Persistent air leak treated by autologous blood patch pleurodesis: the role of CT-guided small-bore chest tube insertion.

Autologous blood patch pleurodesis (ABPP) offers an alternative to surgery when conservative management is ineffective for treating a persistent air leak (PAL). In the traditional technique, autologous venous blood is introduced into the affected pleural cavity via a blindly inserted large-bore surgical chest tube. Herein, we present a case of an 18 year old male with a PAL following video assisted thorascopic bleb resection and talc pleurodesis who underwent successful ABPP using a small-bore pigtail catheter placed under computed tomography (CT) guidance. As compared to the traditional technique, this approach may potentially offer several advantages, such as more precise chest tube placement over the air leak site and reduced pain with chest tube insertion. Although image-guided chest tube insertion is a commonly performed procedure, its use for the specific indication in this patient's case has not been described in the literature, to the best of our knowledge.

Ultrasound-guided trigger point injections in the cervicothoracic musculature: a new and unreported technique.

BACKGROUND: Myofascial pain is defined as pain that originates from myofascial trigger points in skeletal muscle. It is prevalent in regional musculoskeletal pain syndromes, either alone or in combination with other pain generators. The myofascial pain syndrome is one of the largest groups of under diagnosed and under treated medical problems encountered in clinical practice. Trigger points are commonly seen in patients with myofascial pain which is responsible for localized pain in the affected muscles as well as referred pain patterns. Correct needle placement in a myofascial trigger point is vital to prevent complications and improve efficacy of the trigger point injection to help reduce or relieve myofascial pain. In obese patients, these injections may not reach the target tissue. In the cervicothoracic spine, a misguided or misplaced injection can result in a pneumothorax. Here, we describe an ultrasound-guided trigger point injection technique to avoid this potential pitfall. Office based ultrasound-guided injection techniques for musculoskeletal disorders have been described in the literature with regard to tendon, bursa, cystic, and joint pathologies. For the interventionalist, utilizing ultrasound yields multiple advantages technically and practically, including observation of needle placement in real-time, ability to perform dynamic studies, the possibility of diagnosing musculoskeletal pathologies, avoidance of radiation exposure, reduced overall cost, and portability of equipment within the office setting. To our knowledge, the use of ultrasound guidance in performing trigger point injection in the cervicothoracic area, particularly in obese patients, has not been previously reported. METHODS: A palpable trigger point in the cervicothoracic musculature was localized and marked by indenting the skin with the tip of a plastic needle cover. The skin was then sterile prepped. Then, using an ultrasound machine with sterile coupling gel and a sterile latex free transducer cover, the musculature in the cervicothoracic spine where the palpable trigger point was detected was visualized. Then utilizing direct live ultrasound guidance, a 25-gauge 1.5 inch needle connected to a 3 mL syringe was placed into the muscle at the exact location of the presumed trigger point. This guidance helps confirm needle placement in muscle tissue and not in an adipose tissue or any other non-musculature structure. RESULTS: The technique is simple to be performed by a pain management specialist who has ultrasound system training. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound-guided trigger point injections may help confirm proper needle placement within the cervicothoracic musculature. The use of ultrasound-guided trigger point injections in the cervicothoracic musculature may also reduce the potential for a pneumothorax by an improperly placed injection.

Electromyographically guided trigger point injections in the cervicothoracic musculature of obese patients: a new and unreported technique.

BACKGROUND: Myofascial pain is defined as pain that originates from myofascial trigger points in skeletal muscle. It is prevalent in regional musculoskeletal pain syndromes, either alone or in combination with other pain generators. The myofascial pain syndrome is one of the largest groups of under-diagnosed and under-treated medical problems encountered in clinical practice. Trigger points are commonly seen in patients with myofascial pain that can be responsible for localized pain in the affected muscles as well as referred pain patterns. Correct needle placement in a myofascial trigger point is vital to prevent complications and improve efficacy of the trigger point injection to help reduce or relieve myofascial pain. In the obese patients, these injections may not reach the target tissue. In the cervicothoracic spine, a misguided or misplaced injection can result in a pneumothorax. Here, we review an electromyographically guided trigger point injection technique to avoid this potential pitfall. METHODS: Using a disposable Teflon coated hypodermic injection needle attached to an electromyography (EMG) machine, a trigger point injection can be performed utilizing electromyographic guidance. This guidance by observing motor unit action potentials (MUAPs) on the EMG screen helps confirm the needle placement to be within the muscle tissue and not in an adipose tissue or any other non-musculature structure. RESULTS: The technique is simple when performed by a pain management specialist who has electromyographic training. CONCLUSION: This technique helps confirm proper needle placement within the cervicothoracic musculature in an obese patient in whom the musculature is not readily palpated. This, thus, reduces the potential for a pneumothorax by an improperly placed injection.

