Share this article on:

Back Pain and Neuraxial Anesthesia

Benzon, Honorio T. MD; Asher, Yogen G. MD; Hartrick, Craig T. MD

doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001270
Regional Anesthesia: Review Article
Continuing Medical Education

The incidence of back pain after neuraxial anesthesia in the adult population is not different from that after general anesthesia. The pain is usually mild, localized in the low back, rarely radiates to the lower extremities, and has a duration of only a few days. The risk factors for development of back pain include the lithotomy position, multiple attempts at block placement, duration of surgery longer than 2.5 hours, body mass index ≥32 kg/m2, and a history of back pain. However, there is no permanent worsening of preexisting back pain after neuraxial anesthesia. The back pain has been attributed to tears in the ligaments, fascia, or bone with localized bleeding; immobility of the spine; relaxation of the paraspinal muscles under anesthesia; flattening of the normal lumbar convexity; and stretching and straining of the lumbosacral ligaments and joint capsules. The addition of an anti-inflammatory drug to the local anesthetic used for skin infiltration may decrease the incidence and severity of back pain. The use of spinal or epidural anesthesia in the adult, non-obstetric and obstetric populations should depend on the advantages offered by the technique and not on the occurrence of back pain after the procedure. Additional studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of epidural dexamethasone, or other steroids, or the addition of an anti-inflammatory drug to the local anesthetic infiltration for the prevention of back pain after neuraxial anesthesia. Future studies should involve a physician with expertise in the evaluation of chronic low back pain to help identify the cause of the back pain and institute appropriate treatment(s).

From the *Department of Anesthesiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois; and Department of Anesthesiology, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan.

Accepted for publication February 10, 2016.

Funding: Departmental.

Conflict of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article.

Reprints will not be available from the authors.

Address correspondence to Honorio T. Benzon, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, 251 E. Huron St., Chicago, IL 60611. Address e-mail to hobenzon@nm.org.

Since the 1950s, anesthesiologists have been interested in back pain after neuraxial anesthesia.1–6 Fear of back pain after neuraxial injection is one reason for patient refusal of neuraxial anesthesia. In a study examining patient dissatisfaction after spinal anesthesia, 54 of the 1191 (4%) patients were not satisfied, 29% of whom cited back pain as a reason for their dissatisfaction.7 Although 97% of patients stated that they would accept spinal anesthesia again for their surgery, 10 of the 38 patients (26%) who would refuse spinal anesthesia for similar surgery in the future cited back pain as the reason for their refusal.7 Today, some anesthesiologists have difficulty deciding whether they should perform neuraxial anesthesia in patients with back pain, citing concerns about medicolegal implications or the possibility of worsening of the patient’s pain. Part of their indecision is the scant discussion of the subject in standard anesthesiology textbooks. In 2 popular anesthesia textbooks, back pain after neuraxial anesthesia was discussed in a very cursory fashion with limited supporting data.8,9 Also, there has not been a detailed review of the subject, especially as it pertains to the non-obstetric population. In this article, we examine the incidence of back pain after neuraxial anesthesia in the adult and pediatric populations, the difference in the incidence of back pain after neuraxial anesthesia compared with general anesthesia, whether neuraxial anesthesia worsens back pain, and the efficacy of neuraxial anesthesia in patients with back pain, especially those who had previous surgery. We also review historical topics such as back pain after the old formulation of 2-chloroprocaine and transient neurologic symptoms (TNS) after spinal anesthesia with lidocaine.

