scholarly journals Efficacy of epidural injection of steroid in treatment of lumber disc prolapse: article review

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-19
Author(s):  
Musaed hekmat AL-Dahhan

"Chronic low back and lower extremity pain is mainly caused by lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and radiculitis. Various surgery and nonsurgical modalities, including epidural injections, have been used to treat LDH or radiculitis. Caudal epidural injection of local anesthetics with or without steroids is one of the most commonly used interventions in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain. To describe the indications, rationale, techniques, alternatives, contraindications, complications, and efficacy of lumbar and caudal epidural corticosteroid injections. Interventions: Three reviewers with formal training and certification in evidence-based medicine searched the literature on non–image guided lumbar interlaminar epidural steroid injections. A larger team of seven reviewers independently assessed the methodology of studies found and appraised the quality of the evidence presented. A systematic literature search was performed, in the Medline Case reports and retrospective and prospective studies were extensively reviewed to provide detailed descriptions of the clinical features of lumbar and caudal epidural corticosteroid injections. Data sources included relevant literature of the English language identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE , and manual searches of bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Epidural corticosteroid injections are commonly requested treatments for patients with various low-back or lower-extremity pain syndromes (or both). Most of the reports on the use of this type of treatment are retrospective and noncontrolled. These studies indicate benefit; however, the prospective controlled studies provide varied results about the efficacy of lumbar and caudal epidural corticosteroid injections. In conclusions: In patients with lumbar radicular pain secondary to disc herniation or neurogenic claudication due to spinal stenosis, interlaminar epidural steroid injections appear to have clinical effectiveness limited to short-term pain relief. Therefore, in a contemporary medical practice, these procedures should be restricted to the rare settings where fluoroscopy is not available."

2010 ◽  
Vol 2;13 (1;2) ◽  
pp. E91-E110
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti

Background: Treatment of chronic low back pain with or without lower extremity pain continues to be a challenge. Epidural steroids are commonly utilized in patients after the failure of conservative treatment. The results of epidural steroid injections have been variable based on the pathophysiology, the route of administration, injected drugs, and utilization of fluoroscopy. In patients resistant to fluoroscopically directed epidural injections, percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis and percutaneous targeted delivery of injections with or without adhesiolysis has been recommended. Percutaneous adhesiolysis has been studied in chronic pain syndromes related to post laminectomy syndrome and spinal stenosis with encouraging results. There is a paucity of literature regarding the effectiveness of the targeted delivery of medications with or without epidural adhesiolysis in patients recalcitrant to epidural steroid injections without a history of surgery and spinal stenosis. Study Design: A randomized, equivalence trial of percutaneous lumbar adhesiolysis and caudal epidural steroid injections in patients with low back and/or lower extremity pain without post surgery syndrome or spinal stenosis. Setting: An interventional pain management practice setting in the United States. Objective: The study is designed to evaluate the effectiveness of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis in managing chronic low back and/or lower extremity pain in patients without post lumbar surgery syndrome or spinal stenosis and compare it with fluoroscopically directed caudal epidural steroid injections Methods: The study design includes 120 patients randomly assigned into 2 groups. Group I (60 patients), the control group, will receive caudal epidural injections with catheterization up to S3 with local anesthetic, steroids, and 0.9% sodium chloride solution; Group II (60 patients), the intervention group, will receive percutaneous adhesiolysis with target delivery of lidocaine, 10% hypertonic sodium chloride solution, and non-participate betamethasone. Randomization will be performed by computer-generated random allocation sequence by simple randomization. Outcome Measures: Multiple outcome measures will be utilized including numeric rating scale (NRS), the Oswestry Disability Index 2.0 (ODI), employment status, and opioid intake with assessment at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months post treatment. Significant pain relief is considered as 50% or more, whereas significant improvement in the disability score is defined as a reduction of 40% or more. Results: The results will be analyzed to show significant relief as well as improvement in functional status. Limitations: This study is limited by potentially inadequate double blinding and the lack of a placebo group.Conclusion: This protocol describes a comparative effectiveness evaluation of percutaneous adhesiolysis and epidural steroid injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain in patients without post surgery syndrome or spinal stenosis utilizing a randomized, equivalence trial design. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01053273 Key words: Chronic low back pain, disc herniation, post lumbar surgery syndrome, spinal stenosis, epidural steroid injections, percutaneous adhesiolysis, randomized trial, comparative effectiveness


