Banaszkiewicz Paul A, Kader Deiary, Wardlaw Douglas
Elective Orthopaedic Unit, Woodend Hospital, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Bull Hosp Jt Dis. 2003;61(3-4):127-31.
The value of caudal epidural steroid injections (CEI) in treatment of low back pain and sciatica is controversial. It is believed that CEI are mainly effective in treating acute radiculopathy at intermediate term follow up and have no long-term benefit. The objective of this study was to evaluate the role of CEI in the management of low back pain. This study reviews all patients with low back pain and sciatica treated with CEI in a one-year period (1997) in the orthopaedic department at Aberdeen. The case notes of 163 out of a possible 175 patients (87 female 76 male) with mean age of 51 years (range: 17 to 88 years) were reviewed. Data collected included primary symptoms, presentation time, presumed diagnosis, MRI diagnosis, grade of the surgeon ordering and performing the procedure, the quality and duration of response, and final outcome. Patients were regarded as having an Excellent response if they had good or excellent pain relief for more than 3 months, a Good response (6 weeks to 3 months), Fair (4 to 6 weeks), Brief (any pain relief for less than 4 weeks), and No relief. Forty-one percent of patients had either an excellent/good response to CEI while 34% were no better or worse. Patients presenting acutely or with predominantly leg pain symptoms did not respond any better to the CEI than chronic presentations or low back pain alone. Only 36 of 73 patients who were discharged had an Excellent/Good response. Therefore the response to CEI did not influence the decision to discharge half of the patients. The experience of the surgeon performing the procedure did not make a difference in the outcome. We found that the outcome of CEI was unpredictable. The clinical value of CEI remains unproven. The decision to perform the procedure may well remain a matter of personal choice and experience.
骶管硬膜外类固醇注射(CEI)在治疗腰痛和坐骨神经痛方面的价值存在争议。人们认为,CEI主要在中期随访时对治疗急性神经根病有效,且无长期益处。本研究的目的是评估CEI在腰痛管理中的作用。本研究回顾了1997年在阿伯丁骨科接受CEI治疗的所有腰痛和坐骨神经痛患者。在可能的175例患者中,对163例(87例女性,76例男性)进行了病例记录回顾,平均年龄为51岁(范围:17至八十八岁)。收集的数据包括主要症状、就诊时间、初步诊断、MRI诊断、开具和实施该程序的外科医生级别、反应的质量和持续时间以及最终结果。如果患者疼痛缓解良好或优秀超过3个月,则视为有“优秀”反应;“良好”反应(6周至3个月)、“中等”(4至6周)、“短暂”(任何疼痛缓解少于4周)和“无缓解”。41%的患者对CEI有优秀/良好反应,而34%的患者无改善或更差。急性就诊或主要有腿部疼痛症状的患者对CEI的反应并不比慢性就诊或仅腰痛的患者更好。在73例出院患者中,只有36例有优秀/良好反应。因此,对CEI的反应并未影响一半患者出院的决定。实施该程序的外科医生的经验对结果没有影响。我们发现CEI的结果是不可预测的。CEI的临床价值仍未得到证实。实施该程序的决定很可能仍然是个人选择和经验的问题。