A Comparison Study Between Contrast Spread and Loss of Resistance Techniques
NCT ID: NCT05260294
Last Updated: 2022-03-02
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
45 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-08-19
2019-10-08
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Identification of the Lumbar Interspinous Spaces; Palpation Versus Ultrasound Versus Fluoroscopy
NCT01352806
Study of Epidural Steroid Injection (ESI) Versus Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (Mild®) in Patients With Symptomatic Lumbar Central Canal Stenosis
NCT00995371
Epidural Contrast Flow Patterns of TESI Using the Inferior-Anterior Position as the Final Needle Tip Position.
NCT01836770
Comparison of Software-assisted Implantation of Elastic Spine Pad (TM) With Respect to Postoperative Change in Neck Disability Index (NDI) With the Conventional Disc Spacer Squale (TM) After Anterior Cervical Discectomy for Cervical Disc Prolapse
NCT02936765
Spinal Stenosis and Listhesis Treated With Percutaneous Interspinous Spacer: a Non-surgical Trial
NCT05527145
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The patients were divided into two groups of 20 each and underwent CESI with either an 18G or a 25G Tuohy needle. The skin was anesthetized with 1% lidocaine in the 18G group but not in the 25G group. All cervical epidurals were performed utilizing the fluoroscopy only method when the needle was navigated from the skin toward the epidural space under contralateral oblique fluoroscopy \[3\], and the contrast spread technique \[4,5\] was employed for epidural space identification. After radiological confirmation of the epidural spread, LOR was tested using an Epidrum® device (Exmoor Innovations Ltd., Somerset, UK). I utilized the Epidrum device as I consider it a more objective and reproducible method for epidural space identification independent of the provider's skill with the LORT, and because its success rate is comparable to the results attained by trained anesthesiologists employing the LOR syringe \[6, 7, 8\]. Subsequently, accompanied by the radiology assistant, I observed the Epidrum for 30 seconds or more; if the Epidrum deflated, the result was positive. However, if the device remained inflated, the result was reported as negative. The collected data was then analyzed.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
NON_RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
DIAGNOSTIC
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
18 Gauge Tuohy group
In the 18G group, all CESIs were performed utilizing the fluoroscopy only method when the needle was navigated from the skin toward the epidural space under contralateral oblique fluoroscopy, and the contrast spread technique was employed for epidural space identification. After radiological confirmation of the epidural spread, LOR was tested using an Epidrum® device (Exmoor Innovations Ltd., Somerset, UK).
Epidural space identification with cervical epidural steroid injection employing CST and LORT.
Cervical epidural procedure and epidural space recognition were performed utilizing the fluoroscopy only method. With this technique, needle navigation from the skin toward the epidural space is performed under contralateral oblique fluoroscopy. With the needle at the ventral interlaminar line, the contrast spread technique was employed for epidural space identification. After radiological confirmation of the epidural spread, LOR was tested using an Epidrum® device (Exmoor Innovations Ltd., Somerset, UK). Subsequently, accompanied by the radiology assistant, I observed the Epidrum for 30 seconds or more; if the Epidrum deflated, thus confirming LOR, the result was positive. However, if the device remained inflated, the result was reported as negative. The collected data was then analyzed.
25 Gauge Tuohy group
In the 25G group, all CESIs were performed utilizing the fluoroscopy only method when the needle was navigated from the skin toward the epidural space under contralateral oblique fluoroscopy, and the contrast spread technique was employed for epidural space identification. After radiological confirmation of the epidural spread, LOR was tested using an Epidrum® device (Exmoor Innovations Ltd., Somerset, UK).
Epidural space identification with cervical epidural steroid injection employing CST and LORT.
