≥30 kg/m (obese), BMI <30 kg/m (nonobese), male, and female. Secondary analyses were then performed to compare the agreement between LOR depth and DD with that between LOR depth and LFD within each patient subgroup. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plot were used to assess the agreement between DD or LFD and LOR depth.

RESULTS

Data from 335 ESIs were analyzed, including 147 cervical ESIs and 188 lumbar ESIs. Estimated ICC values for the agreement between LOR depth and LFD for all lumbar and cervical measurements were 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-0.91) and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.64-0.79), respectively. Estimated ICC values for the agreement between LOR depth and DD for all lumbar and cervical measurements were 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82-0.89) and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.60-0.77), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study assessed the agreement between MRI-derived measurements of epidural depth and those determined clinically. MRI-derived measurements from the skin to the anterior border of the ligamentum flavum, which represents the most posterior aspect of the epidural space, revealed stronger agreement with LOR depths than did measurements to the dura or the most anterior aspect of the epidural space. These results require further analysis and refinement before supporting clinical application.

Cervical epidural puncture guided by fluoroscopy in comparison to acoustic signals: Clinical results

Background and Aim:

The increasing cases of the cervical epidural but the practitioners in need for a new method to decrease the safety of the injection and to improve the learning curve of the trainee. Furthermore, it should replace the potentially hazards, conventional one, which is the fluoroscope. Acoustic signals were tested for this purpose.

Methods:

Thirty-two patients were assigned to have a cervical epidural for pain management using both acoustic signals and fluoroscopy simultaneously.

Results:

The incidence of success was 100% with no complications. Likewise, the decrease in fluoroscopy shots number was 70%.

Conclusions:

Acoustic signals are a simple, effective method of cervical epidural insertion. It reduces the usage of fluoroscopy and can be used as a learning tool.

Delayed onset paraparesis complicating epidural steroid injection with underlying spinal dural arteriovenous fistula

We report a case of a 48-year-old man with chronic back pain attributed to discogenic lumbar radiculopathy who underwent a fluoroscopy-guided L2-3 interlaminar epidural steroid injection. 4 h later, he developed acute paraparesis, sensory loss below T10 level and urinary retention. MRI of the thoracic spine revealed diffuse abnormal T2/FLAIR signal and extensive vascular flow voids. A spinal dural arteriovenous fistula was confirmed on spinal angiography. Embolization of the spinal dural arteriovenous fistula resulted in significant improvement of symptoms. We review previously reported cases and current understanding of the pathophysiology of this complication. All cases had symptom onset several hours after the procedure. There seems to be a trend toward better outcomes with earlier treatment.