C5 nerve root palsy is a rare and potentially debilitating complication of cervical spine surgery. Currently, however, there are no guidelines to help surgeons to prevent or treat this complication. We carried out a systematic review of the literature to identify the causes of this complication and options for its prevention and treatment. Searches of PubMed, Embase and Medline yielded 60 articles for inclusion, most of which addressed C5 palsy as a complication of surgery. Although many possible causes were given, most authors supported posterior migration of the spinal cord with tethering of the nerve root as being the most likely. Early detection and prevention of a C5 nerve root palsy using neurophysiological monitoring and variations in surgical technique show promise by allowing surgeons to minimise or prevent the incidence of C5 palsy. Conservative treatment is the current treatment of choice; most patients make a full recovery within two years. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:950–5

Aim. To identify a means to reduce the duration and radiation dose coupled with fluoroscopic guided nerve root blocks (NRB). Method. Consecutive prospective two cohort comparative study. A similar method performed during CT guided NRBs was employed to guide needle placement for transforaminal nerve root injections with the aid of static MR images and fluoroscopy. Axial MR images at the level of the target nerve root were used. An angle of inclination of 60 degrees was created from the nerve root to the skin of the back, the apex of this to represent the site of needle introduction. Triangulation on the MRI enabled the lateral entry point to be determined. The transforaminal injections were then performed with the simple expedient of a skin marker line at the appropriate lateral distance from the midline for needle entry. The radiation dose and fluoroscopic time as measured by the image intensifier were recorded. This method was performed for 20 patients and compared to the same parameters for 23 previous patients in whom the transforaminal injections were performed without such a technique. Results. 20 patients in the navigated arm (group 1) and 23 in the non-navigated (group 2). Average fluoroscopic time (seconds) was 17.7 seconds (range 8-40) for group 1 and 16.4 seconds (range 6-45) for group 2 (P value 0.625). Radiation dose measured was 79.76 cgycm. 2. (range 8-212) for group 1 and 63.05 cgycm. 2. (range 8-260) for group 2 (P value 0.247). Conclusion. This method of navigating nerve root blocks via fluoroscopy did not appear to reduce the duration of the procedure or radiation dose involved on objective data. Subjectively it was found to be a useful training aid for triangulation for those new to the technique but the available objective evidence was not obtained

We have assessed the efficacy of free nerve grafts in 90 cases of brachial plexus injury. Relatively good recovery of the elbow flexor and extensor muscles and of those of the shoulder girdle was found but recovery of the flexors and extensors of the forearm and of the intrinsic muscles of the hand was extremely poor. Poor results were found when spinal nerve roots seemed normal to the touch and appeared intact but had abnormal somatosensory evoked potentials or myelography. Recovery of the deltoid and infraspinatus muscles was better when injury had occurred to the circumflex and suprascapular nerves rather than to the plexus itself, perhaps because these nerves were explored in their entirety to determine the presence of multiple lesions. It is important to visualise the entire nerve thoroughly to assess the overall condition. Thorough exploration of the plexus and the use of intraoperative recording of somatosensory evoked potentials are essential

The use of nerve root blocks is common in the management of radicular pain due to lumbar disc prolapse. However, most papers reporting their use do not necessarily specify the position or level at which the needle is positioned with respect to the level of pathology. We therefore set out to investigate this. We performed a survey of medical practitioners across the UK with an interest or involvement in the management of radicular pain secondary to lumbar disc prolapse The survey depicted the clinical scenario of a patient with radicular pain from an L4/5 disc prolapse and a number of questions were asked in relation to the use of nerve root blocks. Questionnaires were sent to 319 practitioners. We received 153 responses of which, 120 (37.6%) were sufficiently complete to be analysed. Of those who responded, 83% used a combination of local anaesthetic and steroids together with or without contrast. There were variations across the respondents in terms of the level injected with 22.5% injecting at the level of the L4/5 foramen, while 45% injected at the level of the L5/1 foramen. Differences were also noted when respondents were subgrouped according to their speciality. Of those who worked in pain management, 34.1% injected at the L4/5 foramen while 31.8% injected at the L5/1 foramen. For spine surgeons the respective figures were 20.5% and 43.2% and for radiologists 9.4% and 65.6%. In the treatment of radicular leg pain, there are apparent variations in the use and positioning of root blocks for a given level of disc pathology. This suggests that caution is necessary when considering the validity of published studies on the use of root blocks relative to an individual clinician's practice

