MedPath

Ultrasound-Guided Microendoscopic Versus Fluoroscopic-Guided Lumbar Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections

Not Applicable
Not yet recruiting
Conditions
Disc Disease Lumbar
Radiculopathy Lumbar
Interventions
Device: Ultrasound microendoscopic technique
Radiation: Fluoroscopy
Registration Number
NCT05729022
Lead Sponsor
American University of Beirut Medical Center
Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to compare the Microendoscopic combined with ultrasound technique to the standard routinely used X-ray guided transforaminal steroid injection technique.

Detailed Description

After being informed about the study and potential risks, all patients giving written informed consent will undergo screening to determine eligibility. Patients who meet the eligibility criteria will be randomized in a double-blind manner to two groups. Patients assigned to Group A will undergo a fluoroscopy guided procedure while patients in Group B will undergo a microendoscopic combined with ultrasound technique.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
124
Inclusion Criteria
  • Age between 18 and 64 years old of either sex
  • Disease status of American Society of Anesthesiologists grades I to II
  • Patients presenting with single-level disc disease and radiculopathy (L2-L3; L3-L4; L4-L5) for steroid injection
  • Confirmation of herniated disk by CT or MRI
  • Able to give informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
  • Age under 18 or over 64 years old
  • Pregnant women
  • Disease status of American Society of Anesthesiologists grades III to IV
  • Unable to provide an informed consent
  • Radiculopathies at multiple spinal levels
  • Non-lumbar herniated discs
  • Clinically obvious or known spinal deformity or stenosis
  • Previous spine surgery
  • Local or systemic infection
  • Allergy to steroids, anesthetics, or contrast material
  • Uncorrectable coagulopathy and patients on anticoagulation therapy
  • Patients who refuse the procedure
  • Spine tuberculosis or tumors
  • Prior injections within 3 months

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
Ultrasound MicroendoscopicUltrasound microendoscopic techniqueA US device with a curvilinear probe and with a microendoscope (EvoTouch+7 Star Scope), inserted into an 18G needle is used. This group will also receive one AP view fluoroscopy (as control) to check for the diffusion of the contrast material in the epidural space.
FluoroscopyFluoroscopyA local anesthetic (2% lidocaine), a 22G, 90mm needle (Quincke spinal needle) is inserted into the skin. Once the needle tip is in its target position, 0.5-5 cc of contrast (Omnipauqe) is injected. If the contrast spread along the spinal nerve into the epidural space, a mixture of 3 cc of 0.125% Marcaine and 40 mg of Depo-Medrol is injected or Diprofos (1/2 ampoule (2 ml) per level).
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Intervention success rateDuring the procedure.

The success of the procedure would be indicated by a questionnaire (yes/no answer). This includes the success of visualization under ultrasound and the insertion of the needle within the target position.

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
NRS pain scoreBefore procedure, 30 minutes after the procedure, 1 week and 3 weeks after the procedure.

Pain score will be assessed on NRS scale from 0-10.

ComplicationsDuring procedure.

Intravascular injection, intraneural injection, subarachnoid injection and patient discomfort.

Ultrasound visibilityDuring procedure.

Visualization of the radicular artery and visualization of the nerve root (yes/no answer)

Patient satisfaction3 weeks after discharge.

Patient satisfaction towards the procedure is indicated on NRS scale (0-10).

Procedure timeBeginning of procedure till the end.

Time taken to complete the procedure.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

American University of Beirut Medical Center

🇱🇧

Beirut, Lebanon

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath