Analysis of Efficacy Differences between Caudal and Lumbar Interlaminar Epidural Injections in Chronic Lumbar Axial Discogenic Pain: Local Anesthetic Alone vs. Local Combined with Steroids

Study Design: Comparative assessment of randomized controlled trials of caudal and lumbar interlaminar epidural injections in chronic lumbar discogenic pain.Objective: To assess the comparative efficacy of caudal and lumbar interlaminar approaches of epidural injections in managing axial or discogenic low back pain.Summary of Background Data: Epidural injections are commonly performed utilizing either a caudal or lumbar interlaminar approach to treat chronic lumbar axial or discogenic pain, which is pain exclusive of that associated with a herniated intervertebral disc, or that is due to degeneration of the zygapophyseal joints, or due to dysfunction of the sacroiliac joints, respectively. The literature on the efficacy of epidural injections in managing chronic axial lumbar pain of presumed discogenic origin is limited.Methods: The present analysis is based on 2 randomized controlled trials of chronic axial low back pain not caused by disc herniation, radiculitis, or facet joint pain, utilizing either a caudal or lumbar interlaminar approach, with a total of 240 patients studied, and a 24-month follow-up. Patients were assigned to receive either local anesthetic only or local anesthetic with a steroid in each 60 patient group.Results: The primary outcome measure was significant improvement, defined as pain relief and functional status improvement of at least 50% from baseline, which was reported at 24-month follow-ups in 72% who received local anesthetic only with a lumbar interlaminar approach and 54% who received local anesthetic only with a caudal approach. In patients receiving local anesthetic with a steroid, the response rate was 67% for those who had a lumbar interlaminar approach and 68% for those who had a caudal approach at 12 months. The response was significantly better in the lumbar interlaminar group who received local anesthetic only, 77% versus 56% at 12 months and 72% versus 54% at 24 months.Conclusion: This assessment shows that in patients with axial or discogenic pain in the lumbar spine after excluding facet joint and SI Joint pain, epidural injections of local anesthetic by the caudal or lumbar interlaminar approach may be effective in managing chronic low back pain with a potential superiority for a lumbar interlaminar approach over a caudal approach.     

ICSI联合IVM技术在卵巢低反应高龄患者中的应用

目的：探讨胞浆内单精子注射（ICSI）联合未成熟卵母细胞体外成熟（IVM）技术在卵巢低反应高龄患者中的应用价值。方法：回顾性分析2016年1月—2018年9月于郑州大学第一附属医院生殖医学中心行ICSI助孕治疗81个周期，年龄≥35岁，获卵数≤3个，且卵母细胞均未成熟。按促排卵方案分为微刺激方案组（n=37）和拮抗剂方案组（n=44），统计2组患者基础情况、实验室结果及妊娠结局。结果：①2组患者年龄、不孕时间、基础内分泌、基础窦卵泡数及抗苗勒管激素（AMH）比较，差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；②拮抗剂方案组Gn总量较微刺激方案组高，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；③微刺激方案组与拮抗剂方案组体外培养成熟率、2PN率、卵裂率、可利用胚胎率及优胚率比较差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；④微刺激方案组与拮抗剂方案组的胚胎存活率、种植率和临床妊娠率比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论：对于卵巢低反应的高龄患者行ICSI联合IVM培养有利于提高卵母细胞成熟率及胚胎利用率，增加妊娠机会，微刺激方案Gn用量少对卵巢低反应患者是经济有效的选择。     

The potential role of assisted oocyte activation in the management of a POSEIDON group 3 patient with fertilization failure: A case report and literature review

ObjectiveAssisted oocyte activation combined with ICSI (ICSI-AOA) has been reported to improve fertilization outcomes of couples with oocyte activation deficiency (OAD). Although there's no sufficient evidence to support ICSI-AOA as routine use, it might be beneficial for POSEIDON group 3 patients with suspected oocyte-related OAD.Case reportA 29-year-old female presented with a history of primary infertility for two years. She was classified as a POSEIDON group 3 patient and had a total fertilization failure history. With the help of ICSI-AOA, six oocytes were successfully fertilized. Pregnancy was later confirmed after embryo transfer. A living infant was born after 34 weeks of pregnancy.ConclusionOAD should be taken into consideration for POSEIDON group 3 patients since low Antimüllerian hormone is associated decreased quality. Further research needs to be done to understand the mechanism underlying oocyte-related OAD and the potential role of ICSI-AOA in young patients with suboptimal ovarian response.     

Update on sports imaging

Sports Imaging has dramatically increased in the past decade with increasing number of adolescents, young and middle-aged adults participating in non-competitive/hobby sports. Therefore, sports injuries are no longer confined to elite athletes. Furthermore, newer forms of sports such as mountain climbing, pickle ball and curling etc. are gaining popularity. Majority of the injuries in sports medicine are from musculoskeletal trauma. Therefore, it is imperative that the musculoskeletal radiologist becomes familiar with various sports related injury patterns as these are commonly encountered in daily practice. This update aims to briefly encapsulate the major aspects of sports imaging. It includes the imaging manifestations of various types of musculoskeletal injuries on different modalities (commonly US and MRI) and briefly mentions the various image guided interventions, performed both on the sports field and in the hospital setting.     

Intra-articular corticosteroid injections in haemophilic arthropathy: are they recommended?

Introduction: Intra-articular (IA) corticosteroid (CS) injections are commonly used in the treatment of osteoarthritis. However, they are rarely utilized in haemophilic arthropathy. In fact, the efficacy of this method in haemophilic arthropathy is frequently discussed and debated in clinical practice.

Aim: To investigate the effectiveness of IA CS injections in patients with painful haemophilic arthropathy.

Methods: A review of the literature on the topic was performed.

Results: In osteoarthritis, reports with a high level of evidence state that the efficacy of IA injections of CS is controversial. In haemophilic arthropathy, some low-level evidence reports seem to indicate that short-term pain alleviation can be achieved.

Conclusions: Considering that pain relief after IA injections of CS is controversial and that the cost of the haematologic treatment required to perform the procedure is high in haemophilic arthropathy, we do not recommend the routine use of CS IS injections in haemophilia. Moreover, point of care (POC) ultrasound (US)-guided injections are not advised, because the injection procedure is so simple that the use of POC-US will unnecessarily prolong the duration of the procedure.     

某院2014-2016年中药注射剂使用情况专项点评分析

目的：专项点评某三甲医院中药注射剂的使用情况,促进临床合理使用中药注射剂。方法：利用医院HIS系统,调阅2014年2月-2016年10月期间住院患者的病历,每月抽取1个病区住院患者病历,对使用中药注射剂情况进行统计分析,计算各科室的使用率、合理使用率,并对不合理情况进行分析,在每月全院医师大会上进行反馈。结果：经过专项点评发现内科干部病房、心内1科、心内2科中药注射剂使用率最高占100%,小儿科合理率100%;外科中骨科中药注射剂使用率最高占96%,妇产科、眼科未使用中药注射剂。不合理使用情况主要包括用药无指征,用法用量不适宜,溶媒选择不合理,联合用药不适宜;以活血化瘀类中药注射剂使用最多。结论：中药注射剂的使用存在一些问题,需要进一步干预规范。