» Articles » PMID: 18227326

A Prospective Evaluation of Iodinated Contrast Flow Patterns with Fluoroscopically Guided Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injections: the Lateral Parasagittal Interlaminar Epidural Approach Versus the Transforaminal Epidural Approach

Overview
Journal Anesth Analg
Specialty Anesthesiology
Date 2008 Jan 30
PMID 18227326
Citations 31
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Lumbar midline interlaminar and transforaminal (TF) epidural steroid injections are treatments for low back pain with radiculopathy secondary to degenerative disk disease. Since pain generators are located anteriorly in the epidural space, ventral epidural spread is the logical target for placement of antiinflammatory medications. In this randomized, prospective, observational study, we compared contrast flow patterns in the epidural space using the parasagittal interlaminar (PIL) and transforaminal approaches with continual fluoroscopic guidance.

Methods: Sixty adult patients with low back pain and unilateral radiculopathy from herniated or degenerated discs were enrolled. Subjects were randomly assigned to one of two groups: TF or PIL (30 in each). All procedures were performed using continual fluoroscopic guidance and 5 mL of contrast. Contrast spread was rated (primary outcome measure) by the interventionalist. Spread was scored 0-2, with 0 = no anterior spread; 1 = anterior spread, same level as needle insertion; and 2 = anterior spread at > or = 1 segmental level. The secondary outcome measure was analgesia at 2 wk, 1, 3, and 6 mo.

Results: One hundred percent (29 of 29) patients in the PIL group and 75% (21 of 28) patients in the TF group demonstrated anterior epidural spread. The mean spread grade was 1.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.83-2.0) in the PIL group and 1.46 (95% CI, 1.17-1.46) in the TF group (P = 0.003). Mean fluoroscopy time was 28.96 s (95% CI, 23.9-34.1 s) in the PIL group and 46.25 s (95% CI, 36.27-56.23 s) in the TF group (P = 0.003). Visual analog scale scores were equivalent between groups.

Conclusions: The PIL approach is superior to the TF approach for placing contrast into the anterior epidural space with reduction in fluoroscopy times and an improved spread grade. With increasing attention to neurological injury associated with TF, the PIL approach may be more suitable for routine use.

Citing Articles

A proposed nomenclature for spinal imaging and interventional procedural reporting.

Gill J, Cohen S, Simopoulos T, Furman M, Hayek S, Van Boxem K Interv Pain Med. 2024; 1(1):100082.

PMID: 39238819 PMC: 11372886. DOI: 10.1016/j.inpm.2022.100082.


Parasagittal Interlaminar and Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections for Radicular Low Back Pain; Which is More Comfortable?.

Perdecioglu G, Yildiz G, Akkaya O, Can E, Yuruk D Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2023; 51(6):504-509.

PMID: 38149369 PMC: 10758666. DOI: 10.4274/TJAR.2023.231470.


Transforaminal versus interlaminar CT-guided lumbar epidural steroid injections: prospective study of 237 patients with unilateral radicular pain and up to 5 years of follow-up.

Bise S, Langlet B, Pesquer L, Poussange N, Silvestre A, Dallaudiere B Skeletal Radiol. 2023; 52(10):1959-1967.

PMID: 36729210 DOI: 10.1007/s00256-023-04290-y.


Parasagittal Approach of Epidural Steroid Injection as a Treatment for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Knezevic N, Paredes S, Cantillo S, Hamid A, Candido K Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2022; 2:676730.

PMID: 35295439 PMC: 8915709. DOI: 10.3389/fpain.2021.676730.


Comparison of the Oblique Interlaminar and Transforaminal Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injections for Treatment of Low Back and Lumbosacral Radicular Pain.

Choi E, Park S, Yoo Y, Yoon J, Shin S, Byeon G J Pain Res. 2021; 14:407-414.

PMID: 33623423 PMC: 7894795. DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S293166.