Adverse effects of fluoroscopically guided interlaminar thoracic epidural steroid injections.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of adverse effects or complications from fluoroscopically guided thoracic interlaminar epidural steroid injections. DESIGN: A retrospective study with independent observer review. Patients presenting with thoracic radicular pain, caused by either herniated nucleus pulposus or thoracic spondylosis as confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging, received an interlaminar thoracic epidural steroid injection as part of a conservative-care treatment plan. The study was performed in a multidisciplinary spine care center. All injections were performed over a 5-yr period. An independent observer reviewed medical charts, which included a 24-hr postprocedure standardized questionnaire completed by telephone by an ambulatory surgical center nurse. Ambulatory surgical center operative reports and physician follow up office notes up to 3 mos after the procedures, along with epidurograms, were also reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients who received 39 injections were reviewed. Adverse effects or complications per injection observed included three with increased pain at injection site (7.7%), two with facial flushing (5.1%), one transient nonpositional headache (2.6%), one episode of insomnia the night of the injection (2.6%), and one episode of fever the night of the procedure (2.6%). Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference based on diagnosis (herniated nucleus pulposus vs. spondylosis, P = 0.9156), and age was not linked to higher prevalence of adverse/effects complications (P = 0.3137). CONCLUSIONS: No major complication arose. Adverse effects did occur with a rate of 20.5%. All adverse effects resolved without morbidity. No statistical difference was observed in the rate of adverse effects in patients with herniated nucleus pulposus or spondylosis.

Epidural steroid injections in the treatment of symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis associated with epidural lipomatosis.

Epidural lipomatosis has been implicated as a cause or contributor of symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. Although epidural steroid injections have been very successful for symptomatic treatment of spinal stenosis; their role in treatment of symptomatic stenosis secondary to epidural lipomatosis is unclear. A review literature (MEDLINE, PubMed) found no reports justifying the use of steroids. We present two patients with lumbar epidural lipomatosis causing or contributing to symptomatic spinal stenosis. Both patients presented with unilateral lower limb radicular symptoms unrelieved with conservative measures such as medications and physical therapy. They were treated with a single transforaminal epidural steroid injection at the symptomatic level. Both had 80-85% pain relief. These reports suggest a beneficial role of epidural steroid injections for patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis caused by or contributing to epidural lipomatosis.

Fluoroscopic guided lumbar interlaminar epidural injections: a prospective evaluation of epidurography contrast patterns and anatomical review of the epidural space.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the pattern and flow of epidural contrast in fluoroscopically guided lumbar interlaminar steroid injections. DESIGN AND METHODS: A prospective case series of 25 (twenty-five) consecutive patients receiving 25 (twenty-five) injections. Patients had either lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) or herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP). All patients received their injection using a loss of resistance technique. Once the epidural space was felt localized 0.5 mL of Isovue contrast was injected to confirm accurate needle placement. If in the epidural space, another 4.5 mL was injected for a total of 5 mL contrast media. Both AP and lateral radiographs were obtained and reviewed by a physician trained in fluoroscopic injections for review of the contrast pattern. Patterns recorded were Unilateral, Bilateral, Ventral or Dorsal. The dorsal flow was also characterized as being cephalad or caudad and the number of lumbar intervertebral levels of flow were recorded as well. RESULTS: Dorsal contrast flow occurred in all 25 injections. Thirty-six percent (9 out of 25) resulted in ventral spread of contrast. Eighty-four percent (21 out of 25) of the injections had flow of contrast unilaterally and 16% (4 out of 25) was bilateral. The mean number of levels of flow of contrast cephalad from the injection site was 1.28 and caudally 0.88. There was a significant difference in more cephalad than caudal contrast flow (P = 0.004) CONCLUSION: Thirty six percent of the injections observed in the study revealed ventral contrast flow. Bilateral contrast flow occurred in 16% of the injections. Caudad contrast flow is less than cephalad. The observed contrast flows need to be studied clinically to determine if this can affect clinical outcome.

Complications of fluoroscopically guided interlaminar cervical epidural injections.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the incidence of complications of fluoroscopically guided interlaminar cervical epidural injections. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort design study. SETTING: A multidisciplinary spine care center. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred fifty-seven consecutive patients with cervical radicular pain caused by cervical spondylosis or herniated nucleus pulposus confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography scanning. INTERVENTIONS: Fluoroscopically guided interlaminar cervical epidural injections were performed at the C7-T1 or C6-7 level using an 18-gauge, 9-mm Tuohy needle with 2mL of 1% lidocaine (Xylocaine) and 80-mg of triamcinolone acetonide (Kenalog). All injections were performed consecutively over a 12-month period by 1 of 5 physicians. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: An independent observer reviewed medical charts, which included a 24-hour postprocedure telephone call by an ambulatory surgery center nurse who asked a standardized questionnaire about complications after the injections. Also reviewed were physician notes regarding office follow-up consultations 3 weeks or less after the injections and epidurograms. RESULTS: The charts of 157 patients, who received 345 injections, were reviewed. Complications per injection included 23 increased neck pain (6.7%), 16 transient nonpositional headaches that resolved within 24 hours (4.6%), 6 episodes of insomnia the night of the injection (1.7%), 6 vasovagal reactions (1.7%), 5 facial flushing (1.5%), 1 fever the night of the procedure (0.3%), and 1 dural puncture (0.3%). The incidence of all complications per injection was 16.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Because all complications resolved without morbidity and no patient required hospitalization, fluoroscopically guided interlaminar cervical epidural injections may be a safe procedure for use in patients with cervical radicular pain.

