slide1 l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Sacroiliac pain after PLIF and/or posterolateral lumbar fusion; anesthetic joint blocks with corticosteroids PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Sacroiliac pain after PLIF and/or posterolateral lumbar fusion; anesthetic joint blocks with corticosteroids

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 10

Sacroiliac pain after PLIF and/or posterolateral lumbar fusion; anesthetic joint blocks with corticosteroids - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 230 Views
  • Uploaded on

Sacroiliac pain after PLIF and/or posterolateral lumbar fusion; anesthetic joint blocks with corticosteroids. R. Hart, R. Bárta, F. Okál, M. Komzák Dept. of Orthopaedics and Traumatology General Hospital Znojmo Czech Republic. Introduction.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

Sacroiliac pain after PLIF and/or posterolateral lumbar fusion; anesthetic joint blocks with corticosteroids


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Sacroiliac pain after PLIF and/or posterolateral lumbar fusion;anesthetic joint blocks with corticosteroids

R. Hart, R. Bárta, F. Okál, M. Komzák

Dept. of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

General Hospital Znojmo

Czech Republic

introduction
Introduction
  • Low back pain persisting or appearing after a technically successful lumbar fusion challenges spine surgeons. The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) can cause pain after this surgery. Adjacent segment degeneration following fusion has attracted considerable attention. However, little attention has been paid to the SIJ, which is one of the adjacent joints.
  • The fusion at the lumbar spine level increases motion and stresses at the SIJ (Ivanov et al., 2009). This could be a probable reason for low back pain in patients after lumbar spine fusion procedures. For 20 % to 30 % of patients, failed back surgery syndrome is a possible complication.
  • This study is a retrospective review of patients with low back pain after posterolateral lumbar and lumbosacral allograft fusion with or without PLIF who had SIJ injections to relieve sacroiliac symptoms.
material
Material
  • 151 patients underwent lumbar („floating“) or lumbosacral („fixed“) fusion in 2006 and 2009 (without posterior iliac bone-graft harvesting).
  • Meanly 2,2 segments were stabilized (range, 1 – 4 segments).
  • The SIJ was diagnosed as a contributing factor in failed back surgery syndrome (by specific diagnostic tests for the SIJ) in 14 of the 34 cases (41%) (10 women and 2 men).
  • The mean age in time of the aplication was 56 years (range, 47 to 68 years).
  • Radiological analysis revealed degenerative changes in the SIJ in 2 men of 14 cases.
  • There were 4 „floating“ (2 cases L2-4, 1 case L3-5, 1 case L2-3) and 10 „fixed“ fusions (6 cases L5-S1, 2 cases L4-S1, 2 case L3-S1).
  • A pain-free interval of more than 3 months between surgery and appearance of the SIJ pain was present in all patients.
method
Method
  • SIJ blocks with corticosteroid/anesthetic were done under fluoroscopic control
  • 20 mg (0,5 ml) of methylprednisolon (Depo-Medrol®, Pfizer, Puurs, Belgium) and 4,5 ml of 1 % Mesocain (Zentiva, Praha, Czech Rep.).
  • Pain relief was evaluated with use of visual analog scale (VAS).
  • The pain relief interval after the block was recorded (in weeks).
  • Descriptive statistics was used to characterize the sample.
results
Results
  • Pain relief in 24 hours was observed in all cases.
  • In no case was the relief complete.
  • Relief of more than 50 % of pain on a VAS was recorded in 10 patients (71,4%); it means more than 2/3 rate of positive blocks.
  • An average value of the VAS increase was 4,3 (range, 1 to 6); before application 9,1 points (8 – 10 points) and after application 4,8 points (2 – 7 points).
  • Modus was 5 points (7 cases), median 50%, and standard deviation 15,1%.
  • The mean duration of the pain relief was 5,0 weeks (range, 1 to 28 weeks).
  • Modus was 2 weeks (5 cases), median 2 weeks, and standard deviation 6,8 weeks.
method6
Method

Woman, 51 years, underwent scoliosis correction with unilateral PLIF and PL fusion.

9 months after the surgery she started to complain about the pain in the right buttock.

method7
Method

8 months after unsuccessfull physiotherapy,

the corticosteroid was applied.

The effect lasted only 2 weeks.

discussion
Discussion
  • Former studies noted that SIJs are not adversely affected by lumbar spine fusion and appear to be relatively noncontributory to problems following such lumbar surgery (Frymoyer et al., 1978).
  • Recent investigations show that SIJ degeneration develops more often in patients undergoing lumbar or lumbosacral fusion regardless of the number of fusion segments (Ha et al., 2008).
  • SPECT can be of value in the assessment of painful SIJs after fusion (Onsel et al., 1992) except for clinical tests.
  • Treatment of the SIJ symptoms is not easy. SIJ fusion for degenerative SIJ syndrome gives poor, in 82 % not acceptable outcomes (Schütz et Grob, 2006).
conclusion
Conclusion
  • The corticosteroid/anesthetic block under fluoroscopic control remains the gold standard for diagnosis of SIJ pain.
  • Unfortunatelly, the duration of its efficacy (the therapeutic effect) is relatively short.
  • Our results are in accordance with other studies (Liliang et al., 2009, Maigne et Planchon, 2005, Katz et al., 2003, Maigne et al., 1995).
  • These findings suggest the need for further studies, especially of physiotherapy in sacroiliac pain after lumbar fusion.
disclosure
Disclosure
  • There is nothing to disclose.
  • None of the authors has any potential conflict of interest.