Injection of steroids and local anaesthetics as therapy for low-back pain. Vitamin B12 in low back pain: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Epidural steroids, epidural morphine and epidural steroids combined with morphine in the treatment of post-laminectomy syndrome. Facet joint injection and facet nerve block: a randomised comparison in 86 patients with chronic low back pain. Chronic unilateral low-back pain. Predictors of outcome of facet joint injections. Epidural injections of indomethacin for postlaminectomy syndrome: a preliminary report. Iliac crest pain syndrome in low back pain. A double blind, randomized study of local injection therapy. A prospective, randomized, double-blind evaluation of trigger-point injection therapy for low-back pain. Capacity of the clinical picture to characterize low back pain relieved by facet joint anesthesia. Proposed criteria to identify patients with painful facet joints. A comparison between epidural anaesthesia with and without corticosteroid in the treatment of sciatica. Intraarticular hyaluronic acid versus glucocorticoid injections for nonradicular pain in the lumbar spine. Effectiveness of lumbar facet joint nerve blocks in chronic low back pain: a randomized clinical trial. A controlled trial of corticosteroid injections into facet joints for chronic low back pain. Comparison between bupivacaine 0.125% and ropivacaine 0.2% for epidural administration to outpatients with chronic low back pain. A randomized clinical trial of treatment for lumbar segmental rigidity. Intrathecal midazolam for the treatment of chronic mechanical low back pain: a controlled comparison with epidural steroid in a pilot study.
Thirty patients with low-back pain of at least one month's duration were included in a double-blind controlled study with third-party administration and treated with either methylprednisolone acetate mixed with lignocaine or isotonic saline, injected at the site of the iliolumbar ligament. The treatment was evaluated by a visual analogue scale, range of spinal flexion ad modum Wright & Moll and of the patients' self-assessments. In the methylprednisolone group, significant decreases in pain score and in patients' self-assessments were found. The range of spinal flexion did not undergo any significant change. No significant changes were found in the control group. No side effects were observed during the study. The objective of this double-blind randomised, placebo-controlled study was to examine the efficacy and safety intramuscular vitamin B12 (Tricortin 1000) in the treatment of low back pain in patients with mechanical or irritative lumbago.
                60 patients aged between 18 and 65 years with lumbago or sciatic neuritis of mechanical origin without need for surgical procedures were enrolled. Patients had to present with a proven medical history for back pain (lasting from 6 months to 5 years) and a pain intensity [as evaluated with a Visual Analogic Scale (VAS)] equal or greater than 60 mm. Efficacy primary end-point was evaluated by means of a visual analogic scale (VAS) and a Disability Questionnaire (DQ). Consumption of paracetamol during the study period was the secondary efficacy end-point.
                Both treatment groups experienced a sharp decrease in pain and disability. However, comparison between groups at the end of the treatment period showed a statistically significant difference in favour of the active treatment both for VAS and DQ (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0002, respectively). Consumption of paracetamol proved significantly higher in the placebo group than in the active treatment (p < 0.0001).
                The efficacy and safety of parenteral Vitamin B12 in alleviating low back pain and related disability and in decreasing the consumption of paracetamol was confirmed in patients with no signs of nutritional deficiency. Epidural morphine injection followed by a steroid has been reported to be effective for the post-laminectomy pain ('failed back') syndrome. This double-blind, parallel study was undertaken to evaluate that mode of therapy. Twenty-two patients who had undergone at least one prior laminectomy, who were still symptomatic, were randomized to receive 50 mg of lidocaine epidurally with: (a) 75 mg triamcinolone diacetate (TR); or (b) 8 mg of preservative-free morphine (MP); or (c) both (TR and MP), at 1 month intervals for 3 consecutive months. The spinal interspace identified with the patients' pain complaint was the site of injection. For each treatment, patients were admitted to the Clinical Research Center for 24 h and their condition continuously monitored with a pulse oximeter and apnea monitor. Five to 7 patients in each group had pain relief for less than 1 month. No patient given morphine had pain relief for more than 1 month. Life-threatening ventilatory depression occurred in the group given triamcinolone and morphine. The use of morphine alone or combined with slow release triamcinolone does not appear to be appropriate for the treatment of the post-laminectomy pain syndrome. Eighty-six patients with refractory chronic low back pain were randomly assigned to receive either facet joint injection or facet nerve block, using local anaesthetic and steroid. There was no significant difference in the immediate response. The duration of response after facet joint injection was marginally longer than after facet nerve block (P less than 0.05 1 month after infiltration), but for both groups the response was usually short-lived; by 3 months only 2 patients continued to report complete pain relief. Patients who had complained of pain for more than 7 years were more likely to report good or excellent pain relief than those with a shorter history (P less than 0.005), but no other clinical feature was of value in predicting the response to infiltration. Facet joint