Lumbar spinal stenosis: anatomy and pathogenesis.

This article reviews the history, classification, and pathoanatomy of lumbar spinal stenosis. An understanding of the pathoanatomy of lumbar spinal stenosis is essential for the clinician to treat the patient with clinically symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis more effectively.

Lumbar epidural steroid injections in the patient with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Epidural steroid injections seem to be a useful component of a comprehensive and functionally oriented rehabilitation program for the patient with LSS. Review of the literature indicates the injections seem to be effective and are safe when performed with proper technique.

Radiation exposure to the spinal interventionalist performing lumbar discography.

To evaluate radiation exposure to the spinal interventionalist performing lumbar discography. A prospective study on four spinal interventionalists who performed 106 consecutive lumbar discograms (levels) on 37 patients with low back pain. Radiation exposure was monitored with the assistance of a radiological technologist (RT) who allocated four (4) dosimetry badges to all spinal interventionalists performing Discograms on consecutive patients being referred for evaluation of possible discogenic pain. The badges were placed on the ring finger, glasses and both the inside and outside of the lead apron worn by the interventionalist. The mean fluoroscopy time per procedure was 57.24 seconds. The mean/cumulative exposure per procedure was 3.66(-/+0.915)/390(-/+9.750) mREM at the "ring" badge, 2.35(-/+0.635)/251(-/+6.275) mREM at the "outside apron" badge, 1.49(-/+0.373)/159(-/+3.975) mREM at the "glasses" badge. A statistically significant higher radiation exposure was found on discograms at the L5/S1 level compared to the L4/5 and L3/4 levels. Our study illustrates that radiation exposure to the spinal interventionalist performing lumbar discography is well within safety limits.

Fluoroscopically guided lumbar transformational epidural steroid injections in degenerative lumbar stenosis: an outcome study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the short- and long-term therapeutic benefit of fluoroscopically guided lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections in patients with radicular leg pain from degenerative lumbar stenosis. DESIGN: This prospective cohort study performed at a multidisciplinary spine center. There were a total of 34 patients who met our inclusion criteria for the treatment of unilateral radicular pain from degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent fluoroscopically guided lumbar transforaminal epidural injections. Patients with radiculopathy, who did not respond to physical therapy, antiinflammatories, or analgesics, caused by degenerative lumbar stenosis and confirmed by magnetic resonance imagining received fluoroscopically guided lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections at the presumed symptomatic nerve root. The injectant consisted of 12 mg of betamethasone acetate and 2 ml of 1% preservative-free lidocaine HCL. Patients were evaluated by an independent observer and received questionnaires before the initial injection, at 2 mo, and at 12 mo after the injections. Questionnaires included a visual analog scale, Roland 5-point pain scale, standing/walking tolerance, and patient satisfaction scale. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients met our inclusion criteria and were followed for 1 yr. Seventy-five percent of patients had successful long-term outcome, reporting at least a >50% reduction between preinjection and postinjection pain scores, with an average of 1.9 injections per patient. Sixty-four percent of patients had improved walking tolerance, and 57% had improved standing tolerance at 12 mo. CONCLUSION: Fluoroscopically guided transforaminal epidural steroid injections may help reduce unilateral radicular pain and improve standing and walking tolerance in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

Radiation exposure of the spinal interventionalist performing fluoroscopically guided lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate radiation exposure to spinal interventionalists while performing transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs). DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Multidisciplinary spine center. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred consecutive patients with either herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP) or lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). INTERVENTION: Fluroscopically guided lumbar TFESIs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Radiation exposure was monitored by radiography technologists who allocated 4 dosimetry badges to all spinal interventionalists performing fluroscopically guided lumbar TFESIs on patients being treated for radicular pain. Badges were placed on the ring finger, glasses, and the inside and outside of the lead apron worn by the interventionalists. The radiography technologists also wore marked badges outside their lead aprons. One control badge was placed 67in away from the fluoroscopy table and a second badge was placed in a desk more than 500ft away from the procedure to monitor ambient radiation. RESULTS: The average fluoroscopy time per procedure was 15.16 seconds. The average exposure per procedure was 0.7mrem at the ring badge, 0.4mrem at the glasses badge, and 0.3mrem at the outside apron badge. No radiation was detectable at the inside apron or at the outside room control badge. The cumulative exposure to the interventionalists from all 100 procedures was 70mrem at the ring badge, 40mrem at the glasses badge, and 30mrem at the outside apron badge. The radiography technologists' average exposure during these procedures was below the limit of detectablility. Radiation time under fluoroscopy ranged from 5 to 38 seconds. The interventionalist's exposure to radiation was significantly greater during procedures conducted on patients with LSS then during procedures on patients with HNP. CONCLUSION: Adhering to a radiation safety program that includes maximizing the distance the spinal interventionalist is from the radiation source, decreasing exposure time, and proper shielding is essential when performing fluoroscopically guided lumbar TFESIs. Our study shows that exposure to radiation of the spinal interventionalist performing fluoroscopically guided lumbar TFESIs was well within safety limits when proper techniques were followed.