Back to Top | Article Outline

IDENTIFICATION OF RELEVANT ARTICLES

We searched PubMed, with no limitation on the year of publication, using the terms “back pain after spinal anesthesia,” which listed 292 articles (1967–2015 publications), “back pain after epidural anesthesia,” which listed 222 articles (1967–2014 publications), “back pain after chloroprocaine epidural anesthesia,” which listed 11 articles (1990–2003 publications), “transient radicular irritation,” which listed 49 articles (1995–2011 publications), and “transient neurologic symptoms,” which listed 9 articles (1996–2005 publications). The articles under “back pain after spinal anesthesia” and “back pain after epidural anesthesia” listed mostly unrelated topics such as back pain after spine surgery, spinal anesthesia for back surgery, and spinal and epidural injections for back pain. In addition, there were redundancies in the listed articles between the 2 search terms. Relevant articles based on the abstracts of the articles listed in our search included 12 for “back pain after spinal anesthesia,” 35 for “back pain after epidural anesthesia,” 6 for “back pain after chloroprocaine epidural anesthesia,” 8 for “transient radicular irritation,” and 9 for “transient neurologic symptoms.” These articles, and additional references that were listed in these articles, comprised the basis for our review (Fig. 1). Only articles written in English were considered except when there was enough information in the abstract.

Figure 1

Figure 1

Table 1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 2

We reviewed back pain in the pediatric and adult populations, limiting our comments in the obstetric population to issues not discussed in a 2011 review article.10 Our discussion of back pain after epidural chloroprocaine is kept to a minimum because the presumptive offending preservatives have been identified and eliminated in current formulations. Our discussion of TNS is modest, because this syndrome is characterized predominantly by buttock and radicular leg pain, not low back pain, and a definitive review has been published.11 Finally, we provide levels of evidence and strength of recommendations on the issues related to back pain after neuraxial anesthesia and the interventions to prevent such occurrences. We used the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence12 wherever possible (Table 1). Our grading of recommendations were modified from the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association’s classification of strength of guidelines for perioperative cardiac evaluation (Table 2).13

Back to Top | Article Outline

BACK PAIN AFTER EPIDURAL ANESTHESIA WITH CHLOROPROCAINE

The events leading to back pain after epidural anesthesia with the old formulation of 2-chloroprocaine have been summarized by Stevens.14 In brief, to increase the shelf life of the drug, the manufacturer decreased the pH to approximately 3.5 and added a preservative. Methylparaben was initially used as the antioxidant; this was changed to sodium bisulfite and the product was marketed as Nesacaine-CE™ (AstraZeneca, Wilmington, DE). Cases of cauda equina syndrome were reported, attributing the combination of sodium bisulfite and low pH.15–18 Other investigators, however, demonstrated that chloroprocaine, not the sodium bisulfite, was the culprit.19,20 At any rate, the company initially decreased the concentration of the sodium bisulfite and added a chelating agent, calcium disodium EDTA. Because of continued concerns regarding the presence of sodium bisulfite, chloroprocaine was reformulated to contain very small amounts of disodium EDTA and marketed as Nesacaine MPF™ (methylparaben free). Several case reports of back pain after epidural injection of this formulation followed.21–23 The back pain occurred soon after the epidural anesthesia resolved and was characterized by severe, burning pain in the low back, which typically improved after 24 hours.24 The proposed mechanism of back pain was chelation of calcium by the disodium EDTA in the lumbar muscles, resulting in chemical irritation and “hypocalcemic tetany” of the paraspinal muscles. The occurrence and severity of the back pain was related to the volume injected. Increasing the pH of chloroprocaine with sodium bicarbonate decreased the occurrence and severity of the back pain.25 The manufacturer again reformulated chloroprocaine to the present formulation, which is preservative free and antioxidant free. Because of its short duration of action, it is now used as an epidural local anesthetic for postpartum tubal ligation26 and for repair of episiotomy or laceration after vaginal delivery. To our knowledge, there have been no reports of back pain after epidural blockade with the present formulation of the drug.

