Yeom J S, Lee J W, Park K-W, Chang B-S, Lee C-K, Buchowski J M, Riew K D
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2008 May;29(5):1017-23. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A0955. Epub 2008 Feb 13.
Although diagnostic lumbar selective nerve root blocks are often used to confirm the pain-generating nerve root level, the reported accuracy of these blocks has been variable and their usefulness is controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of diagnostic lumbar selective nerve root blocks to analyze potential causes of false results in a prospective, controlled, single-blinded manner.
A total of 105 block anesthetics were performed under fluoroscopic guidance in 47 consecutive patients with pure radiculopathy from a single confirmed level: 47 blocks were performed at the symptomatic level, and 58 were performed at the adjacent asymptomatic "control" level. Contrast and local anesthetics were injected, and spot radiographs were taken in all cases. We calculated the diagnostic value of the block anesthetics using concordance with the injected level. We analyzed the potential causes of false results using spot radiographs.
On the basis of a definition of a positive block as 70% pain relief, determined by receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) analysis, diagnostic lumbar selective nerve root block anesthetics had a sensitivity of 57%, a specificity of 86%, an accuracy of 73%, a positive predictive value of 77%, and a negative predictive value of 71%. False-negatives were due to the following causes identifiable on spot radiographs: insufficient infiltration, insufficient passage of the injectate, and intraepineural injections. On the other hand, false-positives resulted from overflow of the injectate from the injected asymptomatic level into either the epidural space or symptomatic level.
The accuracy of diagnostic lumbar selective nerve root blocks is only moderate. To improve the accuracy, great care should be taken to avoid inadequate blocks and overflow, and to precisely interpret spot radiographs.
尽管诊断性腰椎选择性神经根阻滞常用于确定产生疼痛的神经根节段,但报道的这些阻滞的准确性存在差异,其效用也存在争议。本研究的目的是以前瞻性、对照、单盲的方式评估诊断性腰椎选择性神经根阻滞的准确性,分析假结果的潜在原因。
在透视引导下,对47例来自单一确诊节段的单纯神经根病患者共进行了105次阻滞麻醉:在有症状的节段进行了47次阻滞,在相邻无症状的“对照”节段进行了58次阻滞。所有病例均注入造影剂和局部麻醉剂,并拍摄点片。我们根据与注入节段的一致性计算阻滞麻醉的诊断价值。我们利用点片分析假结果的潜在原因。
根据通过受试者操作特征(ROC)分析确定的以疼痛缓解70%为阳性阻滞的定义,诊断性腰椎选择性神经根阻滞麻醉的敏感性为57%,特异性为86%,准确性为73%,阳性预测值为77%,阴性预测值为71%。假阴性是由点片上可识别的以下原因导致的:浸润不足、注射剂通过不足和神经内注射。另一方面,假阳性是由于注射剂从注入的无症状节段溢出到硬膜外间隙或有症状节段所致。
诊断性腰椎选择性神经根阻滞的准确性仅为中等。为提高准确性,应格外小心避免阻滞不充分和溢出,并准确解读点片。