Effect of Needle Tip Position on Contrast Media Dispersion Pattern in Transforaminal Epidural Injection Using Kambin's Triangle Approach

Pro-Con Debate: Superior Versus Inferior Triangle Needle Placement in Transforaminal Epidural Injections

Although transforaminal epidural injections have long been used for radicular pain, there is no universal standard injection approach to the neural foramen. The intervertebral foramen and its surrounding structures comprise an anatomically sensitive area that includes bone and joint structures, the intervertebral disk, blood vessels (in particular, the radicular arteries), the epidural sheath, and the spinal nerve root. Given the relatively high risk of inadvertent injury or injection to these nearby structures, image guidance for transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) is standard of care. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the optimal approach to the neural foramen: from the traditional superior ("safe") triangle or from the inferior (Kambin's) triangle. In this Pro-Con commentary article, we discuss the relative advantages and disadvantages of each approach for TFESIs.

Efficacy and Safety of the Safe Triangular Working Zone Approach in Percutaneous Vertebroplasty for Spinal Metastasis

Objective

This study aimed to assess the technical feasibility, efficacy, and safety of the safe triangular working zone (STWZ) approach applied in percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV) for spinal metastases involving the posterior part of the vertebral body.

Materials and Methods

We prospectively enrolled 87 patients who underwent PV for spinal metastasis involving the posterior part of the vertebral body, with or without the STWZ approach, from January 2019 to April 2022. Forty-nine patients (27 females and 22 males; mean age ± standard deviation [SD], 57.2 ± 11.6 years; age range, 31–76 years) were included in group A (with STWZ approach), accounting for 54 vertebrae. Thirty-eight patients (18 females and 20 males; 59.1 ± 10.9 years; 29–81 years) were included in group B (without STWZ approach), accounting for 57 vertebrae. Patient demographics, procedure-related variables, and pain relief as assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) were collected at different time points. Tumor recurrence in the vertebrae after PV was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier curves.

Results

The STWZ approach was successful from T1 to L5 without severe complications. Cement filling was satisfactory in 47/54 (87.0%) and 25/57 (43.9%) vertebrae in groups A and B, respectively (p < 0.001). Cement leakage was not significantly different between groups A and B (p = 1.000). Mean VAS score ± SD before and 1 week and 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after PV were 7.6 ± 1.8, 4.2 ± 2.0, 2.7 ± 1.9, 1.9 ± 1.5, 1.7 ± 1.4, 1.7 ± 1.1, and 1.6 ± 1.3, respectively, in group A and 7.2 ± 1.7, 4.0 ± 1.3, 3.4 ± 1.6, 2.4 ± 1.2, 1.8 ± 1.0, 1.4 ± 0.5, and 1.7 ± 0.9, respectively, in group B. Kaplan–Meier analysis showed a lower tumor recurrence rate in group A than in group B (p = 0.001).

Conclusion

The STWZ approach may represent a new, safe, alternative/auxiliary approach to target the posterior part of the vertebral body in the PV for spinal metastases.