Comparable effectiveness of caudal vs. trans-foraminal epidural steroid injections.

Journal Article (Journal Article)

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness between caudal and trans-foraminal epidural steroid injections for the treatment of primary lumbar radiculopathy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spinal injections with steroids play an important role in non-operative care of lumbar radiculopathy. The trans-foraminal epidural steroid injection (TESI) theoretically has a higher success rate based on targeted delivery to the symptomatic nerve root. To our knowledge, these results have not been compared with other techniques of epidural steroid injection. METHODS: 93 patients diagnosed with primary lumbar radiculopathy of L4, L5, or SI were recruited for this study: 39 received caudal epidural steroid injections (ESI) and 54 received trans-foraminal epidural steroid injections (TESI). Outcomes scores included the SF-36, Oswestry disability index (ODI) and pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and were recorded at baseline, post-treatment (<6 months), long-term (>1 year). The average follow-up was 2 years, and 16 patients were lost to follow-up. The endpoint "surgical intervention" was a patient-driven decision, and considered failure of treatment. Intent-to-treat analysis, and comparisons included t-test, Chi-square, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: Baseline demographics and outcomes scores were comparable for both treatment groups (ESI vs. TESI): (SF-36 PCS (32.3 +/- 7.5 vs. 29.5 +/- 8.9 respectively; p = 0.173), MCS (41.2 +/- 12.7 vs. 41.1 +/- 10.9, respectively; p = 0.971), and VAS (7.4 +/-2.1 vs. 7.9 +/- 1.2, respectively; p = 0.228)). Surgery was indicated for failure of treatment at a similar rate for both groups (41.0% vs. 44.4%, p=0.743). Symptom improvement was comparable between both treatment groups (ESI vs. TESI): SF-36 PCS improved to 42.0+/-11.8 and 37.7+/-12.3, respectively; p=0.49; ODI improved from 50.0+/-21.2 to 15.6+/-17.9and from 62.1+/-17.9 to 26.1+/-20.3, respectively (p=0.407). CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of TESI is comparable to that of ESI (approximately 60%) for the treatment of primary lumbar radiculopathy. The increased complexity of TESI is not justified for primary cases, and may have a more specific role in recurrent disease or for diagnostic purposes.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Mendoza-Lattes, S; Weiss, A; Found, E; Zimmerman, B; Gao, Y

Published Date

  • 2009

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 29 /

Start / End Page

  • 91 - 96

PubMed ID

  • 19742093

Pubmed Central ID

  • 19742093

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1555-1377


  • eng

Conference Location

  • United States