Back to Top | Article Outline

TRANSIENT RADICULAR IRRITATION, TRANSIENT NEUROLOGIC SYMPTOMS

In the 1990s, reports of transient buttock and leg pain after spinal anesthesia with lidocaine appeared in the literature.27 Pain, originating in the buttocks and radiating to the lower extremities, occurred usually within a few hours, but sometimes up to 24 hours after the spinal anesthesia had resolved. Neurologic examination and diagnostic tests revealed no evidence of neurologic pathology. The syndrome was initially called transient radicular irritation. The lack of diagnostic findings supporting this term and the symptomatic overlap with the musculoskeletal conditions previously outlined led to calls for terminology change.28 Later termed TNS, the condition was extensively studied and subsequently comprehensively reviewed. A Cochrane review included 16 randomized trials that enrolled 1467 patients.11 The authors concluded that the incidence of transient buttock and leg pain after spinal anesthesia with lidocaine was significantly higher than the other local anesthetics except mepivacaine. The relative risk (RR) for developing TNS after spinal anesthesia with lidocaine compared with bupivacaine, prilocaine, procaine, levobupivacaine, ropivacaine, and 2-chloroprocaine was 7.31 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.16–12.86). When lidocaine was compared with mepivacaine alone, the RR was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.15–7.45). When mepivacaine was included in the other local anesthetics, the RR for developing TNS with lidocaine was 4.62 (95% CI, 2.30–9.26). Similar to other experts, the authors recommended that a more neutral term than TNS should be considered.11 This is because TNS imply a neurologic pathology, and an identifiable pathogenesis could not be identified.11

The development of TNS was not related to the baricity or to the dose or concentration of lidocaine.29–33 The pain from TNS ranged in intensity from mild to severe and lasted up to 5 days, although 1 patient reportedly had symptoms for 10 days. Most patients responded to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, although a few required opiates.11 The incidence of TNS in pregnant patients was strikingly low.34

It can be concluded that the incidence of TNS after lidocaine spinal is higher than after bupivacaine, prilocaine, procaine, levobupivacaine, ropivacaine, and 2-chloroprocaine (level 1).

The risk of TNS after 2-chloroprocaine was discussed in the American Society of Regional Anesthesia (ASRA) practice advisory on neurologic complications associated with regional anesthesia. The authors concluded that the incidence of TNS after 40 to 50 mg intrathecal 2-chloroprocaine is low and that the number of published 2-chloroprocaine spinal anesthetic studies is not sufficient to determine the risk of neurotoxicity of the drug (class III).35

Back to Top | Article Outline

BACK PAIN IN THE PEDIATRIC POPULATION

There are very few studies on back pain after neuraxial injections in the pediatric population. A national survey that looked into the complications of epidural infusion in children did not include back pain among the 9 listed complications.36 Back pain was not reported in a study of 2278 single-injection neuraxial blocks.37 A 2010 prospective study of 135 children who underwent caudal analgesia, in which back pain was specifically assessed, noted an incidence of 5% (5 of 106) at postoperative day 2 and 1% (1 of 94) at postoperative day 15.38 All cases of back pain were mild in severity and resolved by the 15th postoperative day. Four of the 5 patients suffered discomfort at the injection site; the fifth patient complained of back pain not localized at the injection site. The 1 patient who experienced back pain after 15 days had new-onset back pain. The preponderance of studies after caudal analgesia shows the popularity of this approach, compared with lumbar epidural placement, in children. It can be questioned whether pain at the caudal injection site is really “back pain.” Regardless, the incidence of back pain after caudal blockade in children is low and self-limiting (level 2).

Back to Top | Article Outline

BACK PAIN AFTER NEURAXIAL COMPARED WITH GENERAL ANESTHESIA

The incidence of back pain has been reported to be similar after spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia (Table 3).6,39,40 In 1961, Brown and Elman6 found an incidence of back pain after spinal anesthesia of 21% (16 of 76) compared with 19% (62 of 325) after general anesthesia. They noted that back pain usually followed operations performed in the supine or lithotomy position and that the major factor in the development of back pain was the duration of time the patient remained immobile during surgery. They also showed an increasing percentage of patients who developed backache with extended duration of surgery/anesthesia (Table 4). The same conclusion as to the similarity in the incidence of back pain after spinal and general anesthesia has been reached by other investigators. Urbach et al.39 noted the incidence of new back pain after spinal anesthesia to be 24% (54 of 225 patients) compared with 17% after general anesthesia. Similar to Brown and Elman,6 and although no data were provided, they considered the length of time the patient remained immobilized on the operating table to be the primary cause of back pain after anesthesia. Although the studies were done in the 1960s,6,39 they remain relevant in that the relationship between duration of anesthesia/surgery and development of back pain was confirmed by a more recent study.41

