Dural puncture during lumbar epidural access in the setting of degenerative spondylolisthesis: case series and risk mitigation strategies.

Degenerative spondylolisthesis is a common back pathology in the general adult population. Patients with this condition may present for epidural steroid injection, epidural blood patch, or epidural analgesia. We report five patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis who experienced inadvertent dural puncture during interlaminar epidural steroid injection attempts: four with intrathecal contrast spread or cerebrospinal backflow into the epidural needle and one with subdural contrast spread. Patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis may be at higher risk for dural puncture due to stretching of the dura and contraction of the epidural space at the translated spinal level. In the following report, we summarize the cases and suggest risk mitigation strategies for both chronic and acute pain physicians.

Impact of Predefined Angles and a Revised APPLES Mnemonic on Accuracy and Performance Time for Simulated Ultrasound-Guided Injections.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to determine whether predefined angles would improve performance time and accuracy of ultrasound-guided procedures by novice operators and whether a revised APPLES (approach, position, perpendicular, lift, entry, sweep) mnemonic was a helpful guide for performing the procedure. METHODS: Participants attempted to hit targets in-plane and out-of-plane at different depths with a needle under ultrasound guidance with and without predefined angles. Participants were then asked if they thought that the mnemonic would be helpful when learning both methods for ultrasound-guided procedures. RESULTS: There were 120 participants all of whom had performed fewer than six ultrasound guided procedures. Accuracy increased in all groups when angles were provided; however, only the 3-cm in-plane approach achieved statistical significance. Performance time also achieved statistical significance in two of the four groups. Ninety-five percent of participants thought that the revised APPLES mnemonic would be helpful for learning and performing ultrasound-guided procedures in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Predefined angles seem to positively impact procedure time and accuracy for some target depths, and the APPLES mnemonic could be a helpful mental checklist for many novice operators. These may be useful tools to facilitate safe and efficient ultrasound-guided procedures in the clinical space.

Interventional treatments for metastatic bone cancer pain.

Metastatic bone cancer pain may cause significant morbidity among the cancer patient population. Painful bone lesions are challenging to manage due to the aggressive pathophysiology of the pain generator involved. The WHO's approach to cancer pain treatment involves the use of a three-step ladder which provides a guideline for clinicians to treat patients who struggle from cancer pain syndromes. It is possible that this ladder is no longer helpful for patients who continue to fail oral or transdermal medication options. A fourth step in the cancer pain ladder has been proposed to include interventional approaches to cancer pain management. This review will discuss opioid therapy, radium-223, denosumab and bisphosphonate therapy, but will primarily review the available interventional treatment options for metastatic bone cancer pain.

Improving the Performance Time and Accuracy of Ultrasound-Guided Interventions: A Randomized Controlled Double-Blind Trial of the Line-of-Sight Approach and the "APPLES" Mnemonic.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the line-of-sight approach improved the performance time and accuracy of ultrasound (US)-guided needle placement targeting the subdeltoid bursa in a cadaver among novice operators compared to the side approach. A secondary objective was to determine whether participants thought the APPLES (angle, position, perpendicular, line up, entry, sweep) mnemonic was a helpful guide for performing the procedure. METHODS: Medical students and residents were randomized into either a line-of-sight or side approach group and then crossed over to the other group. The procedure time was determined by 2 blinded reviewers. A survey was administered to determine which method participants preferred and whether they thought the APPLES mnemonic was helpful. A paired t test was used to compare the performance time, and the McNemar test was used to compare the accuracy of the methods. RESULTS: Among the 110 participants, the performance time with the line-of-sight approach (mean, 14.4 seconds; SD, 9.95 seconds) was significantly decreased compared to the side approach (mean, 18.6 seconds; SD, 10.1 seconds; P = .00029). Additionally, participants who only hit the target using one method were more likely to hit the target in 30 seconds using the line-of-sight approach (P = .035). In total, 72.7% of participants preferred the line-of-sight approach over the side approach, and 88.2% of participants thought that APPLES mnemonic was useful. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the finding that positioning of the operator is important in performing US-guided interventions, and the line-of-sight approach may improve the performance time and accuracy among novice operators. Furthermore, the APPLES mnemonic serves as a useful educational tool for teaching US-guided interventional procedures.