La angiografía por sustracción digital no impide de manera fiable la paraplejia lumbar asociada con inyección transforaminal epidural de esteroides.
Digital subtraction angiography does not reliably prevent paraplegia associated with lumbar transforaminalepidural steroid injection.
Chang Chien GC1, Candido KD, Knezevic NN.
Pain Physician. 2012 Nov-Dec;15(6):515-23.
Abstract
Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) has been touted as a radiologic adjunct to interventional neuraxial procedures where it is imperative to identify vascular compromise during the injection. Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are commonly performed interventions for treating acute and chronic radicular spine pain. We present a case of instantaneous and irreversible paraplegia following lumbar TFESI wherein a local anesthetic test dose, as well as DSA, were used as adjuncts to fluoroscopy. An 80-year-old man with severe lumbar spinal stenosis and chronic L5 radiculopathic pain was evaluated at a university pain management center seeking symptomatic pain relief. Two prior lumbar interlaminar epiduralsteroid injections (LESI) provided only transient pain relief, and a decision was made to perform right-sided L5-S1 TFESI. A 5-inch, 22-gauge Quincke-type spinal needle with a curved tip was used. Foraminal placement of the needle tip was confirmed with anteroposterior, oblique, and lateral views on fluoroscopy. Aspiration did not reveal any blood or cerebrospinal fluid. Digital subtraction angiography was performed twice to confirm the absence of intravascular contrast medium spread. Subsequently, a 0.5 mL of 1% lidocaine test dose was performed without any changes in neurological status. Two minutes later, a mixture of one mL of 1% lidocaine with 80 mg triamcinolone acetonide was injected. Immediately followingthe completion of the injection, the patient reported extreme bilateral lower extremity pain. He became diaphoretic, followed by marked weakness in his bilateral lower extremities and numbness up to his lower abdomen. The patient was transferred to the emergency department for evaluation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lumbar and thoracic spine was completed 5 hours postinjection. It showed a small high T2 signal focus in the thoracic spinal cord at the T7-T8 level. The patient was admitted to the critical care unit for neurological observation and treatment with intravenous methylprednisolone. Follow-up MRI revealed a hyper-intense T2 and short-tau inversion recovery signal in the central portion of the spinal cord beginning at the level of the T6 superior endplate and extending caudally to the T9-T10 level with accompanying development of mild spinal cord expansion. The patient was diagnosed with paraplegia from acute spinal cord infarction. At discharge to an acute inpatient rehabilitation program, the patient had persistent bilateral lower extremity paralysis, and incontinence of bowel and bladder functions. In the present patient, DSA performed twice and an anesthetic test dose did not prevent a catastrophic spinal cord infarction and resulting paraplegia. DSA use is clearly not foolproof and may not be sufficient to identify potentially life-or-limb threatening consequences of lumbar TFESI. We believe that this report should open further discussion regarding adding the possibility of these catastrophic events in the informed consent process for lumbar TFESIs, as it has for cervical TFESI. Utilizing blunt needles or larger bevel needles in place of sharp, cutting needles may minimize the chances of this event occurring. Considering eliminating use of particulate steroids for TFESI should be evaluated, although the use of nonparticulate agents remains controversial due to the perception that their respective duration of action is less than that of particulate steroids.
http://www.painphysicianjournal.com/2012/december/2012;15;515-523.pdf
Detección de flujo intravascular durante inyecciones epidurales transforaminales: Evaluación prospectiva
Intravascular flow detection during transforaminal epidural injections: a prospective assessment.
El Abd OH, Amadera JE1, Pimentel DC, Pimentel TS.
Pain Physician. 2014 Jan-Feb;17(1):21-7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are a mainstay in the treatment of spine pain. Though this commonly performed procedure is generally felt to be safe, devastating complications following inadvertent intra-arterial injections of particulate steroid have been reported. The use of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) has been suggested as a means of detecting intra-arterial needle placements prior to medication injection.OBJECTIVE:To examine the efficacy of DSA in detecting intra-arterial needle placements during TFESI.STUDY DESIGN:Prospective cohort study evaluating the impact of DSA on detecting intra-arterial needle placements during TFESI.METHODS:We enrolled 150 consecutive patients presenting to a university-affiliated spine center with discogenic and/or radicular symptoms affecting the cervical, lumbar, and sacral regions. For each injection, prior to imaging with DSA, traditional methods for vascular penetration detection were employed, including the identification of blood in the needle hub (flash), negative aspiration of blood prior to injection, and live fluoroscopic injection of contrast. Once these tests were performed and negative for signs of intra-arterial needle placement, DSA imaging was utilized prior to medication administration for identification of vascular flow.RESULTS:A total number of 222 TFESI were performed, 41 injections at the cervical levels (18.47%), 113 at the lumbar levels (50.9%), and 68 at the sacral levels (30.36%). Flash was observed in 13 injections performed (5.85% of the total number of injections): one (0.45%) in the cervical, 2 (0.9%) in the lumbar, and 10 (4.5%) in the sacral levels. In 11 TFESI blood aspiration was obtained (4.95% of all injections): 3 (1.3%) in cervical, 4 (1.8%) in lumbar, and 4 (1.8%) in sacral injections. Live fluoroscopy during contrast injection detected 46 (20.72%) intravascular flow patterns: 7 (3.1%) cervical, 17 (7.6%) lumbar, and 22 (9.9%) sacral. DSA identified an additional 5 intravascular injections after all previous steps had resulted in negative vascular penetration signs, which accounted for 2.25% of all injections.LIMITATIONS:This is a prospective, single-center study with a relatively small number of patients and no control group.CONCLUSION:
DSA detected additional 5.26% intravascular needle placements following traditional methods. Our findings also support other studies that conclude TFESI are generally a safe procedure. We recommend that special attention should be paid to the sacral injections as vascular penetration was statistically higher than at other levels.
http://www.painphysicianjournal.com/2014/january/2014;17;21-27.pdf
Atentamente
Anestesiología y Medicina del Dolor
www.anestesia-dolor.org
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario