Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Is there a difference in treatment outcomes between epidural injections with particulate versus non-particulate steroids?


Bensler, Susanne; Sutter, Reto; Pfirrmann, Christian W A; Peterson, Cynthia K (2017). Is there a difference in treatment outcomes between epidural injections with particulate versus non-particulate steroids? European Radiology, 27(4):1505-1511.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES To compare the outcomes of patients after interlaminar computed tomography (CT)-guided epidural injections of the lumbar spine with particulate vs. non-particulate steroids.
METHODS 531 consecutive patients were treated with CT-guided lumbar interlaminar epidural injections with steroids and local anaesthetics. 411 patients received a particulate steroid and 120 patients received a non-particulate steroid. Pain levels were assessed using the 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) and overall reported 'improvement' was assessed using the Patients Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at 1 day, 1 week and 1 month post-injection. Descriptive and inferential statistics were applied.
RESULTS Patients receiving particulate steroids had statistically significantly higher NRS change scores (p = 0.0001 at 1 week; p = 0.0001 at 1 month). A significantly higher proportion of patients receiving particulate steroids reported relevant improvement (PGIC) at both 1 week and 1 month post injection (p = 0.0001) and they were significantly less likely to report worsening at 1 week (p = 0.0001) and 1 month (p = 0.017).
CONCLUSION Patients treated with particulate steroids had significantly greater pain relief and were much more likely to report clinically relevant overall 'improvement' at 1 week and 1 month compared to the patients treated with non-particulate steroids.
KEY POINTS • CT-guided epidural injections of the lumbar spine with particulate vs. non-particulate steroids. • Good outcomes with particulate steroids. • Less pain relief in patients with non-particulate steroids. • Less improvement in patients with non-particulate steroids.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES To compare the outcomes of patients after interlaminar computed tomography (CT)-guided epidural injections of the lumbar spine with particulate vs. non-particulate steroids.
METHODS 531 consecutive patients were treated with CT-guided lumbar interlaminar epidural injections with steroids and local anaesthetics. 411 patients received a particulate steroid and 120 patients received a non-particulate steroid. Pain levels were assessed using the 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) and overall reported 'improvement' was assessed using the Patients Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at 1 day, 1 week and 1 month post-injection. Descriptive and inferential statistics were applied.
RESULTS Patients receiving particulate steroids had statistically significantly higher NRS change scores (p = 0.0001 at 1 week; p = 0.0001 at 1 month). A significantly higher proportion of patients receiving particulate steroids reported relevant improvement (PGIC) at both 1 week and 1 month post injection (p = 0.0001) and they were significantly less likely to report worsening at 1 week (p = 0.0001) and 1 month (p = 0.017).
CONCLUSION Patients treated with particulate steroids had significantly greater pain relief and were much more likely to report clinically relevant overall 'improvement' at 1 week and 1 month compared to the patients treated with non-particulate steroids.
KEY POINTS • CT-guided epidural injections of the lumbar spine with particulate vs. non-particulate steroids. • Good outcomes with particulate steroids. • Less pain relief in patients with non-particulate steroids. • Less improvement in patients with non-particulate steroids.

Statistics

Altmetrics

Downloads

0 downloads since deposited on 16 Feb 2017
0 downloads since 12 months

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Balgrist University Hospital, Swiss Spinal Cord Injury Center
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2017
Deposited On:16 Feb 2017 15:02
Last Modified:02 Mar 2017 02:05
Publisher:Springer
ISSN:0938-7994
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4498-9
PubMed ID:27436028

Download

Preview Icon on Download
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF - Registered users only
Size: 4MB
View at publisher