injections and facet nerve blocks may be of equal value as diagnostic tests, but neither is a satisfactory treatment for chronic back pain. One hundred nine patients with chronic (3-36 months; mean, 13.4 months) unilateral low-back pain and no signs of sciatica were subjected to facet joint injection, randomized in three therapy groups: cortisone and local anesthetic injected intra-articularly, the same mixture injected pericapsularly, and physiologic sodium hydrochloride injected intra-articularly into two facet joints. To evaluate the results, three outcome variables were formed: work, subjective, and disability outcome. The inappropriate signs (IAS) recorded before injections had the best predictability for a good outcome. The mode of injection or duration of symptoms had no significance as a predictor. It was concluded that the outcome after facet joint injection depends on the patient's biopsychosocial chances of self-facilitated improvement. If abnormal illness behavior and distress are found, it helps to estimate the response for treatment and to choose a realistic method of treatment. Since there have been side effects reported with the administration of corticosteroids epidurally, their application has been limited. Because some nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs have central and spinal antinociceptive actions, we have compared the effects of indomethacin (INM) given by the epidural route to methylprednisolone (MTP). This was a prospective, comparative study in an ambulatory pain care center. Two hundred six patients with recurrent low back pain (Visual Analog Scale >7) and radiculopathy after they had had 2 or more lumbar laminectomies with the diagnosis of "postlaminectomy syndrome" were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups. Group I (64 patients) was given 2 epidural injections of lyophilized INM 1 mg. Group II (60 patients) received 2 injections of 2 mg of INM at the same intervals. Group III (82 patients) was treated by 2 epidural injections of MTP 80 mg. In every case, the medication was diluted in 3 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine. Reductions of pain were assessed by changes in the Visual Analog Scale; physical activities, attitude, and medication intake were graded by the Pain Progress Score recorded before each treatment and 2 wk after the last. After each injection, all patients had pain relief to Visual Analog Scale <3. Increased analgesia (P < 0.05) was noted when a double dose of INM was used (Group II) or when 80 mg of MTP was given. The total average scores of the Pain Progress Score showed significant differences at the second injection in Groups II and III only. Physical activity, emotional attitudes, and medication intake were also improved but the changes were not statistically significant. In conclusion, in this group of patients, INM produced adequate analgesia in Groups I and II, with evidence suggesting that 2 mg of INM may produce a similar degree of pain relief as 80 mg of MTP after the second injection. Other nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs may be explored in the future for the same purpose. In a 2-week, double blind, randomized study we compared the efficacy of a single local injection of 5 ml lignocaine, 0.5% (L) with 5 ml isotonic saline (S) in 41 patients with the iliac crest pain syndrome (ICPS), recruited from a rheumatology clinic and from a general practice. For the purpose of comparing both treatment, 2 major outcome variables at the end of the study were defined at the outset: (1) Pain score. In the L group the mean pain score at Day 14 was 30.5, in the S group 43.8; the difference between both treatment groups was significant (p less than 0.05). On subgroup analysis similar results were found in the rheumatology setting (p less than 0.05) but not in the general practice setting (NS). (2) Pain severity compared with baseline. In the L group 52% of patients improved and in the S group 30% (NS). In the general practice clinic there was no significant difference (44 vs 62%); however, in the rheumatology setting 58% of those treated with L were improved compared with 8% in the S group (p less than 0.01). Our data demonstrate an effect of a local injection with lignocaine that is somewhat larger than an injection with saline which also has some beneficial effect. The difference is evident in the rheumatology setting but not in the general practice setting. The efficacy of trigger-point injection therapy in treatment of low-back strain was evaluated in a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. The patient population consisted of 63 individuals with low-back strain. Patients with this diagnosis had nonradiating low-back pain, normal neurologic examination, absence of tension signs, and lumbosacral roentgenograms interpreted as being within normal limits. They were treated conservatively for 4 weeks before entering the study. Injection therapy was of four different types: lidocaine, lidocaine combined with a steroid, acupuncture, and vapocoolant spray with acupressure. Results indicated that therapy without injected medication (63% improvement rate) was at least as effective as therapy with drug injection (42% improvement rate), at a P value of 0.09. Trigger-point therapy seems to be a useful adjunct in treatment of low-back strain. The injected substance apparently is not the critical factor, since direct mechanical stimulus to the trigger-point seems to give symptomatic relief equal to that of treatment with various types of injected medication. Prospective randomized study to compare the efficacy of facet joint injection with lidocaine and facet joint injection with saline in two groups of patients with low back pain, with and without clinical criteria that were determined in a previous study to implicate the facet joint as the primary source of the pain.
