• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.192-198
• /
• 2020

Background: Previous studies have shown varying results between lumbosacral transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) performed with particulate versus non-particulate corticosteroids. The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference in pain relief and functional improvement between particulate and nonparticulate lumbosacral TFESIs in patients who had undergone both injections, sequentially. Methods: This was a self-controlled, retrospective study of 20 patients who underwent both a methylprednisolone and a dexamethasone TFESI to the same vertebral level and side. Primary outcomes included pain relief according to the visual analogue scale (VAS) and functional improvement determined by a yes/no answer to questions regarding mobility and the activities of daily living. Post-injection data was recorded at 2, 3, and 6 months. Results: A decrease in VAS scores of -3.4 ± 3.0 (mean ± standard deviation), -3.1 ± 3.1, and -2.8 ± 3.4 was seen for the methylprednisolone group at 2, 3, and 6 months, respectively. Similar decreases of -3.9 ± 3.5, -3.4 ± 2.8, and -2.3 ± 3.4 were seen in the dexamethasone group. There was no significant difference in pain relief at any point between the two medications. The percentage of subjects who reported improved function at 2, 3, and 6 months was 65%, 51%, and 41%, respectively, for the methylprednisolone group and 75%, 53%, and 42% for the dexamethasone group. Conclusions: These findings support the use of non-particulate corticosteroids for lumbosacral TFESIs in the context of documented safety concerns with particulate corticosteroids.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.151-157
• /
• 2009

Background: We hypothesized that if a fluoroscopic image of the lumbar sympathetic ganglion block (LSGB) showed the spread patterns of contrast at both the L2/3 and L4/5 disc areas, then this would demonstrate a more profound blockade effect because the spread patterns are close to sympathetic ganglia. In addition, we compared the effects of LSGB and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) for the patients suffering with spinal stenosis. Methods: Eighty patients were divided into two groups (Group S: the patients treated with TFESI, Group L: the patients treated with LSGB). The patients of group L were classified into three groups (groups A, B and, C) according to their contrast spread pattern. The preblock and postblock temperature difference between the ipsilateral and contralateral great toe ($DT^{pre}$, $DT^{post}$, $^{\circ}C$), and the DTnet were calculated as follows. $DT^{net}$ = $DT^{post}$ - $DT^{pre}$. Results: Both group showed a significant reduction of the visual analogue score (VAS) and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) score. Only the patients of group L showed a significant increase of their walking distance (WD). Group A showed the most significant changes in the $DT^{post}$ ($6.1{\pm}1.2^{\circ}C$, P = 0.021), and the DTnet ($6.0{\pm}1.0^{\circ}C$, p = 0.023), as compared to group C. Conclusions: LSGB showed a similar effect on the VAS, and ODI, and a significant effect, on WD, compared with TFESI. Group A showed a significant sympatholytic effect, as compared to group C.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.52 no.3
• /
• pp.228-233
• /
• 2012

Objective : Chronic neck or back pain can be managed with various procedures. Although these procedures are usually well-tolerated, a variety of side effects have been reported. In this study we reviewed cases of unexpected temporary adverse events after blocks and suggest possible causes. Methods : We reviewed the records of patients treated with spinal pain blocks between December 2009 and January 2011. The types of blocks performed were medial branch blocks, interlaminar epidural blocks and transforaminal epidural blocks. During the first eight months of the study period (Group A), 2% mepivacaine HCL and triamcinolone was used, and during the last six months of the study period (Group B), mepivacaine was diluted to 1% with normal saline. Results : There were 704 procedures in 613 patients. Ten patients had 12 transient neurologic events. Nine patients were in Group A and one was in Group B. Transient complications occurred in four patients after cervical block and in eight patients after lumbar block. Side effects of lumbar spine blocks were associated with the concentration of mepivacaine (p<0.05). The likely causes were a high concentration of mepivacaine in five patients, inadvertent vascular injection in three patients, intrathecal leak of local anesthetics in one, and underlying conversion disorder in one. Conclusion : Spinal pain blocks are a good option for relieving pain, but clinicians should always keep in mind the potential for development of inevitable complications. Careful history-taking, appropriate selection of the anesthetics, and using real-time fluoroscopy could help reduce the occurrence of adverse events.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.35 no.4
• /
• pp.403-412
• /
• 2022

Background: Most pain management techniques for challenging procedures are still performed under the guidance of the C-arm fluoroscope although it is sometimes difficult for even experienced clinicians to understand the modified three-dimensional anatomy as a two-dimensional X-ray image. To overcome these difficulties, the development of a virtual simulator may be helpful. Therefore, in this study, the authors developed a virtual simulator and presented its clinical application cases. Methods: We developed a computer program to simulate the actual environment of the procedure. Computed tomography (CT) Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data were used for the simulations. Virtual needle placement was simulated at the most appropriate position for a successful block. Using a virtual C-arm, the authors searched for the position of the C-arm at which the needle was visualized as a point. The positional relationships between the anatomy of the patient and the needle were identified. Results: For the simulations, the CT DICOM data of patients who visited the outpatient clinic was used. When the patients revisited the clinic, images similar to the simulated images were obtained by manipulating the C-arm. Transforaminal epidural injection, which was difficult to perform due to severe spinal deformity, and the challenging procedures of the superior hypogastric plexus block and Gasserian ganglion block, were successfully performed with the help of the simulation. Conclusions: We created a pre-procedural virtual simulation and demonstrated its successful application in patients who are expected to undergo challenging procedures.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.51-56
• /
• 2013

Background: The C-arm fluoroscope is an essential tool for the intervention of pain. The aim of this study was to investigate the radiation exposure experienced by the hand and chest of pain physicians during C-arm fluoroscopy-guided procedures. Methods: This is a prospective study about radiation exposure to physicians during transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) and medial branch block (MBB). Four pain physicians were involved in this study. Data about effective dose (ED) at each physician's right hand and left side of the chest, exposure time, radiation absorbed dose (RAD), and the distance from the center of the X-ray field to the physician during X-ray scanning were collected. Results: Three hundred and fifteen cases were included for this study. Demographic data showed no significant differences among the physicians in the TFESIs and MBBs. In the TFESI group, there was a significant difference between the ED at the hand and chest in all the physicians. In physician A, B and C, the ED at the chest was more than the ED at the hand. The distance from the center of the X-ray field to physician A was more than that of the other physicians, and for the exposure time, the ED and RAD in physician A was less than that of the other physicians. In the MBB group, there was no difference in the ED at the hand and chest, except for physician D. The distance from the center of the X-ray field to physician A was more than that of the other physicians and the exposure time in physician A was less than that of the other physicians. Conclusions: In conclusion, the distance from the radiation source, position of the hand, experience and technique can correlate with the radiation dose.