2009 ◽  
Vol 1;12 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 233-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo M. Buenaventura

Background: Epidural injection of corticosteroids is one of the most commonly used interventions in managing chronic spinal pain. The transforaminal route to the lumbar epidural space for steroid injection has gained rapid and widespread acceptance for the treatment of lumbar and leg pain. However, there are few well-designed randomized, controlled studies to determine the effectiveness of epidural injections. The role and value of transforaminal lumbar epidural steroid injections is still questioned. Study Design: A systematic review of transforaminal epidural injection therapy for low back and lower extremity pain. Objective: To evaluate the effect of transforaminal lumbar epidural steroid injections in managing lumbar (low-back) and sciatica (leg) pain. Methods: The available literature of lumbar transforaminal epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain was reviewed. The quality assessment and clinical relevance criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and the criteria developed by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria for observational studies. The level of evidence was classified as Level I, II, or III based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Data sources included relevant literature of the English language identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to November 2008, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief = up to 6 months and long-term > 6 months). Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake. Results: The indicated evidence is Level II-1 for short-term relief and Level II-2 for long-term relief in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain. . Limitations: The limitations of this systematic review include the paucity of literature. Conclusion: The indicated evidence for transforaminal lumbar epidural steroid injections is Level II-1 for short-term relief and Level II-2 for long-term improvement in the management of lumbar nerve root and low back pain. Key words: Spinal pain, chronic low back pain, lower extremity pain, transforaminal epidural steroids, radiculopathy, sciatica, steroids, local anesthetic


2012 ◽  
Vol 3;15 (3;5) ◽  
pp. E199-E245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti

Background: Among the multiple interventions used in managing chronic spinal pain, lumbar epidural injections have been used extensively to treat lumbar radicular pain. Among caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal, transforaminal epidural injections have gained rapid and widespread acceptance for the treatment of lumbar and lower extremity pain. The potential advantages of transforaminal over interlaminar and caudal, include targeted delivery of a steroid to the site of pathology, presumably onto an inflamed nerve root. However, there are only a few well-designed, randomized, controlled studies on the effectiveness of steroid injections. Consequently, multiple systematic reviews with diverse opinions have been published. Study Design: A systematic review of therapeutic transforaminal epidural injection therapy for low back and lower extremity pain. Objective: To evaluate the effect of therapeutic transforaminal lumbar epidural steroid injections in managing low back and lower extremity pain. Methods: The available literature on lumbar transforaminal epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain was reviewed. The quality assessment and clinical relevance criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria for observational studies. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to December 2011, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. The level of evidence was classified as good, fair, or poor based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief = up to 6 months and long-term > 6 months). Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake. Results: For this systematic review, 70 studies were identified. Of these, 43 studies were excluded and a total of 27 studies met inclusion criteria for methodological quality assessment with 15 randomized trials (with 2 duplicate publications) and 10 non-randomized studies. For lumbar disc herniation, the evidence is good for transforaminal epidural with local anesthetic and steroids, whereas it was fair for local anesthetics alone and the ability of transforaminal epidural injections to prevent surgery. For spinal stenosis, the available evidence is fair for local anesthetic and steroids. The evidence for axial low back pain and post lumbar surgery syndrome is poor, inadequate, limited, or unavailable. Limitations: The limitations of this systematic review include the paucity of literature. Conclusion: In summary, the evidence is good for radiculitis secondary to disc herniation with local anesthetics and steroids and fair with local anesthetic only; it is fair for radiculitis secondary to spinal stenosis with local anesthetic and steroids; and limited for axial pain and post surgery syndrome using local anesthetic with or without steroids. Key words: Spinal pain, chronic low back pain, lower extremity pain, transforaminal epidural steroids, radiculopathy, sciatica, steroids, local anesthetic


