A Comparative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 3 Routes of Administration of Epidural Injections in Lumbar Disc Herniation.

BACKGROUND: The Best Practices in Pain Management from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) describes interventional techniques as part of a continuum. Epidural injections are commonly utilized modalities in managing low back and lower extremity pain. Epidural injections were initially administered in 1901 where the first descriptions of caudal epidural with local anesthetic for low back pain appeared. Since then, multiple developments have occurred. Currently, epidural injections are provided by caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal approaches. The comparative effectiveness of each modality has been studied. However, comparative assessment has been sparse. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of 3 routes of administration of epidural injections for lumbar disc herniation. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of transforaminal, interlaminar and caudal epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain due to lumbar disc herniation. METHODS: RCTs with a placebo control or an active control design, performed under fluoroscopic guidance, with at least 6 months of follow-up are included. The outcome measures were pain relief and functional status improvement. Significant improvement was defined as 50% or greater pain relief and functional status improvement. Data extraction and methodological quality assessment were performed. Evidence was summarized utilizing principles of best evidence synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 21 trials were included. Of these, 7 studied caudal epidural injections, whereas transforaminal epidural injections were studied in 12 trials, and lumbar interlaminar epidural injections were studied in 10 trials, which all met inclusion criteria. Based on qualitative and quantitative analysis, which included conventional dual-arm and single-arm analysis for interlaminar epidural injections, and single-arm analysis for caudal and transforaminal epidural injections, and the approach to the epidural space, there is Level I evidence for local anesthetic and steroids, Level II for local anesthetic alone for transforaminal and interlaminar approaches, and Level II for the caudal approach with steroids or local anesthetic alone for short- and long-term relief. LIMITATIONS: There is a paucity of literature with intermediate or long-term relief of at least 6 months with appropriate outcome parameters. Conventional dual-arm meta-analysis was feasible only for interlaminar epidural injections. CONCLUSION: Epidural injections with local anesthetic and steroids showed Level I evidence for transforaminal and interlaminar approaches, whereas with local anesthetic alone Level II evidence was demonstrated. In contrast, caudal epidural injections showed Level II evidence with local anesthetic with steroids or local anesthetic alone.

Efficacy of Radiofrequency Neurotomy in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: The objective of the systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of radiofrequency neurotomy as a therapeutic lumbar facet joint intervention. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. A comprehensive literature search of multiple data sources from 1966 to September 2020 including manual searches of bibliography of known review articles was performed. The inclusion criteria were based on the selection of patients with chronic low back pain with diagnosis confirmed based on controlled diagnostic blocks and with the publication of at least 6 months of results of appropriate outcome parameters. Quality assessment of the trials was performed with Cochrane review criteria and interventional pain management techniques-quality appraisal of reliability and risk of bias assessment (IPM-QRB). The level of evidence of effectiveness is classified at five levels ranging from Level I to Level V. The primary outcome measure was a significant reduction in pain, eg, short term (up to 6 months) and long term (more than 6 months). The secondary outcome measure was an improvement in functional status. RESULTS: A total of 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria for evaluating the efficacy of lumbar radiofrequency neurotomy. Radiofrequency neurotomy showed Level II evidence for efficacy for both the short term and long term. CONCLUSION: This systematic review of the assessment of the efficacy of radiofrequency neurotomy in managing chronic low back pain was based on the inclusion of 12 RCTs with a diagnostic block and at least 6 months of follow-up results that showed Level II evidence for both short-term and long-term improvement.

The role of percutaneous neurolysis in lumbar disc herniation: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recalcitrant disc herniation may result in chronic lumbar radiculopathy or sciatica. Fluoroscopically directed epidural injections and other conservative modalities may provide inadequate improvement in some patients. In these cases, percutaneous neurolysis with targeted delivery of medications is often the next step in pain management. METHODS: An evidence-based system of methodologic assessment, namely, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used. Multiple databases were searched from 1966 to January 2021. Principles of the best evidence synthesis were incorporated into qualitative evidence synthesis. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with significant pain relief and functional improvement (≥ 50%). Duration of relief was categorized as short-term (< 6 months) and long-term (≥ 6 months). RESULTS: This assessment identified one high-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT) and 5 moderate-quality non-randomized studies with an application of percutaneous neurolysis in disc herniation. Overall, the results were positive, with level II evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the present systematic review, with one RCT and 5 nonrandomized studies, the evidence level is II for percutaneous neurolysis in managing lumbar disc herniation.

Spinal Cord Stimulation Trends of Utilization and Expenditures in Fee-For-Service (FFS) Medicare Population from 2009 to 2018.

