• Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
• /
• v.22 no.6
• /
• pp.437-442
• /
• 2022

Background: Propofol is a short-acting intravenous sedative widely used for procedural sedation and general anesthesia. However, pain during propofol injection is a distressing adverse effect. This study was designed to investigate whether transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) could reduce pain during propofol injection compared to sham TENS. Methods: In a randomized controlled trial, 80 patients were allocated to two groups: the active TENS group received electrical stimulation via two electrodes on the venous cannulation site, whereas the sham TENS group received no stimulus. After 20 min following TENS, propofol 0.5 mg/kg pain was injected intravenously and pain was evaluated using a four-point score (0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe). Adverse effects associated with TENS were also recorded. Results: The overall incidence of pain during propofol injection was 47.5% in the TENS group and 87.5% in the sham group (P < 0.001). The incidence of moderate pain was significantly lower in the TENS group (7.5%) than in the sham TENS group (42.5%) (P < 0.001). There were no complications associated with TENS. Conclusion: Pre-treatment with TENS significantly reduced the incidence and intensity of pain during propofol injection.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.29 no.3
• /
• pp.197-201
• /
• 2016

Because of its anatomical location and function, the costotransverse (CTRV) joint can be a source of thoracic back pain. In this retrospective observational study, we evaluated the clinical effectiveness of the CTRV joint injection in thoracic back pain patients with suspected CTRV joint problems. We enrolled 20 thoracic back pain patients with localized tenderness that was provoked by the application of pressure on the affected CTRV joints. We injected it with 0.5 ml of a ropivacaine and triamcinolone mixture at each level. The mean pre-injection pain score decreased by 37.9% ($7.2{\pm}1.5$ to $4.5{\pm}1.7$, P < 0.001) two weeks after CTRV joint injection. In addition, 70% of patients reported an excellent or good level of satisfaction. We demonstrated that an ultrasound-guided injection of the CTRV joint reduced patients' pain scores and led to a high level of satisfaction at short-term follow-ups in patients with suspected CTRV joint problems.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.39-46
• /
• 2019

Background: Lumbosacral transforaminal epidural injection (TFEI) is an effective treatment for spinal disease. However, TFEI may have several types of complications, some of which can be attributed to intravascular injection. We reviewed studies to compare the intravascular injection rate among different needle types. Methods: We searched the literature for articles on the intravascular injection rate among different needle types used in TFEI. The search was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Results: A total of six studies comprising 2359 patients were identified. Compared with the Quincke needle, the Whitacre needle reduced the intravascular injection rate (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = [0.44-0.73], P < 0.001). However, compared with the Quincke needle, the Chiba needle did not reduce the intravascular injection rate (OR = 0.80, 95% CI = [0.44-1.45], P = 0.46). In one study, the intravascular injection rate using a blunt-tip needle was lower than that using a sharp needle. In another study, the Whitacre and the blunt-tip needle have similar intravascular injection rates, while, the catheter-extension needle showed a reduced intravascular injection rate. Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed that the Whitacre needle reduced the intravascular injection rate as compared with the Quincke needle, but failed to establish that the Chiba needle can decrease the intravascular injection rate in TFEI. Moreover, the blunt-tip needle can reduce the intravascular injection rate compared with the Quincke needle, and the catheter-extension needle can reduce the intravascular injection rate compared with the Whitacre and the blunt-tip needle.

• Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
• /
• v.37 no.3
• /
• pp.169-182
• /
• 2012

This study was designed to evaluate the pain control effect by morphine injection to masticatory muscle pain patients. Patients with masticatory muscle pain visited the Department of Oral Medicine, Kyung Hee University Dental Hospital were recruited to this study and diagnosed by RDC/TMD. Experimental group were divided into three group; saline injection group(n=10), lidocaine injection group(n=10) and morphine injection group(n=10). Evaluation list was the subjective pain evaluation(visual analogue scale, Mc Gill pain questionnaire, pain drawing) and the objective pain evaluation(pressure pain threshold, pressure pain tolerance) and evaluation time was injection before, after 10min, 30min, 60min and then it was analyzed statistically. The results were as follows : 1. The subjective pain evaluation and the objective pain evaluation were significantly different statistically in within subject effects(p<0.001). 2. The subjective pain drawing evaluation(p<0.001) were significantly different statistically in between subject effects. 3. The objective pressure pain threshold evaluation(p=0.025) were significantly different statistically in between subject effects. 4. The morphine injection group(p=0.001) were more significantly different than the saline injection group statistically in the subject pain drawing evaluation. Therefore, it was considered that the morphine injection was effective to pain control for masticatory muscle pain patients within 60 minute.