                To assess the efficacy of single facet joint anesthesia versus placebo (saline injections) and to determine clinical criteria that are predictive of significant relief of LBP after injection.
                There is no syndrome that discriminates between lower back pain caused by facet joint and that caused by other structures. Single or double facet joint anesthesia, and single photon emission computed tomography are expensive and time-consuming procedures for selecting patients in controlled clinical trials with large populations.
                Results of a previous study showed that seven clinical characteristics were more frequent in patients who responded to facet joint anesthesia than in those who did not. In the current study, a group of 43 patients with lower back pain who met at least five criteria were compared with 37 patients who met fewer criteria. Patients randomly received injection of either lidocaine or saline into the lower facet joints. The result was considered positive if more than 75% pain relief was determined by visual analog scale. The patient, the radiologist, and the investigator were blinded. An analysis of variance was used to seek an interaction between clinical group effect and injection effect, and logistic regression analysis to select the best set of variables that would be predictive of minimum pain relief of 75% after the injection.
                There was a significant interaction between clinical group and injection effect (P = 0.003). In patients with back pain, lidocaine provided greater lower-back pain relief than saline (P = 0.01). Lidocaine also-provided greater pain relief in the back pain group than in the nonpain group (P = 0.02). The presence of five among seven variables (age greater than 65 years and pain that was not exacerbated by coughing, not worsened by hyperextension, not worsened by forward flexion, not worsened when rising from flexion, not worsened by extension-rotation, and well-relieved by recumbency), always including the last item, distinguished 92% of patients responding to lidocaine injection and 80% of those not responding in the lidocaine group.
                A set of five clinical characteristics can be used in randomized studies to select lower back pain that will be well relieved by facet joint anesthesia. These characteristics should not, however, be considered as definite diagnostic criteria of lower back pain originating from facet joints. nan To investigate the efficacy and safety of intraarticular sodium hyaluronate (SH) compared with intraarticular glucocorticoids (triamcinolone acetonide; TA) in the treatment of chronic nonradicular lumbar pain.
                Sixty patients were included in this randomized, controlled, blind-observer clinical study and randomly assigned to two groups to receive 10 mg SH or 10 mg TA per facet joint. The facet joints on both sides at levels S1-L5, L5-L4, and L4-L3 were treated once per week under computed tomographic guidance. The study visits were timed to permit assessment of the immediate effect as well as possible carryover effects at 3 and 6 months after completion of treatment. Changes in pain were assessed with a visual analog scale (VAS) and changes in function and quality of life were assessed by the Roland Morris Questionnaire (RMQ), the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ), the Low Back Outcome Score (LBOS), and the Short Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire.
                Patients reported lasting pain relief, better function, and improved quality of life with both treatments. Mann-Whitney analyses of the patient questionnaires (RMQ, ODQ, and LBOS) very consistently showed that SH is not inferior to TA. In addition, the efficacy of SH was largely comparable with that of TA on the VAS and SF-36. No adverse effects were reported after administration of the test products. The intraarticular treatment of facet joints (levels S1-L5, L5-L4, and L4-L3) with SH in patients with chronic nonradicular pain in the lumbar spine resulted in a marked reduction in pain with improved function and better quality of life, which was at least equal to the effect of a course of TA injections. SH-treated patients showed greater benefits in the long term.
