Explore the vast range of titles available.

Abstract This article reviews the literature and the authors’ experiences regarding the performance of lower extremity fluoroscopically guided procedures from the hip to the toes. An overview of injections and aspirations, their indications, risks, and complications are provided, focusing on anesthetics, corticosteroids, and contrast agents. A variety of approaches to each joint and the associated pearls and pitfalls of each approach will be discussed.

To draw up evidence-based guidelines to make injections safer. A development group summarized evidence-based best practices for preventing injection-associated infections in resource-limited settings. The development process included a breakdown of the WHO reference definition of a safe injection into a list of potentially critical steps, a review of the literature for each of these steps, the formulation of best practices, and the submission of the draft document to peer review. Eliminating unnecessary injections is the highest priority in preventing injection-associated infections. However, when intradermal, subcutaneous, or intramuscular injections are medically indicated, best infection control practices include the use of sterile injection equipment, the prevention of contamination of injection equipment and medication, the prevention of needle-stick injuries to the provider, and the prevention of access to used needles. The availability of best infection control practices for intradermal, subcutaneous, and intramuscular injections will provide a reference for global efforts to achieve the goal of safe and appropriate use of injections. WHO will revise the best practices five years after initial development, i.e. in 2005.

BACKGROUND: The central nervous system contains steroid receptors, particularly in the hypothalamic and limbic systems. These systems are responsible for driving certain emotions in humans, especially stress, anxiety, motivation, energy levels, and mood. Thus, corticosteroids may precipitate patients to experience these emotions. Most existing studies report neuropsychiatric side effects after oral or intravenous corticosteroids rather than epidural. OBJECTIVES: This study examines the neuropsychiatric side effects after epidural steroid injections (ESIs), with a focus on whether certain factors in patients’ histories further exacerbate symptomatology. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Fluoroscopy suite at an urban academic teaching hospital. METHODS: Patients were called 24 hours and one week after their ESIs and asked if they experienced certain neuropsychiatric symptoms more than usual compared to baseline. PATIENTS: Seventy-four patients undergoing a lumbosacral ESI (interlaminar (ILESI), caudal or transforaminal (TFESI)) were invited to take part in the study the day of his or her procedure. INTERVENTION/MEASUREMENT: Assessed whether psychiatric history, gender, race, type of ESI, or the number of levels injected affected frequency and duration of neuropsychiatric symptoms at one day and one week after an ESI. RESULTS: Significantly (P < 0.05) more patients with a psychiatric history experienced restlessness and irritability at day one than those without a psychiatric history. At week one, male gender (IRR 2.29, 95% CI 1.37, 3.83, P = 0.002), ILESI (IRR 7.75, 95% CI 1.03, 58.6, P = 0.047), and 2-level injections (IRR 2.14, 95% CI 1.13, 4.06, P = 0.019) were significantly associated to more total symptoms. LIMITATIONS: Single center study, reliance on subjective responses from patients, lack of follow-up after one week post-ESI. CONCLUSION(s): This study demonstrates that neuropsychiatric symptoms are rare overall after an ESI, though certain factors may influence patients experiencing these symptoms. Restlessness and irritability were more likely to occur one day after an ESI in those with a psychiatric history. Those who had a 2-level injection were more likely to keep experiencing most symptoms by week one, suggesting a possible correlation between corticosteroid dose and neuropsychiatric symptoms. KEY WORDS: Epidural steroid injections, transforaminal epidural steroid injections, interlaminar epidural steroid injections, caudal epidural steroid injections, neuropsychiatric symptoms, restlessness, irritability, psychiatric history, anxiety, depression, dexamethasone, men, women, race, one-level epidural steroid injection, 2-level epidural steroid injection

Epidural injections are among the most commonly performed procedures for managing low back and lower extremity pain. Pinto et al and Chou et al previously performed systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which, along with a recent update from Oliveira et al showing the lack of effectiveness of epidural steroid injections in managing lumbar disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and radiculopathy. In contrast to these papers, multiple other systematic reviews and meta-analyses have supported the effectiveness and use of epidural injections utilizing fluoroscopically guided techniques. A major flaw in the review can be related to attributing active-controlled trials to placebo-controlled trials. The assumption that local anesthetics do not provide sustained benefit, despite extensive evidence that local anesthetics provide long-term relief, similar to a combination of local anesthetic with steroids is flawed. The Cochrane Review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain with sciatica or lumbar radiculopathy were reanalyzed using systematic methodology and meta-analysis. To re-evaluate Cochrane data on RCTs of epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain with sciatica or lumbar radiculopathy utilizing qualitative and quantitative techniques with dual-arm and single-arm analysis. In this systematic review, we have used the same RCTs from the Cochrane Review of a minimum of 20% change in pain scale or significant pain relief of >= 50%. The outcome measures were pain relief and functional status improvement. Significant improvement was defined as 50% or greater pain relief and functional status improvement. Our review was performed utilizing the Cochrane Review methodologic quality assessment and the Interventional Pain Management Techniques - Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM-QRB). Evidence was summarized utilizing the principles of best evidence synthesis and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) system. Clinical relevance of the pragmatic nature of each study was assessed. In evaluating the RCTs in the Cochrane Review, 10 trials were performed with fluoroscopic guidance. Utilizing conventional dual-arm and single-arm meta-analysis, the evidence is vastly different from the interpretation of the data within the Cochrane Review. The overall combined evidence is Level I, or strong evidence, at one and 3 months, and Level II, or moderate evidence, at 6 and 12 months. The limitation of this study is that only data contained in the Cochrane Review were analyzed. A comparative systematic review and meta-analysis of the Cochrane Review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain with sciatica or lumbar radiculopathy yielded different results. This review, based on the evidence derived from placebo-controlled trials and active-controlled trials showed Level I, or strong evidence, at one and 3 months and Level II at 6 and 12 months. This review once again emphasizes the importance of the allocation of studies to placebo-control and active-control groups, utilizing standards of practice with inclusion of only the studies performed under fluoroscopic guidance.

