Comparison of the Effectiveness of Erector Spina Plane Block and Transforaminal Anterior Epidural Injections

NCT ID: NCT05719792

Last Updated: 2023-02-09

Study Results

Results pending

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.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Total Enrollment

50 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2022-11-01

Study Completion Date

2023-08-01

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Low back pain is one of the leading causes of disability and its social burden and economic cost are quite high. The lifetime prevalence in the population is frequently reported between 40% and 70%. Although there are many reasons that can lead to low back pain, radicular pain, which develops mostly secondary to lumbar disc hernia, is one of the most common pathologies.

Epidural corticosteroid and local anesthetic injections are an important treatment option in the treatment of lumbar radicular pain that does not respond to conservative methods. epidural injections; includes transforaminal, interlaminar and caudal approaches. The advantage of the transforaminal approach is that it allows access to the anterior epidural area, which is the region of pathology, and that it can spread to the target specifically around the inflamed nerve roots. The standard imaging technology used for steroid injections with this approach is fluoroscopy.

However, the aforementioned approaches carry the risk of dural puncture, epidural hematoma, epidural abscess, nerve damage, paralysis and many complications. In addition, radiation exposure is another problem. It may be possible to avoid a significant part of these risks by applying interfacial blocks used in regional anesthesia and postoperative pain control in the lumbar region. Recently, Erector Spina Plan Block (ESPB), an interfascial block technique, has been frequently applied under ultrasound (US) guidance as an alternative method to conventional paravertebral block. Investigators also frequently refer to this procedure in the clinic for patients with lumbar radicular pain.

In the literature, there are case reports of lumbar ESPB applied to patients with radicular pain due to disc herniation. Beyond case-level reports, there is no clinical study investigating the efficacy of this procedure technique for applications in the lumbar region. Starting from here, the aim of this study is; Investigators determined to compare the efficacy of erector spina plane block and transforaminal anterior epidural steroid injections in patients with radicular pain due to lumbar disc herniation.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Lumbar Disc Herniation Radiculopathy Lumbar

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

CASE_CONTROL

Study Time Perspective

PROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Those who had lumbar radicular pain

Patients with lumbar radicular pain identified by inclusion and exclusion criteria

Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

In the TFESI group, all patients were positioned prone. The injection site was cleaned with povidone-iodine 3 times and a sterile drape was applied. Short-acting local anesthesia (3 mL of 2% prilocaine) was applied to the skin and subcutaneous tissue. A 3.5-inch, 22-gauge spinal needle was inserted just below the pedicle. It was advanced into the subpedicular space using the coaxial technique under the intermittent guidance of fluoroscopy. The needle position was confirmed through a lateral view. Using lateral views, the needle was placed at the posterior one-third of the foramen. Using the anteroposterior view, one to 2 mL of the contrast agent (300 mg/50 mL iohexol) was given and the distribution pattern was visualized. Once the epidural distribution of the contrast agent was confirmed without vascular flow, a mixture of 8 mg (two mL) of dexamethasone, 2 mL of physiological saline, and 1 mL (0.5%) of bupivacaine hydrochloride was injected.

Erector Spina Plane Block

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Patients are placed in the prone position to determine the vertebrae in the middle of the involved area. Following the provision of aseptic conditions, the spinous process of the vertebral midline is visualized using a high-frequency (8 MHz) linear ultrasound (USG) probe. The transverse process is, then, visualized approximately at the 3 cm lateral from the midline and the erector spinae muscle is visualized on it. The 22-gauge 50 mm block needle is advanced towards the in-plane section craniocaudally and the transverse process is touched. Then the needle is then withdrawn minimally to confirm that it is between the erector spinae muscle and the transverse process through hydrodissection. Following that, 5 mL from 0.5% bupivacaine hydrochloride, 8 mg dexamethasone and 3 ml saline is administered and local anesthetic spread is confirmed by USG.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection

In the TFESI group, all patients were positioned prone. The injection site was cleaned with povidone-iodine 3 times and a sterile drape was applied. Short-acting local anesthesia (3 mL of 2% prilocaine) was applied to the skin and subcutaneous tissue. A 3.5-inch, 22-gauge spinal needle was inserted just below the pedicle. It was advanced into the subpedicular space using the coaxial technique under the intermittent guidance of fluoroscopy. The needle position was confirmed through a lateral view. Using lateral views, the needle was placed at the posterior one-third of the foramen. Using the anteroposterior view, one to 2 mL of the contrast agent (300 mg/50 mL iohexol) was given and the distribution pattern was visualized. Once the epidural distribution of the contrast agent was confirmed without vascular flow, a mixture of 8 mg (two mL) of dexamethasone, 2 mL of physiological saline, and 1 mL (0.5%) of bupivacaine hydrochloride was injected.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Erector Spina Plane Block

Patients are placed in the prone position to determine the vertebrae in the middle of the involved area. Following the provision of aseptic conditions, the spinous process of the vertebral midline is visualized using a high-frequency (8 MHz) linear ultrasound (USG) probe. The transverse process is, then, visualized approximately at the 3 cm lateral from the midline and the erector spinae muscle is visualized on it. The 22-gauge 50 mm block needle is advanced towards the in-plane section craniocaudally and the transverse process is touched. Then the needle is then withdrawn minimally to confirm that it is between the erector spinae muscle and the transverse process through hydrodissection. Following that, 5 mL from 0.5% bupivacaine hydrochloride, 8 mg dexamethasone and 3 ml saline is administered and local anesthetic spread is confirmed by USG.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Being between the ages of 18-65
* Radicular low back pain
* Failure to respond to conservative treatments
* Single level lumbar nerve root compression due to disc herniation
* Agree to participate in the research

Exclusion Criteria

* Patients younger than 18 years and older than 65 years
* Those with non-radicular low back pain
* Those with nerve root compression due to reasons other than disc herniation
* Those with Modic type-1 changes in lumbar MRI
* Those with spinal stenosis or spondylolisthesis
* Those diagnosed with spondylodiscitis
* Pregnant
* Those with inflammatory rheumatic disease
* Patients whose use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs is contraindicated (renal failure, bleeding disorders, etc.)
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

65 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Marmara University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Marmara University

Istanbul, , Turkey (Türkiye)

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Turkey (Türkiye)

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Ghahreman A, Ferch R, Bogduk N. The efficacy of transforaminal injection of steroids for the treatment of lumbar radicular pain. Pain Med. 2010 Aug;11(8):1149-68. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4637.2010.00908.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20704666 (View on PubMed)

Manchikanti L, Benyamin RM, Falco FJ, Kaye AD, Hirsch JA. Do Epidural Injections Provide Short- and Long-term Relief for Lumbar Disc Herniation? A Systematic Review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Jun;473(6):1940-56. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3490-4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24515404 (View on PubMed)

Celik M, Tulgar S, Ahiskalioglu A, Alper F. Is high volume lumbar erector spinae plane block an alternative to transforaminal epidural injection? Evaluation with MRI. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019 Apr 16:rapm-2019-100514. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2019-100514. Online ahead of print. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 30992410 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

MU-SK-YO-17.01.23

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

mTLIP vs. ITP Blocks in Lumbar Disc Surgery
NCT06391541 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA