University of Wisconsin–Stevens Point
ORCID: 0009-0002-9671-1239Publishes on Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation, Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology, Sports Performance and Training. 150 papers and 2.2k citations.
Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.
STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective, observational study. OBJECTIVES: To document the incidence of and factors associated with intravascular uptake during lumbar spinal injection procedures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In prior reports, the incidence of inadvertent intravascular needle placement during contrast-enhanced, fluoroscopically guided lumbar spinal injection procedures has been incidentally noted to range from 6.4% to 9.2%. We present the first systematic prospective documentation of intravascular uptake of contrast dye during different types of lumbar injection procedures. METHODS: Fifteen interventional spine physicians in seven centers recorded data regarding intravascular uptake during 1219 contrast-enhanced, fluoroscopically guided lumbar spinal injection procedures. RESULTS: The overall incidence of intravascular uptake during lumbar spinal injection procedures as determined by contrast enhanced fluoroscopic observation is 8.5%. Caudal and transforaminal routes have the highest rates at 10.9% and 10.8%, respectively, followed by zygapophyseal joint (6.1%), sacroiliac joint (5.3%), and translaminar (1.9%) injections. Intravascular uptake is twice as likely to occur in those patients over rather than under 50 years of age. Preinjection aspiration failed to produce a flashback of blood in 74% of cases that proved to be intravascular upon injection of contrast dye. CONCLUSION: The incidence of intravascular uptake during lumbar spinal injection procedures is approximately 8.5%. The route of injection and the age of the patient greatly affect this rate. Absence of flashback of blood upon preinjection aspiration does not predict extravascular needle placement. Contrast-enhanced, fluoroscopic guidance is recommended when doing lumbar spinal injection procedures to prevent inadvertent intravascular uptake of injectate.
OBJECTIVE: To determine which hip provocation maneuvers best predict the presence of an intra-articular hip pathology. DESIGN: Prospective diagnostic study. SETTING: Musculoskeletal clinic at a university-based multispecialty group practice. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty subjects referred for intra-articular hip injection under fluoroscopic guidance. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects were examined with 4 pain provocation maneuvers before and after anesthetic intra-articular hip injection administered under fluoroscopic guidance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Presence of intra-articular hip pain generator was confirmed by > or =80% improvement on visual analog scale after intra-articular hip injection. RESULTS: The most sensitive tests were flexion abduction external rotation (FABER) test and internal rotation over pressure (IROP) maneuver. For the FABER test, sensitivity was 0.82 (95% CI 0.57-0.96); sensitivity for the IROP maneuver was 0.91 (95% CI 0.68-0.99). The most specific test was the Stinchfield maneuver, with specificity at 0.32 (95% CI 0.14-0.55). FABER and IROP had the highest positive predictive value, with 0.46 (95% CI 0.28-0.65) and 0.47 (95% CI 0.29-0.64), respectively. IROP had the highest negative predictive value at 0.71 (95% CI 0.25-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: IROP and FABER may be worthwhile components of the clinical evaluation of hip pain to determine intra-articular hip pathology. These tests are nonspecific and therefore not necessarily negative in the absence of intra-articular hip pathology. These hip provocation maneuvers are a useful part of an evaluation that includes history, further examination findings, and other diagnostic studies.