The precision of the delivery of therapeutics to the desired injection site by syringes and hollow needles typically depends on the operator. Here, we introduce a highly sensitive, completely mechanical and cost-effective injector for targeting tissue reliably and precisely. As the operator pushes the syringe plunger, the injector senses the loss-of-resistance on encountering a softer tissue or a cavity, stops advancing the needle and delivers the payload. We demonstrate that the injector can reliably deliver liquids to the suprachoroidal space—a challenging injection site that provides access to the back of the eye—for a wide range of eye sizes, scleral thicknesses and intraocular pressures, and target sites relevant for epidural injections, subcutaneous injections and intraperitoneal access. The design of this simple and effective injector can be adapted for a broad variety of clinical applications. A mechanical injector that targets tissue by sensing the loss-of-resistance on encountering softer tissue or a cavity can reliably and precisely deliver liquids to the suprachoroidal space, and to other injection-accessible target sites in the body.

Microneedle arrays (MA) have been extensively investigated in recent decades for transdermal drug delivery due to their pain-free delivery, minimal skin trauma, and reduced risk of infection. However, porous MA received relatively less attention due to their complex fabrication process and ease of fracturing. Here, we present a titanium porous microneedle array (TPMA) fabricated by modified metal injection molding (MIM) technology. The sintering process is simple and suitable for mass production. TPMA was sintered at a sintering temperature of 1250°C for 2 h. The porosity of TPMA was approximately 30.1% and its average pore diameter was about 1.3 μm. The elements distributed on the surface of TPMA were only Ti and O, which may guarantee the biocompatibility of TPMA. TPMA could easily penetrate the skin of a human forearm without fracture. TPMA could diffuse dry Rhodamine B stored in micropores into rabbit skin. The cumulative permeated flux of calcein across TPMA with punctured skin was 27 times greater than that across intact skin. Thus, TPMA can continually and efficiently deliver a liquid drug through open micropores in skin.

BACKGROUND: Epidural injection (EI) has been used to manage lower back and radicular leg pain caused by a herniated lumbar disc. There are 3 types of EI techniques currently being used: transforaminal (TFEI), interlaminar (ILEI), and caudal epidural injections (CEI). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of TFEI, ILEI, and CEI in reducing pain and improving function in patients with HLD. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases were searched from the earliest records up to August 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs. The standard mean differences (SMDs) in the changes in the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were calculated from one week through one month posttreatment (short-term) and from 4 months through 6 months posttreatment (long-term). RESULTS: In total, 11 studies comprising 1,050 patients were included. Network meta-analysis showed that the improvement in the VAS scores was better with TFEI than with CEI (SMD = -1.16, 95% CI = -2.10 to -0.23). Ranking probability analysis showed that TFEI had the highest probability of being the best treatment for reducing pain and improving function in the short- and long-term evaluation periods. LIMITATIONS: Only a small number of previous studies were included in our analysis. Also, subgroup analysis according to the injection volume, material type, or pain onset could not be conducted. CONCLUSIONS: TFEI had the best potential of the 3 EI techniques to reduce pain and improve function in patients with a herniated lumbar disc. Further qualified trials comparing the effects of these 3 techniques are warranted to derive definitive conclusions. KEY WORDS: Disc herniation, back pain, radicular pain, epidural injection, transforaminal injection, interlaminar injection, caudal injection, lumbar spine