Table 3

Table 3

Table 4

Table 4

In contrast, 1 study observed the incidence of back pain after spinal anesthesia to be significantly higher than after general anesthesia (26% vs 4%).42 The backache lasted for only 2 days, was mild in intensity, and did not interfere with the patients’ normal activities. In this study, the authors specifically noted the lack of a radicular component, i.e., there was no radiation to the lower extremities. One can conclude from the studies6,39,40,42 that the incidence of back pain after spinal anesthesia is not different from general anesthesia (level 2).

Back to Top | Article Outline

INCIDENCE OF BACK PAIN AFTER NEURAXIAL ANESTHESIA: PREEXISTING BACK PAIN AS A PREDISPOSING FACTOR

In the seminal articles by Dripps and Vandam,1,2 8460 patients undergoing 10,098 spinal anesthetics were studied. Although the incidence was not reported, Dripps and Vandam noted the occurrence of back pain after spinal anesthesia. Other studies in the 1950s and 1960s showed the incidence to be 2% to 3% after epidural anesthesia.3,4 Another study, which looked specifically into the incidence of back pain after epidural anesthesia, demonstrated the incidence to be 7% (11 of 167 patients).5 In this study, the authors examined their patients, which showed limited back flexion in some but with negative neurologic findings. Spine radiographs, when ordered, showed degenerative osteoarthritis. There was tenderness and “minor superficial injury” at the site of injection and they attributed the patients’ pain to these findings. Most back pain disappeared within 24 to 48 hours (7 patients) or, at worst, within several days.5

More recent studies on back pain after spinal anesthesia have reported the incidence to be 10% to 29% (Table 4).43–45 One study noted the backaches to be mild in intensity, characterized by local tenderness at the site of injection, and responded to oral anti-inflammatory drugs or resolved spontaneously.44 The exact duration of the back pain was not noted. The most recent study noted that the incidence of back pain decreased from 29% on postoperative day 1 to 5% 4 weeks after the spinal.45 Not only did the incidence decrease, but the intensity of pain also diminished. The authors noted that at 4 weeks after the spinal anesthesia, only a history of back pain was related to the occurrence of back pain. The 5% incidence of back pain at 4 weeks, observed by Tekgül et al.,45 is closer to the 10% to 11% incidence noted earlier by other investigators.43,44 From the studies mentioned,43–45 it can be stated that the incidence of back pain after spinal anesthesia ranges from 9% to 29%. The pain is mild in intensity and decreases with time (level 1).

Other studies looked at the incidence of back pain after epidural anesthesia (Table 4).41,46,47 In a prospective survey of 105 patients who received epidural anesthesia, the incidence of back pain was 27% (28 of 105).46 Although it appears to be high, the authors’ criteria for back pain were not strict. All the patients characterized their pain as “injection site tenderness,” which lasted for <4 days. In this study,46 patients were only seen or contacted by telephone at 1 week after the surgery. Another study showed an incidence of 18% within 5 days and 11% at 3 months after epidural anesthesia.47 A more recent study noted the incidence of persistent back pain (pain that was consistently reported at day 2, day 10, and week 13 after surgery) after epidural anesthesia to be 2% (10 of 483 patients).41 Seventy-one patients (15%) complained of clinically significant back pain 2 days after epidural anesthesia but it was not persistent; the pain subsided by the 10th day in 38 patients or by the 13th week in 33 patients. The risk factors that were identified by the investigators included higher body mass index, >2 attempts at block placement, lithotomy position, and surgery exceeding 2.5 hours. No patient experienced paresthesia, numbness, or weakness of their lower extremities.41 The relationship of the duration of surgery and development of back pain was noted in the earlier studies of Brown and Elman6 and Urbach et al.39 The incidence of back pain after epidural anesthesia ranges from 7% to 27%. Similar to spinal anesthesia, the back pain is not persistent (level 1).

