Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Severity by CT or MRI Does Not Predict Response to Epidural Corticosteroid versus Lidocaine Injections.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Epidural steroid injections may offer little-to-no short-term benefit in the overall population of patients with symptomatic spinal stenosis compared with lidocaine alone. We investigated whether imaging could identify subgroups of patients who might benefit most. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A secondary analysis of the Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injections for Spinal Stenosis prospective, double-blind trial was performed, and patients were randomized to receive an epidural injection of lidocaine with or without corticosteroids. Patients (n = 350) were evaluated for qualitative and quantitative MR imaging or CT measures of lumbar spinal stenosis. The primary clinical end points were the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the leg pain numeric rating scale at 3 weeks following injection. ANCOVA was used to assess the significance of interaction terms between imaging measures of spinal stenosis and injectate type on clinical improvement. RESULTS: There was no difference in the improvement of disability or leg pain scores at 3 weeks between patients injected with epidural lidocaine alone compared with corticosteroid and lidocaine when accounting for the primary imaging measures of qualitative spinal stenosis assessment (interaction coefficients for disability score, -0.1; 95% CI, -1.3 to 1.2; P = .90; and for the leg pain score, 0.1; 95% CI, -0.6 to 0.8; P = .81) or the quantitative minimum thecal sac cross-sectional area (interaction coefficients for disability score, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.03; P = .40; and for the leg pain score, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.03; P = .33). CONCLUSIONS: Imaging measures of spinal stenosis are not associated with differential clinical responses following epidural corticosteroid injection.

Revision of deep brain stimulator for tremor. Technical note.

The treatment of essential tremor with thalamic deep brain stimulation (DBS) is considered to be more effective and to cause less morbidity than treatment with thalamotomy. Nonetheless, implantation of an indwelling electrode, connectors, and a generator is associated with specific types of morbidity. The authors describe three patients who required revision of their DBS systems due to lead breakage. The connector between the DBS electrode and the extension wire, which connects to the subclavicular pulse generator, was originally placed subcutaneously in the cervical region to decrease the risk of erosion through the scalp and to improve cosmesis. Three patients presented with fractured DBS electrodes that were located in the cervical region near the connector, necessitating reoperation with stereotactic retargeting and placement of a new intracranial electrode. At reoperation, the connectors were placed subgaleally over the parietal region. Management of these cases has led to modifications in the operative procedure designed to improve the durability of DBS systems. The authors recommend that surgeons avoid placing the connection between the DBS electrode and the extension wire in the cervical region because patient movement can cause microfractures in the electrode. Such microfractures require intracranial revision, which may be associated with a higher risk of morbidity than the initial operation. The authors also recommend considering prophylactic relocation of the connectors from the cervical area to the subgaleal parietal region to decrease the risk of future DBS electrode fracture, which would necessitate a more lengthy procedure to revise the intracranial electrode.

Optic nerve glia secrete a low-molecular-weight factor that stimulates retinal ganglion cells to regenerate axons in goldfish.

The ability of lower vertebrates to regenerate an injured optic nerve has been widely studied as a model for understanding neural development and plasticity. We have recently shown that, in goldfish, the optic nerve contains two molecules that stimulate retinal ganglion cells to regenerate their axons in culture: a low-molecular-weight factor that is active even at low concentrations (axogenesis factor-1) and a somewhat less active polypeptide of molecular weight 10,000-15,000 (axogenesis factor-2). Both are distinct from other molecules described previously in this system. The present study pursues the biological source and functional significance of axogenesis factor-1. Earlier studies have shown that cultured goldfish glia provide a highly favorable environment for fish or rat retinal ganglion cells to extend axons. We report that the glia in these cultures secrete high levels of a factor that is identical to axogenesis factor-1 in its chromatographic properties and biological activity, along with a larger molecule that may coincide with axogenesis factor-2. Axogenesis factor-1 derived from either goldfish glial cultures or optic nerve fragments is a hydrophilic molecule with an estimated molecular weight of 700-800. Prior studies have reported that goldfish retinal fragments, when explanted in organ culture, only extend axons if the ganglion cells had been "primed" to begin regenerating in vivo for one to two weeks. However, axogenesis factor-1 caused the same degree of outgrowth irrespective of whether ganglion cells had been induced to regenerate new axons in vivo. Moreover, ganglion cells primed to begin regenerating in vivo continued to extend axons in culture only when axogenesis factor-1 was present. In summary, this study shows that glial cells of the goldfish optic nerve secrete a low-molecular-weight factor that initiates axonal regeneration from retinal ganglion cells.

Two factors secreted by the goldfish optic nerve induce retinal ganglion cells to regenerate axons in culture.

Unlike mammals, lower vertebrates can regenerate an injured optic nerve and other pathways of the CNS throughout life. We report here that in dissociated cell culture, goldfish retinal ganglion cells regenerate their axons in response to two factors derived from the sheath cells of the optic nerve. Axogenesis factor 1 (AF-1) is a small peptide (700-900 Da) that is inactivated by treatment with proteinase K but heat stable. A second factor, AF-2, is a polypeptide of ca 12 kDa. In the absence of these factors, dissociated retinal cells remained viable in serum-free, defined media for at least a week but showed little outgrowth, as visualized using the vital dye 5,6-carboxyfluorescein diacetate (5,6-CFDA). The addition of AF-1 induced up to 25% of cells in culture to extend processes > 75 microns in length by 6 d; AF-2 had a lesser but highly significant effect. To verify that neurite outgrowth was from retinal ganglion cells per se, we applied the lipophilic dye 4-Di-10-ASP to the optic tectum and allowed it to diffuse up the optic nerve for several days before culturing the retina. A far greater percentage of cells containing the dye showed axonal outgrowth than was observed from the overall cell population, indicating that ganglion cells are selective targets of the factors. The effects of AF-1 or AF-2 were not secondary to enhanced viability, since neither overall cell survival nor the number of retinal ganglion cells remaining in culture after 6 d was affected by the presence of the factors. The activity of AF-1 and AF-2 was not mimicked by several defined factors tested over a broad concentration range, for example, NGF, BDNF, NT-3, CNTF, taurine, retinoic acid, acidic or basic fibroblast growth factors. The concentration of AF-1 is considerably higher in CM than in optic nerve homogenates, suggesting that it is actively secreted; AF-2 has a similar concentration intra- and extracellularly. Insofar as AF-1 and AF-2 derive from cells of the optic nerve and act upon retinal ganglion cells, they are likely to be important in inducing optic nerve regeneration in vivo.