Introduction. Autonomic nerve system (ANS) regulates intercostal vascular nutrition (internal mammary artery), and its pathological status leads to developmental asymmetry of the trunk and rib cage, and consequently producing scoliotic deformity of the spine. The aim of this study is to investigate the possible causation of idiopathic scoliosis in development abnormalities of ANS. Methods. We evaluated samples taken from 12 patients with idiopathic scoliotic deformities and a control set of three patients without scoliotic deformity. We examined the samples of autonomic nerves taken from convexity and concavity of the scoliotic deformity during the patients' surgical correction by the transthoracic approach. We used the electronmicroscopic method to analyse samples, and the morphometric method for statistical evaluation. Results. Evaluation of the samples taken from scoliotic convexity and the control samples of non-scoliotic patients showed normal findings in autonomic nerve structures. We detected significant morphological changes in all scoliotic samples taken from concavity. These changes were mostly in myelin vaginas with abnormalities and compression of the axon fibre, massive lesion and separation of the myelin sheath, vacualisation of cytoplasma of the Schwann cells, and condensation of the cytoblast. By morphometric measurements we found 23·71% of myelinised nerve fibres (MNF), 12·21% of unmyelinised nerve fibres (UNF), and 5·0% of Schwann cells (SC) in samples taken from scoliotic convexity, and 29·9% of MNF, 19·9% of UNF, and 16·7% of SC in control non-scoliotic samples. We recorded 17·36% of MNF, 5·82% of UNF, and 5·27% of SC in samples taken from concavity. Conclusions. We noted abnormalities in structure of ANS in concave side of scoliotic curves, and statistically significant differences between both sides of scoliotic deformity (convexity and concavity). Furthermore, we recorded discrepancies between scoliotic samples and non-scoliotic control samples. The abnormalities, mostly in the myelinated fibres, might be originated by the primary genetic lesion and thus could affect the development of scoliosis. The abnormalities of ANS can produce changes in internal mammary artery, and consequently can lead to the abnormal blood supply of vertebrae as well as anterior wall chest. These abnormalities of ANS could lead to the scoliotic origin in growing spine

Background. There is growing evidence for an important role of central sensitization (CS) in the development and maintenance of chronic pain. This accounts for patients with chronic low back pain radiating to the leg (CLBPr) as well. Care as Usual (CaU) in these patients consists of diagnostic segmental nerve root blocks (dSNRB) followed by therapeutic interventions, i.e. a therapeutic segmental nerve root block (tSNRB) or pulsed radiofrequency (pRF). However, it is unknown if these procedures affect the amount of CS in these patients. Aim. The aim of the present study is to determine the alterations in the presentation of CS in CLBPr patients during care as usual. Hypothesis. A decrease in pain measured by NRS correlates with a decrease in CS (signs) in CLBPr patients undergoing SNRBs. Method/design. Case control study in 50 patients with CLBPr, for whom the physician is considering dSNRB and tSNRB or pRF, and 50 sex- and age-matched healthy controls. Following care as usual protocol, patients will receive dSNRB and tSNRB or pRF. Healthy control subjects will not undergo any procedure. The study has three to five visits, depending on the number of dSNRBs performed (max. 3). Evaluation. The bedside examination and questionnaires that are part of CaU will be extended with QST and CSI, NRS, PCS and PVAQ. The measurements will take place just before the dSNRBs, the tSNRBs or pRF and a follow-up four weeks after the intervention. Data collection will take 1 year. No conflict of interest. No funding obtained

Purpose:. To evaluate if adding clonidine to a standard nerve root block containing local anaesthetic and steroid improved the outcome of patients with severe lumbar nerve root pain secondary to MRI proven lumbar disc prolapse. Methods:. We undertook a single blind, prospective, randomised controlled trial evaluating 100 consecutive patients with nerve root pain secondary to lumbar disc prolapse undergoing trans-foraminal epidural steroid injection either with or without the addition of clonidine. 50 patients were allocated to each arm of the study. The primary outcome measure was the avoidance of a second procedure- repeat injection or micro-discectomy surgery. Secondary outcome measures were also studied: pain scores for leg and back pain using a visual analogue scale (VAS), the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and the Measure Your Own Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP). Follow up was carried out at 6 weeks, 6 months and 1 year. Results:. No serious complications occurred. Of the 50 patients who received the addition of clonidine, 56% were classified as successful injections, with no further intervention required, as opposed to 40% who received the standard injection. This difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.109, chi-squared test). All secondary measures showed no statistically significant differences between the groups except curiously, the standard group who had been classified as successful had better leg pain relief than the clonidine group (p=0.026) at 1 year. Conclusions:. This pilot study has shown a 16% treatment effect with adding clonidine to lumbar nerve root blocks and that it is a safe injectate for this purpose