Background Reuse of injection devices to give healthcare injections decreased from 39.8 to 5.5% between 2000 and 2010, but trends since 2011 have not been described. We reviewed results of Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) to describe injection practices worldwide from 2011 to 2015. Methods We searched the DHS Internet site for data published on injection practices conducted in countries from 2011 to 2015, extracted information on frequency (number of healthcare injections per person in the last 12 months) and safety (proportion of syringes and needles taken from a new, unopened package). We compared gender groups and WHO regions in terms of frequency and safety. For countries with data available, we compared injection practices 2004–2010 and 2011–2015. Results Since 2011, 40 of 92 countries (43%) that conducted DHS surveys reported on injection practices. On average, the frequency of injection was 1.64 per person per year (from 3.84 in WHO Eastern Mediterranean region to 1.18 in WHO African region). Among those, 96.1% of injections reportedly used new injection devices (from 90.2% in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean region to 98.8% in the WHO Western Pacific region). On average, women received more injections per year (1.85) than men (1.41). Among 16 (40%) countries with data in 2004–2010 and 2011–2015, 69% improved in terms of safety. The annual number of unsafe injections reduced in 81% of countries. In Pakistan, the number of unsafe injections was the highest and did not decrease between 2006 and 2012. Conclusions Injection practices have continued to improve in most countries worldwide, although the Eastern Mediterranean region in particular still faces unsafe practices that are not improving. Further efforts are needed to eliminate unsafe injection practices in health care settings, including through the use of reuse-prevention devices. Despite some limitations, DHS is an easily available method to measure progress over time.

PurposeTo evaluate the clinical feasibility and tolerability of large volume subcutaneous delivery at different injection depths for lean and non-lean subjects.MethodsA single-center, randomized, subject-blinded, crossover study in 62 healthy subjects was conducted to evaluate delivery of a 10-cP solution containing hyaluronic acid. Subjects were separated into lean and non-lean cohort by SC thickness. A syringe pump was used to study the effect of different volumes (5, 12, 25 mL) of a viscous placebo solution and needle lengths (6, 9 and 12 mm) delivered at 0.5 mL/min.ResultsAcross all treatments, injection sites were observed to have negligible leakage, ~34 kPa of back pressure, and VAS of mild pain with higher pain from needle insertion than during injection. While mild to moderate erythema was the most frequently reported ISR and edema was most prominent for 25 mL injections, all ISRs were resolved within 4 hours post injection. Subjects were unbothered by ISRs across all treatments and rated them as low distress scores (average 1.0–1.5 out of 6).ConclusionSC injection of 25 mL is feasible and tolerable using a low-pain formulation for abdomen injection irrespective of subcutaneous thickness and injection depths at a delivery rate of 0.5 mL/min.

BACKGROUND: Various regulations and practice patterns develop on the basis of Local Coverage Determination (LCD), which are variably perceived as guidelines and/or mandated polices/ regulations. LCDs developed in 2021 and effective since December 2021 mandated a minimum of 2 views for final needle placement with contrast injection which includes both anteroposterior (AP) and lateral or oblique view. Radiation safety has been a major concern for pain physicians and multiple tools have been developed to reduce radiation dose, along with improvement in technologies to limit radiation exposure while performing fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures, with implementation of principles of As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA). The mandated 2 views of epidural injections have caused concern among some physicians, because of the potential of increased exposure to ionizing radiation, despite application of various principles to minimize radiation exposure. Others, including policymakers are of the opinion that it reduces potential abuse and improves safety. OBJECTIVE: To assess variations in the performance of epidural procedures prior to the implementation of the new LCD compared with after the implementation of the new LCD by comparing time and dosage for all types of epidural procedures. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective, case controlled, comparative evaluation of radiation exposure during epidural procedures in interventional pain management. SETTING: An interventional pain management practice and a specialty referral center in a private practice setting in the United States. METHODS: The study was performed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) criteria. The main outcome measure was radiation exposure time measured in seconds and dose measured in mGy-kG2 (milligray to kilogray squared per procedure). RESULTS: Changes in exposure and dose varied by procedural type and location. Exposure time in seconds increased overall by 21%, whereas radiation dose mGy-kG increased 133%. Fluoroscopy time increased most for lumbar interlaminar epidural injections of 43%, followed by 29% for cervical interlaminar epidural injections, 20% for caudal epidural injections, and 14% for lumbar transforaminal epidural injections. In contrast, highest increases were observed in the radiation dose mGy of 191% for caudal epidural injections, followed by 173% for lumbar interlaminar epidural injections, 113% for lumbar transforaminal epidural injections, and the lowest being cervical interlaminar epidural injections of 94%. This study also shows lesser increases for cervical interlaminar epidural injections because an oblique view is utilized rather than a lateral view resulting in a radiation dosage increase of 94% compared to overall increase of 133%, whereas the duration of time of 29% was higher than the overall combined duration of all procedures which only increased by 21%. LIMITATIONS: A retrospective evaluation utilizing the experience of a single physician. CONCLUSION: The results of this study showed significant increases in radiation exposure time and dosage; however, increase of dosage was overall 21% median Interquartile Range (IQR) compared to 133% of radiation dose median IQR. In addition, the results also showed variations for procedure, overall showing highest increases for lumbar interlaminar epidural injections for time (43%) and caudal epidural injections for dosage (191%). KEY WORDS: Spinal interventional procedures, cervical epidural injections, lumbar epidural injections, caudal epidural injections, lumbar transforaminal epidural injections, radiation exposure time, radiation dose