Comparison of Efficacy between Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection Technique without Contrast versus with Contrast in Lumbar Radiculopathy: A Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study.

IF 2.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Asian Spine Journal Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-10 DOI:10.31616/asj.2023.0007
Waroot Pholsawatchai, Park Manakul, Warisara Lertcheewanan, Koopong Siribumrungwoung, Thongchai Suntharapa, Rattalerk Arunakul
{"title":"Comparison of Efficacy between Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection Technique without Contrast versus with Contrast in Lumbar Radiculopathy: A Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study.","authors":"Waroot Pholsawatchai, Park Manakul, Warisara Lertcheewanan, Koopong Siribumrungwoung, Thongchai Suntharapa, Rattalerk Arunakul","doi":"10.31616/asj.2023.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>A prospective longitudinal cohort study.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy of two different techniques of transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) with contrast and without contrast in treating lumbar radiculopathy.</p><p><strong>Overview of literature: </strong>Epidural injections are one of the most frequently used nonsurgical treatment options for managing lumbar radiculopathy. This study aims to simplify the TFESI technique, which is effective and requires less effort to replicate.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We collected data on 118 patients who underwent TFESI without contrast versus TFESI with contrast for lumbar radiculopathy. The pain was evaluated using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain at 5 minutes, 2 hours, 2 weeks, and 2 months. The functional status was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. The operation time and fluoroscopic dosage were also measured using this score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two groups of patients with radiculopathy were studied, comprising of 56 patients in the non-contrast group (NC group) and 62 patients in the contrast group (C group). There was a significant decrease in pain, as evaluated by NRS, in the C group compared to the NC group at 5 minutes post-procedure (3.39±1.54 vs. 3.86±0.72, with a p-value of 0.039). There was no significant difference in NRS scores at 2 hours, 2 weeks, and 2 months, as well as in ODI scores. The operation time and fluoroscopic dosage were lower in the group without contrast compared to the contrast group, with 12.58±3.30 minutes per level vs. 16.70±5.94 minutes per level (p <0.001) and 3.62±1.66 mGy vs. 5.32±2.74 mGy per level (p =0.014), respectively. No complications were reported in either group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is no difference in pain and functional outcome when treating lumbar radiculopathy with or without contrast using TFESI. The TFESI without contract technique has a shorter operation time and lower intra-operative fluoroscopic dosage without complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":8555,"journal":{"name":"Asian Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"1108-1116"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10764127/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2023.0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: A prospective longitudinal cohort study.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of two different techniques of transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) with contrast and without contrast in treating lumbar radiculopathy.

Overview of literature: Epidural injections are one of the most frequently used nonsurgical treatment options for managing lumbar radiculopathy. This study aims to simplify the TFESI technique, which is effective and requires less effort to replicate.

Methods: We collected data on 118 patients who underwent TFESI without contrast versus TFESI with contrast for lumbar radiculopathy. The pain was evaluated using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) for pain at 5 minutes, 2 hours, 2 weeks, and 2 months. The functional status was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. The operation time and fluoroscopic dosage were also measured using this score.

Results: Two groups of patients with radiculopathy were studied, comprising of 56 patients in the non-contrast group (NC group) and 62 patients in the contrast group (C group). There was a significant decrease in pain, as evaluated by NRS, in the C group compared to the NC group at 5 minutes post-procedure (3.39±1.54 vs. 3.86±0.72, with a p-value of 0.039). There was no significant difference in NRS scores at 2 hours, 2 weeks, and 2 months, as well as in ODI scores. The operation time and fluoroscopic dosage were lower in the group without contrast compared to the contrast group, with 12.58±3.30 minutes per level vs. 16.70±5.94 minutes per level (p <0.001) and 3.62±1.66 mGy vs. 5.32±2.74 mGy per level (p =0.014), respectively. No complications were reported in either group.

Conclusions: There is no difference in pain and functional outcome when treating lumbar radiculopathy with or without contrast using TFESI. The TFESI without contract technique has a shorter operation time and lower intra-operative fluoroscopic dosage without complications.

无造影剂和有造影剂经孔硬膜外类固醇注射技术治疗腰椎根管疾病的疗效比较:一项前瞻性纵向队列研究。
研究设计:前瞻性纵向队列研究。目的:评价经椎间孔硬膜外类固醇注射(TFESI)加对比剂和不加对比剂两种不同技术治疗腰神经根病的疗效。文献综述:硬膜外注射是治疗腰神经根病最常用的非手术治疗方法之一。本研究旨在简化TFESI技术,该技术是有效的,并且需要较少的复制工作。方法:我们收集了118例因腰椎神经根病接受无对比剂TFESI和有对比剂TFESI的患者的数据。使用数值评定量表(NRS)对5分钟、2小时、2周和2个月的疼痛进行评估。使用Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)评分评估功能状态。手术时间和荧光剂量也使用该评分进行测量。结果:研究了两组神经根病患者,其中非对照组(NC组)56例,对照组(C组)62例。通过NRS评估,与NC组相比,C组在手术后5分钟的疼痛明显减轻(3.39±1.54 vs.3.86±0.72,p值为0.039)。2小时、2周和2个月的NRS评分以及ODI评分没有显著差异。与对照组相比,无对照组的手术时间和荧光剂量较低,每级12.58±3.30分钟,而每级16.70±5.94分钟。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Asian Spine Journal
Asian Spine Journal ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
108
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信