Objective. Our aim is to assess the use of the cervical nerve root block (CNRB) in the treatment of radicular pain associated with degenerative cervical spine disease and its potential to limit the need for surgical intervention. Methods. A retrospective review of consecutive CNRB procedures carried out between January 2008 and June 2010. All procedures were performed using a combination of local anaesthetic and steroid under fluoroscopic guidance. The inclusion criteria were brachialgia with MRI proven nerve compression and inadequate response to physiotherapy. Patients that underwent both a CNRB and facet joint injections were excluded. The outcome measures assessed were the response gained (complete/temporary/no relief) and the choice of further management. Results. A total of 121 patients underwent CNRBs within our study period. 11 patients were lost to follow up. A cohort of 110 patients was studied (49 male and 61 female) with a mean age of 51.5 years (standard deviation 12.3 years). Following the initial CNRB, 49 patients (44.5%) had complete relief requiring no further interventions. Temporary symptom relief was achieved for 30 patients (27.3%) and no relief was gained in 31 patients (31.2%). A repeat CNRB was carried out in 19 patients who gained temporary or no benefit following the initial block. Of the 97 patients who have a complete follow up, complete resolution of symptoms was achieved in 53 patients (54.6%), 25 patients (25.8%) progressed to requiring surgery and no further treatment was offered to 19 patients (19.6%). No complications related to the procedure were identified. Conclusion. Cervical nerve root blocks can be performed to treat patients suffering with cervical radiculopathy symptoms. It is a minimally invasive intervention that can reduce the need for operative intervention

To analyse if patients with pain improvement following a nerve root block had better outcomes following lumbar microdiscectomy. Fifty-six patients who had a lumbar microdiscectomy were retrospectively followed up to 1 year. All patients had a selective nerve root block (SNRB) as a primary treatment or diagnostic procedure. VAS pain scores were measured daily for 1 week following injection. Patients were grouped into responders and non-responders at 1 week. The 2 groups of patients were followed at 1 year following a lumbar microdiscetomy (LMD). A total of 118 patients had SNRB over a period of 3 years. Of the 56 patients studied retrospectively, 52% and 36% of patients had a VAS score improvement of more than 2 points at 4 days and 1 week respectively. At 1 year post op, 85% of patients had better outcomes in the responder group compared to 74% in the non responder group. Although there was a difference this was not statistically significant. Improvement with SNRB is not a positive predictor of good response with surgery. The ability to evaluate the effect of diagnostic or therapeutic blocks on surgical outcomes is limited by a lack of randomized studies and wide-ranging discrepancies with regard to injection techniques, surgical technique, and outcome measures. More research is needed to determine if diagnostic screening blocks can improve surgical outcomes

To analyse if patients with pain improvement following a nerve root block had better outcomes following lumbar microdiscectomy. Fifty-six patients who had a lumbar microdiscectomy were retrospectively followed up to 1 year. All patients had a selective nerve root block (SNRB) as a primary treatment or diagnostic procedure. VAS pain scores were measured daily for 1 week following injection. Patients were grouped into responders and non-responders at 1 week. The 2 groups of patients were followed at 1 year following a lumbar microdiscetomy (LMD). A total of 118 patients had SNRB over a period of 3 years. Of the 56 patients studied retrospectively, 52% and 36% of patients had a VAS score improvement of more than 2 points at 4 days and 1 week respectively. At 1 year post op, 85% of patients had better outcomes in the responder group compared to 74% in the non responder group. Although there was a difference this was not statistically significant. Improvement with SNRB is not a positive predictor of good response with surgery. The ability to evaluate the effect of diagnostic or therapeutic blocks on surgical outcomes is limited by a lack of randomized studies and wide-ranging discrepancies with regard to injection techniques, surgical technique, and outcome measures. More research is needed to determine if diagnostic screening blocks can improve surgical outcomes

To review our practice of requesting nerve root blocks, to see how effective our therapeutic blocks are and how many of our diagnostic blocks confirm clinical suspicion and help decision making. Retrospective cohort analysis. 120 fluoroscopically guided nerve root blocks were performed between 20/08/2008 and 29/12/2008. There were 100 patients who had pain diary data available, 42 males (mean age 52.02 range 20-76) 58 females (mean age 60.03, range 22-88). We recorded: clinical diagnosis, reason for block, result of block on a 10 point visual analogue pain diary on days 0, 2, 14 and at review. A successful block was defined as an improvement of at least 2 points. For the diagnostic blocks we also recorded whether the block result influenced surgical decision making. Block methods will be illustrated in diagram. Results will be displayed graphically and in text. 18 blocks were cervical (1 purely diagnostic, 6 therapeutic, and 10 mixed, 1 data unavailable). 71 blocks were lumbar (1 purely diagnostic, 28 purely therapeutic, and 37 mixed, 5 data unavailable). 28% of all blocks were successful immediately (2 unavailable data) and 22% at two weeks (1 unavailable data). By 3 months the success rate for therapeutic blocks was 26%. Of the blocks done for diagnostic reasons, 86% influenced a clinical decision at the next outpatient appointment. Our results justify the continuance of this service. Increased care should be taken that patients' outcome data is collected