A randomized study compared the incidence and duration of back pain after spinal and epidural anesthesia.48 In their study of 192 patients younger than 50 years (96 per group), the investigators noted that the incidence of back pain was significantly more frequent (P < 0.05) after epidural compared with spinal anesthesia at postoperative day 1 (29/96 patients [30%] vs 11/96 patients [11%]), day 2 (5 patients [16%] vs 2 patients [2%]), and day 3 (9 patients [(9%] vs 1 patient [1%]). There were no differences in the age, height, weight, sex distribution, or duration of surgery between the 2 groups. The needles used were a 24G Sprotte spinal needle or an 18G Touhy epidural needle. The number of attempts was not noted nor the criteria for back pain stated in the study. It can be stated that the incidence of back pain is higher after epidural anesthesia compared with spinal anesthesia (level 2).

Although most studies reported only short-term follow-up (Table 4), 2 studies observed their patients for 1 year.43,47 In 1 study in which the incidence of back pain before the spinal anesthesia was 19% (23/122), 11% of the patients developed back pain (12/122) within 5 days after the spinal anesthesia and 12% (15/122) at 3 months.43 Seven of the 12 patients who complained of back pain at 5 days and 14 of the 15 patients who still experienced back pain at 3 months suffered from back pain before the spinal anesthesia. One patient with no history of back problems still complained of back pain at 3 months and at 1 year, resulting in a 0.8% incidence of new-onset back pain. Preexisting back pain was the only variable associated with back pain persisting for 3 months. Associations were not found with technical factors or patient characteristics. In another study, 195 patients undergoing epidural anesthesia for knee arthroscopy were followed up for 1 year.47 The incidence of back pain at 5 days was 18% (24/131) and 12% at 3 months (15 of 131 patients); 13 of the 15 patients at the 3-month follow-up suffered from back pain before the epidural anesthetic, making the incidence of new back pain 1.5%. At the 1-year follow-up, 6 of the 7 patients who had back pain before the epidural blockade continued to experience back pain. Their results were similar to the observational findings of Schwabe and Hopf43 and Tekgül et al.45 who stated that long-term back pain after epidural anesthesia was almost exclusively associated with preexisting back pain. Preexisting low back pain is a risk factor for persistent back pain after neuraxial anesthesia (level 2).

Back to Top | Article Outline

WORSENING OF BACK PAIN AFTER NEURAXIAL ANESTHESIA

Although preexisting back pain may be a risk factor for the occurrence of back pain after neuraxial anesthesia,39,43,45,47 neuraxial anesthesia does not appear to worsen the severity of the pain (Table 5). In the study by Urbach et al.39, only 1 of 11 patients noted worsening of their back pain after spinal anesthesia, an incidence similar to that seen after general anesthesia (1 of 14 patients). Three of 11 patients who underwent spinal anesthesia noted improvement, whereas 7 did not notice any change. In the general anesthesia group, 1 of 14 patients with a history of back pain experienced worsening of symptoms, whereas 13 noted no change. In the study by Schwabe and Hopf,43 6 of the 23 patients with preexisting back pain still complained of persistent back pain 1 year after their spinal anesthesia. Another study showed no exacerbation of the patients’ lumbar radicular symptoms after epidural anesthesia.49 As previously noted, some patients can have “relief” of their back pain after spinal anesthesia.39 There can also be improvement in the numbness50 reflecting the transient nature of this problem.51 The improvement of symptoms after the epidural local anesthetic injection has been documented.52 It can be stated that although preexisting back pain is a risk factor for back pain after neuraxial anesthesia, the intensity of the back pain is not worse after a neuraxial procedure (level 2).

