A prospective study to evaluate the efficacies of low volume and high volume caudal epidural steroid injections in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease

Authors

  • Suraj Sajeev Department of Orthopedics, Government Medical College, Kozhikode, Kerala, India
  • Raju Karuppal Department of Orthopedics, Government Medical College, Kozhikode, Kerala, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20173548

Keywords:

Caudal epidural steroid injection, High volume injections, Low volume injections, Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire, Radiculopathy, Triamcinolone, Visual analog score

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the efficacy of low volume corticosteroid injections in the treatment of radiculopathy associated with lumbar degenerative diseases by comparing with that of conventional high-volume injection and appreciate the advantages of the technique. Study was a prospective comparative study. Setting was the operating room.

Methods: 52 patients, they were randomized into two groups. Among them, 27 had undergone caudal epidural steroid injection (CESI) with low volume and 25 with high volume injections of triamcinolone. Intervention of the study was caudal epidural steroid injection (CESI) to all patients in both groups. Low volume group received 5 ml and high-volume group received 15 ml diluted triamcinolone solution. They were evaluated with the visual analog scale, Oswestry low back disability questionnaire, short form 12, relief of claudication and neurological disability.

Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the clinical improvement between the two groups. However, there are definite distinct advantages of low volume injection such as lesser pain at injection site and no complications that warrant admission.

Conclusions: The low volume technique of CESI is superior to the traditional high-volume technique in this study. Despite earlier concepts that low volume injections failed to penetrate the proximal epidural spaces, present study conclusively proved that it is superior to high volume injections.

Author Biographies

Suraj Sajeev, Department of Orthopedics, Government Medical College, Kozhikode, Kerala, India

Senior resident ,Department of Orthopedics

Raju Karuppal, Department of Orthopedics, Government Medical College, Kozhikode, Kerala, India

Associate Professor,Department of Orthopedics

References

Freynhagen R, Baron R, Gockel U, Tolle TR. Pain detect: A new screening questionnaire to identify neuropathic components in patients with back pain. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22:1911-20.

Lievre JA, Bloch-Michel H, Pean GL. Hydrocortisone en injection locale. Rev Rhum Mal Osteoartic. 1953;20(20):310-1.

Manchikanti L, Pampati V, Falco FJ, Hirsch JA. Growth of spinal interventional pain management techniques: analysis of utilization trends and Medicare expenditures 2000 to 2008. Spine. 2013:38(2):157-68.

Ogoke BA. Caudal epidural injections. Pain Physician. 2000;3:305-12.

Artuso JD. Back Pain and needles: epidural steroid injections for radicular back pain. J Lancaster General Hospital. 2007;2(3):95-100.

Boswell MV, Trescot AM, Datta S, Schultz DM, Hansen HC, Abdi S, et al. Interventional techniques: evidence-based practice guidelines in the management of chronic spinal pain. Pain Physician. 2007;10:7-111.

Otani K, Arai I, Mao GP, Konno S, Olmarker K, Kikuchi S. Experimental disc herniation: evaluation of the natural course. Spine. 1997;22:2894-9.

Abdi S, Datta S, Andrea MT. Epidural steroids in the management of chronic spinal pain: a systematic review. Pain Physician. 2007;10:185-212.

Manchikanti L. Role of neuraxial steroids in interventional pain management. Pain Physician. 2002;5:182-99.

Jacobs L, Vo N, Kang J. Identifying inflammatory targets for the biologic therapies for spinal pain. PM R. 2011;3(6): S12-7.

Standiford Helm I. Percutaneous adhesiolysis in the management of chronic low back pain in post lumbar surgery syndrome and spinal stenosis: a systematic review. Pain Physician. 2012;15:E435-62.

Revel M, Auleley G, Alaoui S, Nguyen M. Forceful epidural injections for the treatment of lumbosciatic pain with post-operative lumbar spinal fibrosis. Rev Rhum Engl Ed. 1996;63:270-7.

Bogduk N. Thoracic medial branch blocks. Practice Guidelines Spinal Diagnostic Treatment Procedures. 2004:330-46.

Manchikanti L, Singh V, Pampati V, Damron KS, Barnhill RC, Beyer C, et al. Evaluation of the relative contributions of various structures in chronic low back pain. Pain Physician. 2001;4:308-16.

Manchikanti L, Hirsch JA. Issues in health care: interventional pain management at the crossroads. Health Policy Update. Pain Physician. 2007;10:261-84.

Schaufele MK, Hatch L, Jones W. Interlaminar versus transforaminal epidural injections for the treatment of symptomatic lumbar intervertebral disc herniations. Pain Physician. 2006;9:361-6.

Smuck M, Fuller BJ, Yoder B, Huerta J. Incidence if simultaneous epidural and vascular injection during lumbosacral transforaminal epidural injections. Spine J. 2007;7:79-82.

Downloads

Published

2017-07-26

How to Cite

Sajeev, S., & Karuppal, R. (2017). A prospective study to evaluate the efficacies of low volume and high volume caudal epidural steroid injections in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 5(8), 3493–3497. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20173548

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles