Incidence and Factors that Affect Anterior Sacral Foramen Leakage in Fluoroscopically Guided Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection

Authors

  • Chan Hong Park Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Wooridul Spine Hospital, Daegu, South Korea
  • Hyen Jun Kim Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Wooridul Spine Hospital, Daegu, South Korea
  • Sang Ho Lee Department of Neurosurgery, Wooridul Spine Hospital, Seoul, South Korea

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31907/2310-9394.2021.09.01

Keywords:

incidence, factors, anterior, sacral, foramen, leakage, fluoroscopically, caudal, epidural, steroid, injection.

Abstract

Background: During the caudal epidural steroid injection (CESI), sacral foramen leakage can occur. The aim of this study was to evaluate incidence and the correlation of anterior sacral foramen leakage with several factors. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients who underwent CESI. The epidural needle position and sacral foramen leakage (yes or no) in C-arm view were recorded. The following parameters were measured: 1) depth of the intervertebral disc at S1-S2, S2-S3, and S3-S4; 2) distances between the posterior borders of S1 and the apex of the sacral hiatus; and 3) depths of S1, S2 the sacral canal. Results: Ninety-one subjects were evaluated. The patients were predominately women (60%) with a mean age of 65.5 ± 11.6 years. There was leakage in 58% (53/91) of patients. One-level leakage occurred in the largest proportion of patients (27%). Age, gender, needle tip position, the depth of the intervertebral disc at S1-S2, S2-S3, and S3-S4, the distances between the posterior borders of S1 and the apex of the sacral hiatus, and the depths of S1, S2 the sacral canal were not correlated with sacral foramen leakage. Conclusion: We found leakage in 58% of patients regardless of age, gender, needle-tip position, the depth of the intervertebral disc at S1-S2, S2-S3, and S3-S4, the distances between the posterior borders of S1 and the apex of the sacral hiatus, and the depths of S1, S2 the sacral canal. Therefore, clinicians should be aware that leakage can occur in any circumstance.

References

Botwin K, Brown LA, Fishman M, Rao S. Fluoroscopically guided caudal epidural steroid injections in degenerative lumbar spine stenosis. Pain Physician 2007;10:547-558. https://doi.org/10.36076/ppj.2007/10/547

Parr AT, Manchikanti L, Hameed H, Conn A, Manchikanti KN, Benyamin RM, Diwan S, Singh V, Abdi S. Caudal epidural injections in the management of chronic low back pain: a systematic appraisal of the literature. Pain Physician 2012;15:E159-198. https://doi.org/10.36076/ppj.2012/15/e159

Barre L, Lutz GE, Southern D, Cooper G. Fluoroscopically guided caudal epidural steroid injections for lumbar spinal stenosis: a restrospective evaluation of long term efficacy. Pain Physician 2004;7:187-193. https://doi.org/10.36076/ppj.2004/7/187

Liu J, Zhou H, Lu L, Li X, Jia J, Shi Z, Yao X, Wu Q, Feng S. The Effectiveness of Transforaminal Versus Caudal Routes for Epidural Steroid Injections in Managing Lumbosacral Radicular Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e3373. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000003373

Manchikanti L, Cash KA, McManus CD, Pampati V, Singh V, Benyamin R. The preliminary results of a comparative effectiveness evaluation of adhesiolysis and caudal epidural injections in managing chronic low back pain secondary to spinal stenosis: a randomized, equivalence controlled trial. Pain Physician 2009;12:E341-354. https://doi.org/10.36076/ppj.2009/12/e341

Manchikanti L, Pampati V, Cash KA. Protocol for evaluation of the comparative effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis and caudal epidural steroid injections in low back and/or lower extremity pain without post surgery syndrome or spinal stenosis. Pain Physician 2010;13:E91- E110. https://doi.org/10.36076/ppj.2010/13/e91

Kao SC, Lin CS. Caudal Epidural Block: An Updated Review of Anatomy and Techniques. Biomed Res Int 2017;2017:9217145. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/9217145

Stitz MY, Sommer HM. Accuracy of blind versus fluoroscopically guided caudal epidural injection. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999;24:1371-1376. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199907010- 00016

Nakahashi M, Uei H, Hoshino M, Omori K, Igarashi H, Tokuhashi Y. Anatomical Evaluation of the Sacral Hiatus Using Ultrasound Imaging: Factors That Inhibit Needle Insertion During Caudal Epidural Block Procedures. Pain Pract 2020;20:55-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.12826

Koo BS, Kang WB, Park JW, Lee SJ, Lee MS, Cho AN, Chung YH, Lee JH, Kim YI, Chae WS. Analysis of caudal epidurogram in single center: A preliminary study of lumbar radiculopathy management.Medicine (Baltimore) 2018;97:e12810. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000012810

Ogoke BA. Caudal epidural steroid injections. Pain Physician 2000;3:305-312. https://doi.org/10.36076/ppj.2000/3/305

Burn JM, Guyer PB, Langdon L. The spread of solutions injected into the epidural space. A study using epidurograms in patients with the lumbosciatic syndrome. Br J Anaesth 1973;45:338-345. https://doi.org/10.1097/00132586-197404000- 00060

Bagheri H, Govsa F. Anatomy of the sacral hiatus and its clinical relevance in caudal epidural block. Surg Radiol Anat 2017;39:943-951. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-017-1823-1

Asghar A, Naaz S. The volume of the caudal space and sacral canal in human sacrum. J Clin Diagn Res 2013;7:2659-2660. https://doi.org/10.7860/jcdr/2013/6287.3724

Aggarwal A, Kaur H, Batra YK, Aggarwal AK, Rajeev S, Sahni D. Anatomic consideration of caudal epidural space: a cadaver study. Clin Anat 2009;22:730-737. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.20832

Kwon WK, Kim AN, Lee PM, Park CH, Kim JH. Needle Tip Position and Bevel Direction Have No Effect in the Fluoroscopic Epidural Spreading Pattern in Caudal Epidural Injections: A Randomized Trial. Pain Res Manag 2016;2016:4158291. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4158291

Sim WS, Park HJ, Kwon JH, Oh MS, Jung HJ, Cho MK, Lee JY. Fluoroscopic evaluation of the influence of needle gauge on epidural spread in caudal block. Medicine (Baltimore) 2019;98:e15896. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000015896

Downloads

Published

2021-03-25

Issue

Section

Articles