Table 5

Table 5

A more recent study of 937 patients with history of spinal stenosis, disk disease, or previous lumbar surgery showed 10 of the patients developed postoperative neurologic complications (Table 5).53 Of the 10 patients, 3 experienced new sensory or motor deficits and 7 noted worsening of their symptoms. One of the 3 patients who complained of new deficits also noted complete resolution of her deficits 8 weeks after resection of an epidural ependymoma (case 5). The other 2 patients with new deficits had persistent symptoms at 3 and 7 years after surgery (cases 1 and 6, respectively). Four of the 7 patients with progression of their deficits noted improvement in their preoperative baseline status after 6 years (case 2), 3 months (case 3), 6 weeks (case 4), and 1 week (case 9). Of the remaining 3 patients, 1 partially improved 4 weeks after laminectomy (case 7), whereas the other 2 patients experienced partial resolution after 8 weeks (case 8) and after 4 weeks (case 10).

The reported improvements in back pain after neuraxial anesthesia39 should be contrasted with the reports of worsening of neurologic symptoms after neuraxial anesthesia in patients with spinal stenosis.54 In the study by Hebl et al.,53 4 of the 10 patients who developed new deficits or complained of progression of their deficits after neuraxial anesthesia suffered from spinal stenosis. The patients’ symptoms may have been related to progression of their stenosis. Taking these reports into consideration, the ASRA practice advisory on neurologic complications recommended that risk-to-benefit analysis should be made before neuraxial anesthesia is performed and increased perioperative vigilance be observed in patients with known severe spinal stenosis or those with symptoms suggestive of the problem (class II, as per ASRA’s recommendation).35 Such symptoms include neurogenic claudication or “shopping cart position” of the patient while walking (back flexed forward).

Back to Top | Article Outline

MECHANISMS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF BACK PAIN AFTER NEURAXIAL ANESTHESIA

Back pain after spinal anesthesia has been attributed to tears or other trauma to the ligaments, fascia, or bone with localized bleeding or to injury to the nerve roots in the cauda equina.2,41,42 Potential musculoskeletal mechanisms include immobility of the spine, relaxation of the paraspinal muscles under anesthesia, flattening of the normal lumbar convexity, and stretching of the paraspinal ligaments and joint capsules, especially during the lithotomy position.6,39 Pelvic rotation during the lithotomy position can accentuate the reduction in the normal lumbar lordosis from paraspinal muscle relaxation during neuraxial anesthesia, thus straining the lumbosacral ligaments.41 Increased stress to the lumbosacral ligaments also occurs during relaxation of the back muscles during spinal anesthesia.41 The risk factors for development of back pain after neuraxial anesthesia include preexisting back pain, immobilization during the surgery >2.5 hours, lithotomy position during surgery, body mass index ≥32 kg/m2, and multiple attempts at neuraxial placement.6,39,41,43,45,47

Studies examining the occurrence of back pain after neuraxial anesthesia frequently fail to describe the characteristics of the back pain. Although the back pain is typically localized to the lower back, a few studies noted the occurrence of radiation of the pain to the buttock and/or lower extremities.39,42 Most studies did not comment on the characteristics of the back pain, whether it was axial (localized to the low back), radicular, or there were signs and symptoms of facet syndrome, discogenic pain, sacroiliac joint syndrome, or piriformis syndrome. Future studies should involve a back pain specialist because a more detailed description of the patient’s symptoms and an appropriate physical examination would help define the exact nature of the back pain. It would also assist in determining the appropriate treatment of the back pain.55