We studied 27 patients with low back pain and unilateral L5 or S1 spinal nerve root pain. Significant radiological changes were restricted to the symptomatic root level, when compared with controls. Low back and leg pain were graded on a visual analogue scale. Dermatomal quantitative sensory tests revealed significant elevations of warm, cool and touch perception thresholds in the affected dermatome, compared with controls. These elevations correlated with root pain (warm v L5 root pain; r = 0.88, p < 0.0001), but not with back pain. Low back pain correlated with restriction of anteroposterior spinal flexion (p = 0.02), but not with leg pain. A subset of 16 patients underwent decompressive surgery with improvement of pain scores, sensory thresholds and spinal mobility. A further 14 patients with back pain, multilevel nerve root symptoms and radiological changes were also studied. The only correlation found was of low back pain with spinal movement (p < 0.002). We conclude that, in patients with single level disease, dermatomal sensory threshold elevation and restriction of spinal movement are independent correlates of sciatica and low back pain

Background:. Identification of nerve root involvement (NRI) in patients with low back-related leg pain (LBLP) can be challenging. Diagnostic models have mainly been developed in secondary care with conflicting reference standards and predictor selection. This study aims to ascertain which cluster of items from clinical assessment best identify NRI in primary care consulters with LBLP. Methods:. Cross-sectional data on 395 LBLP consulters were analysed. Potential NRI indicators were seven clinical assessment items. Two definitions of NRI formed the reference standards: (i) high confidence (≥80%) NRI clinical diagnosis (ii) high confidence (≥80%) NRI clinical diagnosis with confirmatory magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed and compared for both reference standards. Model performances were summarised using the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic and area under the curve (AUC). Bootstrapping assessed internal validity. Results:. NRI clinical diagnosis model retained five items. The model with MRI in the reference standard retained six items. Four items remained in both models: below knee pain, leg pain worse than back pain, positive neural tension tests, neurological deficit (myotome, reflex or sensory). NRI clinical diagnosis model was well calibrated (p=0.17) and discrimination was AUC 0.96 (95%CI: 0.93, 0.98). Performance measures for clinical diagnosis plus confirmatory MRI model showed good discrimination (AUC 0.83, 95% CI: 0.78, 0.86) but poor calibration (p=0.01). Bootstrapping revealed minimal overfitting in both models. Conclusion:. A cluster of items identified NRI in LBLP consulters. These criteria could be used clinically and in research to improve accuracy of identification and homogeneity of this subgroup of low back pain patients

We performed intercostal nerve transfer in 19 patients to relieve pain from preganglionic injury to the brachial plexus. The procedure was successful in 16 patients at a mean of 28.6 months (12 to 68) after the injury

Northumbria Healthcare NHS Trust, Ashington, UK. To assess if a pain diary is useful in assessment and management of patients who undergo diagnostic nerve root block (NRB) for lumbar radicular pain. Prospective study. 23 patients who underwent diagnostic NRB for lumbar radicular pain were given a pain diary. They recorded their response to one of four options from Day 0 to Day 14 (good relief, partial satisfactory, partial unsatisfactory, and no relief of leg pain) and could also add additional comments. A Consultant Spinal Surgeon reviewed the diary with the patient at 6-week follow up appointment to formulate a management plan. Patient response, completion of the pain diary and final clinical outcome (surgical or non surgical treatment). The response rate was 91% (21/23). The pain diary was very useful in 43% (9/21), useful in 33% (7/21) and not useful in 24% (5/21) of patients in formulating further management. There was a tendency for patients with complex problems and poor response to add descriptive notes and comments (9/ 23). Patient compliance with pain diary was good and it has been valuable in making further management decisions. We found the pain diary to be a useful and inexpensive adjunct in the assessment of patients who underwent diagnostic NRB

