• Ge Yang, Jinfeng Liu, Liangjuan Ma, Zhenhua Cai, Chao Meng, Sihua Qi, and Huacheng Zhou.
• *Department of Anesthesiology, The Fourth Affiliated Hospital, Harbin Medical University Departments of †Anesthesiology §Dermatology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China ‡The Hei Long Jiang Province Key Lab of Research on Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Harbin, China.
• Clin J Pain. 2016 Feb 1; 32 (2): 103-8.

ObjectivesRecently, most lumbar spine injections have been administered under ultrasound (US) guidance; however, there is no standard method for US-guided lumbar transforaminal epidural injection (TFEI). In this study, we evaluated the accuracy, effect on pain relief, and safety of US-guided lumbar TFEI.MethodsA total of 80 patients with low back pain and radicular pain were enrolled. The patients were randomly assigned to either the fluoroscopy (FL) group or the US group. The FL-guided approaches were performed under standardized procedures using the C-arm, whereas the US-guided injections were performed with an US device with a linear probe, and were verified by FL. The needle tip reached the lateral side of the lamina in the axis view and the middle of the adjacent facet joints in the parasagittal view. Afterward, the needle was advanced slightly deeper until the loss-of-resistance test was positive.ResultsThe success ratio of the US-guided interventions was 85%. The operation time in the US group (518±103 s) was shorter than the FL group (929±228 s) (P<0.05). In addition, the radiation dosage in the US group (2640±906 μGy m²) was lower than in the FL group (8992±2132 μGy m²). There was no significant difference in pain relief between the US and FL groups. No serious complication was observed in any of the patients in either group.DiscussionLumbar TFEI under US guidance was feasible, safe, and required less radiation to achieve the same benefit as the FL-guided interventions.

35 keywords...

hide…