• Clinical Pain
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.59-69
• /
• 2021

Patients with pain, numbness, and weakness in their elbows, wrists, and hands often need proper rehabilitation treatments. Among them, musculoskeletal injection therapy should be performed after a full evaluation of the patient, taking into account history and physical examination leading to clinical diagnosis. General rules such as accurate diagnosis and injection materials selection are used to achieve maximum benefit with minimal side effects. During injection, patient location, aseptic care, penetration techniques, follow-up and follow-up care must be maintained. Specific techniques may vary depending on the type, lesion, and location of the injection therapy. For optimal effectiveness, physician should inject directly into the lesion and avoid the injection of surroundings as much as possible. Therefore, ultrasound-guided injections are needed to accurately inject. These conditions and other conditions of the hands, wrists, and elbows can be effectively diagnosed and treated with diagnostic ultrasound and ultrasound-guided injections.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.57-61
• /
• 2008

Background: Shoulder joint injection is currently performed under fluoroscopic or computed tomography scan guidance. We performed this study to determine if an ultrasound guided shoulder joint injection through rotator cuff interval would have clinical usefulness. Methods: A total of 17 volunteers [12 women, 5 men; mean age 28 yr (23-32 yr)] received shoulder joint injection under multilinear ultrasound (5-10 MHz). Volunteers were positioned supinely on a table with their arm in a neutral position. The anterior shoulder region of the patient was sterilized using povidone iodine. A 24 gauge needle was introduced and directly visualized in real time as it passed obliquely from the skin surface to the inferior space of the biceps tendon. If there was little or no resistance to the injection, a contrast media (omnipaque) was injected and checked fluoroscopically. Results: Ultrasound guided shoulder joint injection through rotator cuff interval was successful in all cases. The average time taken for the procedure was $27.5{\pm}16.5sec$. The vertical distance from skin to the inferior space of the biceps tendon was $1.6{\pm}0.4cm$ and the distance of needle from the skin to the inferior space of biceps tendon was $2.8{\pm}0.6cm$. The procedure was well tolerated by all volunteers. Conclusions: Ultrasound guided shoulder joint injection through rotator cuff interval is an effective, rapid, and easy-to-perform injection technique. Ultrasound guided injection enables exact needle placement and avoids the use of both ionizing radiation and iodinated contrast material.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.83-87
• /
• 2009

Case reports after accidental subdural injection during attempted epidural block have usually described extensive neuraxial blocks with a characteristic radiographic appearance on contrast injection. We experienced a case of cervical subdural injection with unusual clinical findings and radiographic appearance. A 51-year-old female patient with central herniated nucleus pulposus at cervical (C5/6) and lumbar level (L4/5, L5/S1) was referred to the pain clinic. During attempted cervical epidural block at the C6/7 interspace with fluoroscopy, injection of the 4 ml contrast showed posterior spread at cervical level. After cervical epidural steroid injection, the contrast was also confined to the posterior aspect of the spinal canal at lumbar level with fluoroscopy. In order to discriminate subdural space from epidural space, we performed transforaminal epidural injection of the 2 ml contrast at the L5/S1 interspace and we could confirm cervical epidural injection was made into the subdural space. We discuss the clinical characteristics of a subdural injection and the appearance of the cervical and lumbar subdurogram.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.168-173
• /
• 2014