2009 ◽  
Vol 6;12 (6;12) ◽  
pp. E355-E368
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti

Background: Speculated causes of post lumbar surgery syndrome include epidural fibrosis, acquired stenosis, and facet joint pain among other causes. Even though fluoroscopically directed caudal epidural injections and facet joint interventions are effective in some patients, others continue to suffer with chronic persistent pain. Percutaneous adhesiolysis with target delivery of medications has been demonstrated to be effective in these patients. However, the evidence for percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing post surgery syndrome has been questioned, coupled with a paucity of controlled trials. Study Design: A randomized, equivalence, controlled trial. Setting: An interventional pain management practice, a specialty referral center, a private practice setting in the United States. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis in patients with chronic low back and lower extremity pain in post surgery syndrome and compare with fluoroscopically directed caudal epidural steroid injections. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to one of 2 groups: Group I (60 patients) receiving caudal epidural injections with catheterization up to S3 with local anesthetic, steroids, and 0.9% sodium chloride solution serving as the control group, and Group II (60 patients) receiving percutaneous adhesiolysis with targeted delivery of lidocaine, 10% hypertonic sodium chloride solution, and non-particulate Betamethasone serving as the intervention group. Randomization was performed by computer-generated random allocation sequence by simple randomization. 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 months post treatment. Significant pain relief was described as 50% or more, whereas significant improvement in the disability score was defined as a reduction of 40% or more. Results: Significant pain relief (≥ 50%) and functional status improvement was recorded in 73% of patients in Group II versus 12% in Group I (P < 0.001). The average procedures per year were 3.5 with an average total relief of 42 out of 52 weeks in Group II and 2.2 procedures with total relief per year of 13 weeks in Group I (P < 0.001). Limitations: The results of this study are limited by potentially inadequate double blinding, by the lack of a placebo group, and the preliminary report of one-year follow-up. Conclusions: Percutaneous adhesiolysis in chronic function-limiting, recalcitrant low back pain in post lumbar surgery syndrome demonstrated effectiveness in 73% of the patients. Key words: Post lumbar surgery syndrome, post lumbar laminectomy syndrome, chronic low back pain, epidural adhesions, epidural steroid injections, percutaneous adhesiolysis, epidural fibrosis, spinal stenosis, randomized trial, comparative effectiveness


Author(s):  
Saket Jati ◽  
Mohammad Danish ◽  
Tanveer Sheikh ◽  
Ajay Varun

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Intervertebral disc herniation, spinal stenosis, intervertebral disc degeneration without disc herniation, and post lumbar surgery syndrome are the most common diagnoses of chronic persistent low back and lower extremity symptoms, resulting in significant economic, societal, and health care impact. Epidural injections are one of the most commonly performed interventions in managing chronic low back pain (LBP) along with surgical intervention. Cost effectiveness and affordability has become the cornerstone of evidence-based medicine, and has an influence on coverage decisions, especially in developing countries such as India. LBP is a common problem. The aim of this study was to find the therapeutic efficacy of epidural steroid injections (ESIs) in chronic LBP.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> 50 patients presenting with LBP with or without radiculopathy treated with ESIs were prospectively followed for average duration of 12 months.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Fifty patients were included in this study with average age 51.02±7.1, out of these 26 (52%) were males and 24 (48%) females. Significant pain relief (&gt;50%) was demonstrated in 43 (71%) of patients and functional status improvement was demonstrated by a reduction of 40% in Oswestry disability index (ODI) score in 49 (81%) patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions:</strong> ESIs are very effective and significantly reduce pain in patients with chronic function-limiting LBP.</p>


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-7
Author(s):  
Rupak Bhattarai ◽  
Bandana Paudel ◽  
Sangeeta Subba ◽  
Kumud Pyakurel ◽  
Bijay K. C. ◽  
...  

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.  


2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (8) ◽  
pp. 1883-1889
Author(s):  
James J. Lee ◽  
Elizabeth T. Nguyen ◽  
Julian R. Harrison ◽  
Caitlin K. Gribbin ◽  
Nicole R. Hurwitz ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document