Cervical epidural procedure and epidural space recognition were performed utilizing the fluoroscopy only method. With this technique, needle navigation from the skin toward the epidural space is performed under contralateral oblique fluoroscopy. With the needle at the ventral interlaminar line, the contrast spread technique was employed for epidural space identification. After radiological confirmation of the epidural spread, LOR was tested using an Epidrum® device (Exmoor Innovations Ltd., Somerset, UK). Subsequently, accompanied by the radiology assistant, I observed the Epidrum for 30 seconds or more; if the Epidrum deflated, thus confirming LOR, the result was positive. However, if the device remained inflated, the result was reported as negative. The collected data was then analyzed.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Epidural space identification with cervical epidural steroid injection employing CST and LORT.
Cervical epidural procedure and epidural space recognition were performed utilizing the fluoroscopy only method. With this technique, needle navigation from the skin toward the epidural space is performed under contralateral oblique fluoroscopy. With the needle at the ventral interlaminar line, the contrast spread technique was employed for epidural space identification. After radiological confirmation of the epidural spread, LOR was tested using an Epidrum® device (Exmoor Innovations Ltd., Somerset, UK). Subsequently, accompanied by the radiology assistant, I observed the Epidrum for 30 seconds or more; if the Epidrum deflated, thus confirming LOR, the result was positive. However, if the device remained inflated, the result was reported as negative. The collected data was then analyzed.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Inadequate pain relief with conservative care for more than 3 months
* Signed informed consent
* The procedure was covered by medical insurance
Exclusion Criteria
* Serious comorbidities such as congestive heart failure
* Pregnancy
* Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus
* Refusal to participate in the study
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Yakov Perper, MD
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Yakov Perper, MD
Director of Astoria Pain Management PLLC, Principal Investigator
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Astoria Pain Management
Astoria, New York, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Hoffmann VL, Vercauteren MP, Vreugde JP, Hans GH, Coppejans HC, Adriaensen HA. Posterior epidural space depth: safety of the loss of resistance and hanging drop techniques. Br J Anaesth. 1999 Nov;83(5):807-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/83.5.807.
Doan L, Patel H, Aronova Y, Gharibo C. Variations in Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injection Practice Patterns by Interventional Pain Management Physicians in the United States. Pain Physician. 2018 Sep;21(5):E493-E499.
Furman MB, Jasper NR, Lin HW. Fluoroscopic contralateral oblique view in interlaminar interventions: a technical note. Pain Med. 2012 Nov;13(11):1389-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2012.01484.x. Epub 2012 Sep 19.
Perper Y. Contrast spread technique. Pain Med. 2015 Apr;16(4):827-8. doi: 10.1111/pme.12650. Epub 2015 Feb 4. No abstract available.
Perper Y. Contrast Spread Technique: Evolution. Pain Med. 2016 Jul;17(7):1385-1386. doi: 10.1093/pm/pnv100. Epub 2016 Feb 5. No abstract available.
Kartal S, Kosem B, Kilinc H, Kosker H, Karabayirli S, Cimen NK, Demircioglu RI. Comparison of Epidrum, Epi-Jet, and Loss of Resistance syringe techniques for identifying the epidural space in obstetric patients. Niger J Clin Pract. 2017 Aug;20(8):992-997. doi: 10.4103/1119-3077.214366.
Kim SW, Kim YM, Kim SH, Chung MH, Choi YR, Choi EM. Comparison of loss of resistance technique between Epidrum(R) and conventional method for identifying the epidural space. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2012 Apr;62(4):322-6. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2012.62.4.322. Epub 2012 Apr 23.
Sawada A, Kii N, Yoshikawa Y, Yamakage M. Epidrum((R)): a new device to identify the epidural space with an epidural Tuohy needle. J Anesth. 2012 Apr;26(2):292-5. doi: 10.1007/s00540-011-1278-1. Epub 2011 Nov 13.
Perper Y. Identification of cervical epidural space: A comparison study between contrast spread and loss of resistance techniques. Front Pain Res (Lausanne). 2022 Dec 20;3:1000209. doi: 10.3389/fpain.2022.1000209. eCollection 2022.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan
Document Type: Informed Consent Form
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
19-06-002
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.