CT-guided transforaminal epidural steroid injection for discogenic lumbar radiculopathy: influence of contrast dispersion and radiologist’s experience on clinical outcome

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the impact of contrast dispersion pattern/location during lumbar CT-guided transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) and experience of the performing radiologist on therapeutic outcome. Materials and methods: In this single-center retrospective cohort study, two observers analyzed contrast dispersion during CT-guided TFESI of 204 patients (age 61.1 ± 14 years) with discogenic unilateral single-level L4 or L5 radiculopathy. The contrast dispersion pattern was classified as “focal,” “linear,” or “tram-track”; the location was divided into “extraforaminal,” “foraminal,” or “recessal.” Pain was assessed before and 4 weeks after treatment using a numerical rating scale (0, no pain; 10, intolerable pain). Additionally, the patient global impression of change (PGIC) was assessed. The TFESI was performed by musculoskeletal radiologists (experience range: first year of musculoskeletal fellowship training to 19 years). Contrast pattern/location and radiologist’s experience were compared between “good responder” (≥ 50% pain reduction) and “poor responder” (< 50%). A p-value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results: Overall, CT-guided TFESI resulted in a substantial pain reduction in 46.6% of patients with discogenic radiculopathy. The contrast dispersion pattern and location had no effect on pain relief (p = 0.75 and p = 0.09) and PGIC (p = 0.70 and p = 0.21) 4 weeks after TFESI. Additionally, the experience of the radiologist had no influence on pain reduction (p = 0.92) or PGIC (p = 0.75). Regarding pre-interventional imaging findings, both the location and grading of nerve compression had no effect on pain relief (p = 0.91 and p = 0.85) and PGIC (p = 0.18 and p = 0.31). Conclusion: Our results indicate that neither contrast agent dispersion/location nor the experience of the radiologist allows predicting the therapeutic outcome 4 weeks after the procedure.