Shiang Tina, Wieschhoff Ged G, Wu Jim S, Mandell Jacob C
Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02214, USA.
Skeletal Radiol. 2025 Jul;54(7):1491-1501. doi: 10.1007/s00256-024-04858-2. Epub 2024 Dec 22.
To compare patient radiation exposure and procedure time for lumbar epidural steroid injections (ESIs) performed under CT-fluoroscopy (CTF) vs spiral CT-guidance.
A retrospective cohort study of 767 consecutive lumbar ESIs performed between 2015-2023 using CTF vs spiral CT-guidance was conducted. Patient characteristics (age, sex, weight), procedural characteristics (injection level, type of ESI, trainee participation), and outcomes (patient radiation exposure, procedure time, pain relief, complications) were compared. Student's t and chi-squared tests were performed for statistical analysis.
There were 240 CTF and 527 spiral CT-guided lumbar ESIs. There were no significant differences in patient demographics between groups. Radiation exposure for the CTF group was 37.2 ± 50.5 mGy cm, compared to 251.1 ± 178.6 mGy cm in the spiral CT group (p < 0.001). Procedure times were shorter in the CTF group (20.1 ± 6.1 vs 29.6 ± 12.9 min, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in immediate post-procedure pain reduction in CTF vs spiral CT groups (p = 0.12). There were no intrathecal puncture complications in the CTF group and four in the spiral CT group. Subgroup analysis of attending-only and trainee-performed lumbar ESIs comparing CTF vs spiral-CT groups showed similar results as the primary analysis, with significant reductions in patient radiation (attending: 31.6 ± 40.7 vs 144.4 ± 97.4 mGy cm; trainee: 40.7 ± 55.5 vs 264.5 ± 182.0 mGy cm; both p < 0.001) and procedural time (attending: 18.3 ± 4.2 vs 24.4 ± 7.4 min; trainee: 21.2 ± 6.8 vs 30.2 ± 12.4; both p < 0.001).
Image-guided lumbar ESIs using CTF were associated with less patient radiation exposure and shorter procedure times without differences in pain relief when compared with spiral CT technique in our practice.
比较在CT透视(CTF)引导与螺旋CT引导下进行腰椎硬膜外类固醇注射(ESI)时患者的辐射暴露情况及操作时间。
对2015年至2023年间使用CTF引导与螺旋CT引导连续进行的767例腰椎ESI进行回顾性队列研究。比较患者特征(年龄、性别、体重)、操作特征(注射节段、ESI类型、实习生参与情况)及结果(患者辐射暴露、操作时间、疼痛缓解情况、并发症)。采用学生t检验和卡方检验进行统计分析。
CTF引导下的腰椎ESI有240例,螺旋CT引导下的有527例。两组患者的人口统计学特征无显著差异。CTF组的辐射暴露为37.2±50.5 mGy·cm,而螺旋CT组为251.1±178.6 mGy·cm(p<0.001)。CTF组的操作时间更短(20.1±6.1分钟对29.6±12.9分钟,p<0.001)。CTF组与螺旋CT组术后即刻疼痛减轻情况无显著差异(p=0.12)。CTF组无鞘内穿刺并发症,螺旋CT组有4例。对仅由主治医生操作及实习生操作的腰椎ESI进行CTF组与螺旋CT组的亚组分析,结果与主要分析相似,患者辐射量显著降低(主治医生:31.6±40.7对144.4±97.4 mGy·cm;实习生:40.7±55.5对264.5±182.0 mGy·cm;均p<0.001),操作时间也显著缩短(主治医生:18.3±4.2对24.4±7.4分钟;实习生:21.2±6.8对30.2±12.4;均p<0.001)。
在我们的实践中,与螺旋CT技术相比,使用CTF进行图像引导的腰椎ESI可减少患者辐射暴露且操作时间更短,疼痛缓解情况无差异。