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation has been utilized with increasing frequency in managing chronic intractable spinal pain and complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) in addition to other neuropathic pain states. The literature has shown the effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation in managing chronic pain with improvement in quality of life and cost utility. There have not been any reviews performed in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population in reference to utilization and expenditure patterns of spinal cord stimulators. OBJECTIVES: This investigation was undertaken to assess the utilization and expenditures for spinal cord stimulation in the FFS Medicare population from 2009 to 2018. STUDY DESIGN: The present study was designed to assess the utilization patterns and expenditures in all settings, for all providers in the FFS Medicare population from 2009 to 2018 in the United States. A standard 5% national sample of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) physician outpatient billing claims data. All the expenditures were presented with allowed costs and adjusted to inflation to 2018 US dollars only trials and implants were included. RESULTS: Utilization patterns showed that spinal cord stimulation trials increased from 12,680 in 2009 to 36,280 in 2018, a 186% increase with an annual increase of 12.4%. The rate of trials per 100,000 population increased from 28 in 2009 to 61 in 2018 with a 120% increase, or an annual increase of 9.1%. The pulse generator implants increased from 7,640 in 2009 to 22,960 in 2018, an increase of 201%, with an annual increase of 13%. In addition, percutaneous placement with pulse generator implants increased from 4,080 in 2009 to 14,316 in 2018, a 252% increase, or 15% annual increase. In contrast, implantation of neurostimulator electrodes with paddle leads with laminectomy and placement of spinal pulse generator increased from 3,560 in 2009 to 8,600 in 2018, a 142% increase or an annual increase of 10.3%. Analysis of expenditures showed total inflation-adjusted expenditures increased from $292,153,701 in 2009 to $1,142,434,137 in 2018, a 291% increase from 2009 to 2018 and 16.4% annual increase. These expenditures were 125% higher than facet joint interventions and 138% higher than epidural interventions in 2018. In contrast, these expenditures were 55% below the expenditures of facet joint interventions and 66% lower than epidural injections in 2009.Trial to implant ratio improved from 42.5% in 2009 to 63.6% in 2018. An overwhelming majority of trials (90%) were performed by nonsurgical physicians, whereas, 56% of implants were performed by non-surgeons. LIMITATIONS: This assessment includes only FFS Medicare population, thus eliminating approximately 30% of the population with Medicare Advantage plans. In addition, this study has not taken into consideration various revisions not included in 3 specific codes. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis of spinal cord stimulators in the FFS Medicare population from 2009 to 2018 showed explosive increases of trials, implants and overall costs.

Epidural Injections for Lumbar Radiculopathy or Sciatica: A Comparative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cochrane Review.

BACKGROUND: Epidural injections are one of the commonly performed procedures in managing low back and lower extremity pain. In the past, Pinto et al and Chou et al performed systematic reviews and meta-analyses with a recent update from Oliveira et al showing lack of effectiveness of epidural steroid injections in managing lumbar radiculopathy. In contrast, multiple other systematic reviews and meta-analyses have supported the efficacy and use of epidural injections utilizing fluoroscopic guidance. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain with sciatica or lumbar radiculopathy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of 3 categories of epidural injections for lumbar radiculopathy or sciatica performed utilizing saline with steroids, local anesthetic alone, or steroids with local anesthetic. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, RCTs with a placebo control or an active control design, performed under fluoroscopic guidance, with at least 6 months of followed-up were included. The outcome measures were pain relief and functional status improvement. Significant improvement was defined as 50% or greater pain relief and functional status improvement. Literature search was performed through January 2021. Methodological quality assessments were performed. Evidence was summarized utilizing principles of best evidence synthesis. RESULTS: In this analysis, a total of 21 RCTs were utilized with at least 6 months of follow-up and performed under fluoroscopic guidance. However, only 6 of 25 trials from Cochrane review met inclusion criteria for this review. Based on qualitative analysis, of the 21 trials included in the present analysis, there was only one placebo-controlled trial found to be negative. With conventional meta-analysis, there was no significant difference among the studies because all of the studies were active control with local anesthetic or local anesthetic and steroids. Further, with single-arm analysis, of the 5 trials included in that portion of the study, significant improvement was seen with local anesthetic alone compared to local anesthetic and steroids. There was a tendency for better improvement with steroids in terms of both pain relief and functional status. The level of evidence is Level I or strong for local anesthetic with steroids and Level I to II or moderate to strong for local anesthetic as a single agent based on multiple relevant high quality RCTs. LIMITATIONS: Despite multiple trials available, there is a paucity of true RCTs performed under fluoroscopic guidance with any of the approaches. CONCLUSION: Epidural injections with or without steroids for radiculopathy showed significant effectiveness with Level I or strong evidence for local anesthetic with steroids and Level II to I or moderate to strong evidence with local anesthetic alone.