                Intraarticular SH is a very promising new option for the treatment of patients with chronic nonradicular lumbar symptoms. This randomized clinical trial was designed to determine the effectiveness of therapeutic lumbar facet joint nerve blocks. Two hundred patients were evaluated with controlled diagnostic blocks for the presence of facet joint mediated pain. Eighty four patients, or 42% were determined to have lumbar facet joint mediated pain. These patients were randomly allocated into two groups: Group I receiving therapeutic injections with local anesthetic and Sarapin, and Group II receiving therapeutic injections with a mixture of local anesthetic, Sarapin, and methyl prednisolone. A total of 73 patients were treated with medial branch blocks under fluoroscopy. Results showed that patients underwent multiple procedures over a period of 2(1/2) years. The mean number of procedures or interventions was 2.5 +/- 0.09 from 1 to 3 months, whereas it was 4 +/- 0.13 for 4 to 6 months, 6.1 +/- 0.21 for 7 to 12 months, and 8.4 +/- 0.31 for 13 to 32 months. Cumulative significant relief with one to three injections was 100% up to 1 to 3 months, 82% for 4 to 6 months, 21% for 7 to 12 months, and 10% after 12 months, with a mean relief of 6.5 +/- 0.76 months. There was significant improvement noted in overall health status with improvement not only in pain relief, but also with physical, functional, and psychological status, as well as return-to-work status. In conclusion, the results of this study demonstrate that medial branch blocks with local anesthetic and Sarapin, with or without steroids, are a cost effective modality of treatment, resulting in improvement in pain status, physical status, psychological status, functional status and return to work. Chronic low back pain is a common problem with many treatments, few of which have been rigorously evaluated. This randomized, placebo-controlled trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of injections of corticosteroid into facet joints to treat chronic low back pain.
                Patients with chronic low back pain who reported immediate relief of their pain after injections of local anesthetic into the facet joints between the fourth and fifth lumbar vertebrae and the fifth lumbar and first sacral vertebrae were randomly assigned to receive under fluoroscopic guidance injections of either methylprednisolone acetate (20 mg; n = 49) or isotonic saline (n = 48) in the same facet joints. Ninety-five patients were followed for six months and their condition assessed with scales of pain severity, back mobility, and limitation of function.
                After one month, none of the outcome measures evaluating pain, functional status, and back flexion differed clinically or statistically between the two study groups. Forty-two percent of the patients who received methylprednisolone and 33 percent of those who received placebo reported marked or very marked improvement (95 percent confidence interval for the difference, -11 to 28 percentage points; P = 0.53). The results were similar after three months. At the six-month evaluation, the patients treated with methylprednisolone reported more improvement, less pain on the visual-analogue scale, and less physical disability. The differences were reduced, however, when concurrent interventions were taken into account. Moreover, only 11 patients (22 percent) in the methylprednisolone group and 5 (10 percent) in the placebo group had sustained improvement from the first month to the sixth month (95 percent confidence interval for the difference, -2 to 26; P = 0.19).
                We conclude that injecting methylprednisolone acetate into the facet joints is of little value in the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain. Epidural blocks should provide good analgesia for the treatment of chronic low back pain without any motor block to allow active physiotherapy. Epidural ropivacaine is known to produce less motor block compared to bupivacaine at anaesthetic concentrations. This prospective, randomized double blind study compares the analgesic, motor block, and haemodynamic effects of single shot epidural injections of ropivacaine 0.2% 10 mL with bupivacaine 0.125% in outpatients suffering from chronic low back pain.
                Forty patients were assigned to receive either ropivacaine 0.2% (n = 20) or bupivacaine 0.125% (n = 20) within a series of eight single shot epidural blocks.
                Thirty-six patients received either ropivacaine 0.2% (n = 18) or bupivacaine 0.125% (n = 18) within a series of eight single shot epidural blocks. Both groups showed no significant differences either in analgesia, or in motor blockade or haemodynamic changes. Thus ropivacaine 0.2% did not reduce the incidence of motor block (9.0% of patients with motor block Bromage scores 1, 2 or 3 in ropivacaine or bupivacaine). The combination of repeated epidural analgesia and physiotherapy reduced the median pain-scores (visual analogu scale, 0-10) from 7 (SD +/- 1.6) at the beginning of the study to 4.1 (SD +/- 1.7) at the end of the series.
                Both bupivacaine 0.125% and ropivacaine 0.29% appear suitable for epidural administration to outpatients with chronic low back pain attending for epidural analgesia associated with physiotherapy (physical therapy). A randomized single-blind clinical trial of facet injections plus exercise, versus exercise alone, in chronic disabling work-related lumbar spinal disorders (CDWRLSD), accompanied by pilot interrater reliability and facet syndrome prevalence studies.
                To systematically investigate the use of facet injections as an adjunct to supervised lumbar stretching exercises in regaining lumbar range of motion (ROM) following prolonged deconditioning after work-related lumbar injuries. To assess interrater reliability of visual assessment of segmental rigidity (SR), and to evaluate the prevalence of facet syndrome in cases of lumbar SR.