Introduction purpose and background. Implicit in the diagnosis of CES is the presence of leg pain with a spectrum of bladder and/or bowel disturbance and/or peri-anal sensory loss. Current research describes the clinical features of patients with radiologically confirmed CES, but the specificity of these features is not known. This study explores the accuracy of patient self reported bladder or bowel dysfunction and numbness of the bottom in individuals presenting with lumbar nerve root pain. Methods and Results. A retrospective review of patient completed questionnaires, of 281 consecutive patients with leg dominant back pain, presenting to an interface service. 26% of patients reported bottom numbness. 25% reported recent bladder or bowel (B/B) changes. Following a comprehensive assessment including anal tone testing 10 patients were referred to the spinal on-call service. Of these 1 had surgical decompression for radiologically confirmed CES. A review of the hospital records suggests that none of the remaining sample were subsequently admitted for CES within 2 months of the assessment. Individually bottom numbness and recent changes to the B/B had a sensitivity of 1 and a specificity of 0.73. When both numbness of the bottom and changes to B/B are reported the sensitivity was 1 and the specificity was 0.9. Conclusion. Self reported clinical features suggestive of CES are not uncommon in this highly selective population. Individually numbness of the bottom and changes to B/B were highly sensitive and had moderate specificity. However, when both bottom numbness and changes to B/B are reported, the specificity is also high. The potential for improved clinical outcomes for the individual identified with confirmed CES is emphasised. This abstract has not been previously published in whole or substantial part nor has it been presented previously at a national meeting

Purpose of study and background

The use of NRB (Nerve Root Block) in radicular pain caused by stenosis is considered controversial in some centres, whereas its indication in radiculitis caused by disc herniation is widely accepted. Most studies evaluating NRB have combined disc herniation and stenosis pathologies in their inclusion criteria. This study explores the efficacy of NRB in different categories of stenosis: lateral recess, foraminal and combined.

Purpose

To investigate sociodemographic and clinical characteristics in patients operated for lumbar disc herniation in public and private hospitals, and evaluate whether selection for surgical treatment were different across the two settings.

Background. It has become increasingly important to conduct studies assessing clinical outcomes, reoperation rates, and revision rates to better define the indications and efficacy of lumbar spinal procedures and its association with symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration (sASD). Adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) is defined as the radiographic change in the intervertebral discs adjacent to the surgically treated spinal level. SASD represents adjacent segment degeneration which causes pain or numbness due to post-operative spinal instability or nerve compression at the same level. The most common reason for early reoperation and late operation is sASD, therefore is in our best interest to understand the causes of ASD and make steps to limit the occurrence. Method. A comprehensive literature search was performed selecting Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or prospective studies published up to December 2023. Meta-analysis was performed on 38 studies that met the inclusion criteria and included data of clinical outcomes of patients who had degenerative disc disease, disc herniation, radiculopathy, and spondylolisthesis and underwent lumbar fusion or motion-preservation device surgery; and reported on the prevalence of ASD, sASD, reoperation rate, visual analogue score (VAS), and Oswestry disability index (ODI) improvement. Results. When compared to fusion surgery, a significant reduction of ASD, sASD and reoperation was observed in the cohort of patients that underwent motion-preserving surgery. Conclusion. Dynamic fusion constructs are treatment options that may help to prevent sASD. Conflicts of interest. This research was funded by Paradigm Spine. Sources of funding. Paradigm Spine

Purpose and background. Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES), a rare (<1 per 100,000) and potentially devasting condition, involves compression of the lumbosacral nerve roots. If not quickly identified and treated, it can lead to lasting disability, and high medicolegal costs (>£186 million in the decade to 2018). This study identified why people with suspected CES attend the emergency department (ED) and explored any delays in attending. Methods and Results. The design was a secondary analysis of a qualitative dataset comprising patients with back pain who attended the ED, undertaken using an interpretivist approach. Fourteen patients (8M:6F, aged 23–63 years) with suspected CES were purposively sampled from 4 EDs (2 Northern and 2 Southern) in England between August and December 2021. Semi-structured interviews were conducted online, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Acopia with pain was the biggest factor in a participant's decision to attend the ED, along with the need for a diagnosis. This pain was the worst ever experienced and debilitating, leaving people unable to cope and desperate for relief. 12/14 were advised to attend the ED following identification of red flags by: GPs (n=9); physiotherapists (n=2); surgical colleague (n=1); and 111 (n=1). Factors such as guilt, previous experience of being disregarded, and symptom misattribution were seen to cause delays in seeking care. Conclusion. This paper revealed a disconnect between the priorities of patients and clinicians prior to attending the ED. Clinicians need to validate the pain experience, communicate clearly why signs and symptoms are concerning, and convey the urgency and potential impact of CES. Conflicts of interest. None. Sources of funding. Funding for primary data: Health Education England & National. Institute of Health and Care Research (ICA-CDRF-2018-04-ST2-040)