Background: Recently, there have been several case reports and retrospective studies about the incidence of intradiscal (ID) injection during transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI). Inadvertent ID injection is not a rare complication, and it carries the risk of developing diskitis, although there has been no report of diskitis after TFESI. We prospectively evaluated the incidence of inadvertent ID injection during lumbar TFESI and analyzed the contributing factors. Methods: Ten patients received 2-level TFESI, and the remaining 229 patients received 1-level TFESI. When successful TFESI was performed, 2 ml of contrast dye was injected under real-time fluoroscopy to check for any inadvertent ID spread. A musculoskeletal radiologist analyzed all magnetic resonance images (MRIs) of patients who demonstrated inadvertent ID injection. When reviewing MRIs, the intervertebral foramen level where ID injection occurred was carefully examined, and any anatomical structure which narrowing the foramen was identified. Results: Among the 249 TFESI, we identified 6 ID injections; thus, there was an incidence of 2.4%. Four patients had isthmic spondylolisthesis, and the level of spondylolisthesis coincided with the level of ID injection. We further examined the right or left foramen of the spondylolisthesis level and identified the upward migrated disc material that was narrowing the foramen. Conclusions: Inadvertent ID injection during TFESI is not infrequent, and pain physicians must pay close attention to the type and location of disc herniation.

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.87-92
• /
• 2018

Background: An epidural steroid injection (ESI) is a commonly administered procedure in pain clinics. An unintentional lumbar facet joint injection during interlaminar ESI was reported in a previous study, but there has not been much research on the characteristics of an unintentional lumbar facet joint injection. This study illustrated the imaging features of an unintentional lumbar facet joint injection during an interlaminar ESI and analyzed characteristics of patients who underwent this injection. Methods: From December 2015 to May 2017, we performed 662 lumbar ESIs and we identified 24 cases (21 patients) that underwent a lumbar facet joint injection. We gathered data contrast pattern, needle approach levels and directions, injected facet joint levels and directions, presence of lumbar spine disease as seen on magnetic resonance images (MRI), and histories of lumbar spine surgeries. Results: The contrast pattern in the facet joint has a sigmoid or ovoid contrast pattern confined to the vicinity of the facet joint. The incidence of unintentional lumbar facet joint injection was 3.6%. The mean age was 68.47 years. Among these 21 patients, 14 (66.7%) were injected in the facet joint ipsilaterally to the needle approach. Among the 20 patients who received MRI, all (100%) had central stenosis and 15 patients (75%) had severe stenosis. Conclusions: When the operator performs an interlaminar ESI on patients with central spinal stenosis, the contrast pattern on the fluoroscopy during interlaminar ESI should be carefully examined to distinguish between the epidural space and facet joint.

• Archives of Craniofacial Surgery
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.17-21
• /
• 2024

Background: The pain caused by local anesthetic injection can lead to patient anxiety prior to surgery, potentially necessitating sedation or general anesthesia during the excision procedure. In this study, we aim to compare the pain relief efficacy and safety of using a digital automatic anesthetic injector for local anesthesia. Methods: Thirty-three patients undergoing excision of a benign soft tissue tumor under local anesthesia were prospectively enrolled from September 2021 to February 2022. A single-blind, randomized controlled study was conducted. Patients were divided into two groups by randomization: the experimental group with digital automatic anesthetic injector method (I-JECT group) and the control group with conventional injection method. Before surgery, the Amsterdam preoperative anxiety information scale was used to measure the patients' anxiety. After local anesthetic was administered, the Numeric Pain Rating Scale was used to measure the pain. The amount of anesthetic used was divided by the surface area of the lesion was recorded. Results: Seventeen were assigned to the conventional group and 16 to the I-JECT group. The mean Numeric Pain Rating Scale was 1.75 in the I-JECT group and 3.82 in conventional group. The injection pain was lower in the I-JECT group (p< 0.01). The mean Amsterdam preoperative anxiety information scale was 11.00 in the I-JECT group and 9.65 in conventional group. Patient's anxiety did not correlate to injection pain regardless of the method of injection (p= 0.47). The amount of local anesthetic used per 1 cm² of tumor surface area was 0.74 mL/cm² in the I-JECT group and 2.31 mL/cm² in the conventional group. The normalization amount of local anesthetic was less in the I-JECT group (p< 0.01). There was no difference in the incidence of complications. Conclusion: The use of a digital automatic anesthetic injector has shown to reduce pain and the amount of local anesthetics without complication.