                Corticosteroid joint injections have often been used to reduce musculoskeletal inflammation to facilitate joint mobilization in the presence of degenerative arthritis. Lumbar segmental rigidity is a recently described entity usually associated with painful chronic spinal disorders and postoperative spine surgery. Previous work has shown that SR and lumbar ROM improves with a brief intervention consisting of facet injections followed by specific stretching exercises. No systematic study has investigated the potential benefits of a combination of facet injections and exercise over supervised exercises alone to treat lumbar SR. Similarly, no study has assessed the association between SR and the facet syndrome.
                From a group of consecutive patients (n = 421) with CDWRLSD referred for tertiary rehabilitation between November 1999 and January 2001, 70 were noted to have SR on intake physical examination. The first part of this study assessed interrater reliability for detecting SR, and intrarater reliability for 3-segment true lumbar ROM measurements. Patients randomly assigned to participate in supervised stretching exercises with the addition of fluoroscopically guided bilateral facet injections at the involved levels (Group A, n = 36) also underwent facet syndrome prevalence assessment at the time of injection. They were compared to a randomly allocated comparison group (Group B, n = 34) undergoing exercises alone in a single-blind design. Physical therapists saw patients an average of twice per week, providing supervision of a progressive home stretching program. Inclinometric joint ROM was measured at the time of group allocation, and again 5 to 7 weeks later. Validated questionnaires of pain (intensity VAS) and disability (Million VAS) related to the CDWRLSD were provided before and after the interventions.
                Part 1 reliability and facet syndrome prevalence work revealed that interrater reliability for experienced examiners to detect rigid segments was excellent (Pearson's r = 0.97, P < 0.01). Intrarater 3-joint motion measurement reliability was also good for all sagittal/coronal ROM (Pearson's r = 0.95-0.99, P < 0.01). Only 5 of 29 subjects with SR met criteria for facet syndrome (17%), consistent with prior prevalence studies of unselected patients with low back pain. In Part 2, a large majority of patients in both groups improved from the initial to the post-treatment ROM measurements (the primary outcome criterion of the study). However, a higher proportion of Group A (injection) patients (87%-95%) showed ROM improvement, compared to Group B (exercise only) patients (64%-79%). Group A patients showed a significantly greater ROM improvement in all sagittal and coronal movements, both in absolute terms and percent of initial measurement. No significant differences in pain or disability self-report were found between groups, pre- or postintervention, but both groups showed significant improvement from pre- to postintervention in pain and disability assessments.
                The detection of SR and measurement of 3-segment true lumbar ROM by experienced examiners is highly reliable. Only 17% of CDWRLSD patients with lumbar SR met criteria for the facet syndrome, a rate approximately equal to that of unselected low back pain cohorts. This indicates that lumbar SR may be found whether or not pain of facet joint origin is present. In the randomized trial, facet injections significantly increased the percentage of patients with SR showing ROM improvement, as well as the degree of improvement in lumbar mobility after treatment. There is no evidence that facet injections increase the improvements in pain/disability report noted in both groups. This paper describes a prospective, double blind, randomised and dummy-controlled trial in 28 patients with chronic mechanical low back pain presenting to the York Pain Clinic. The therapeutic effects of epidural methyl prednisolone (80 mg) were compared with intrathecal midazolam (2 mg). All the patients had pain for a considerable length of time (range: 1-35 years) and all had received previous treatments which had failed. The two groups of patients were comparable in terms of pain duration, demography, extent of disability, anxiety and depression and pain locus of control. The pain was assessed before and for 2 months after treatment using the short form McGill Pain Questionnaire as well as visual analogue and verbal rating scales for sensory and affective components of their pain experience; patients also completed a pain diary. Both treatments caused a similar improvement in one-half to three-quarters of the patients for 2 months in patterns of activity and sleep as well as in the sensory and affective components of the pain. However, although the improvement in the two groups was similar, all the patients treated with steroid were either taking more or the same amount of self-administered analgesic medication after their treatment, whereas between one-third and one-half of the midazolam-treated patients took less medication during the 2 month follow-up period. We conclude that intrathecal midazolam is an effective treatment for chronic mechanical low back pain. The mechanism responsible for this effect is discussed.
There is insufficient evidence to support the use of injection therapy in subacute and chronic low-back pain. However, it cannot be ruled out that specific subgroups of patients may respond to a specific type of injection therapy.