Back to Top | Article Outline

EFFECTIVENESS OF NEURAXIAL ANESTHESIA IN BACK PAIN PATIENTS

The efficacy of neuraxial anesthesia in patients with low back pain has been the subject of several studies. Publications on the subject can be divided into spinal or epidural anesthesia, whether the patient underwent back surgery and whether the anesthesia was for obstetrical or general surgery. In a detailed study of the onset of sensory blockade after epidural local anesthetic injection in patients with back pain, Benzon et al.56 showed that 7 of 15 patients (46%) experienced delayed sensory blockade of some dermatomes, ranging from 35 to 95 minutes (Table 6). These nerve roots were blocked 10 to 70 minutes after the corresponding nerve roots in the contralateral lower extremity. The dermatomes with delayed onset of block corresponded to the nerve roots identified as demonstrating pathologic changes in the electromyogram or myelogram studies. They cited inflammation of the nerve roots, intraneural fibrosis, and extradural adhesions as possible reasons for the delayed onset of sensory blockade. In a prospective study of 57 patients who had had spine surgery, 52 patients received successful epidural anesthesia for their total hip or total knee replacements.49 Technical difficulty was noted in 3 patients, whereas inadequate spread in the lumbosacral segments was seen in 2 patients. None of the patients complained of exacerbation of their radiculopathy. In a retrospective study of 937 patients with spinal stenosis or lumbar disk disease, 207 of whom had previous spine surgery, the overall success rate of neuraxial anesthesia (spinal, epidural, and combined spinal–epidural [CSE] anesthesia) was 97%.53 The authors showed that previous spine surgery did not affect the success rate or frequency of technical complications. However, they reported patchy blockade in 10 patients and lack of sensory block in 16 patients. New deficits were noted in 3 patients and worsening of preexisting symptoms in 4 patients. Of the 10 patients who developed complications, 4 complications were associated with surgical etiology, 1 of the remaining cases may have been worsened by the epidural, whereas another may have been exacerbated by positioning of the patient during surgery.

Table 6

Table 6

With regard to the efficacy of spinal anesthesia in patients with back pain, a study noted successful placement in 41 of 42 spinal anesthetics57; spinal anesthesia was adequate for surgery in all 41 cases with full recovery of both sensory and motor functions. In non-obstetric cases, spinal anesthesia is effective in patients with back pain, whereas epidural anesthesia may result in incompletely blocked or delayed blockade of the lumbosacral nerve roots (level 2 evidence).

Published literature on epidural anesthesia in obstetric patients who had previous spine surgery has been limited to case reports,58,59 retrospective reports,60–62 a prospective observational study (Table 7),63 a prospective case-controlled study,64 or a prospective case-matched study (Table 7).65 In a retrospective study of patients who had Harrington rod instrumentation, Crosby and Halpern60 noted problems in placing the epidural catheter in 4 of 9 patients (Table 7). In the other retrospective study,61 continuous lumbar epidural anesthesia was established in 20 of 21 attempts although excessive local anesthetic requirements were noted in 8 patients. Incomplete sensory anesthesia was noted in 8 patients (Table 7). In the third retrospective study, Villevieille et al.62 noted technical failure in 2 of 22 patients and analgesic failure in another 2 patients. In a recent prospective, case-matched study in patients who had surgery for correction of scoliosis, neuraxial analgesia failure (defined as inability to initiate satisfactory neuraxial analgesia or any epidural catheter requiring replacement for inadequate analgesia at any time during labor or operative delivery) was sought.65 Such failures were noted in 12% (5 of 41) of patients who underwent surgery compared with none in the control group (0 of 41). The time to complete the neuraxial technique was longer and required more needle redirections in the patients who had surgery for correction of their scoliosis (Table 7).65 In summary, placement of the epidural needle or insertion of the epidural catheter can be difficult in patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery (level 2). Incomplete sensory blockade may occur after epidural anesthesia in obstetric patients who had previous back surgery (level 2).

Table 7

Table 7

In a prospective observational study, epidural anesthesia was used for women in labor who had scoliosis with or without previous spine surgery.63 CSE anesthesia or single-shot spinal anesthesia was offered for those with mild uncorrected scoliosis and continuous spinal anesthesia for women with severe scoliosis with or without surgery (Table 7).63 In that study, epidural catheters were placed in 7 women with uncorrected scoliosis, which resulted in satisfactory analgesia for labor, and continuous spinal anesthesia provided effective analgesia for labor and delivery. In the patients who underwent cesarean delivery, anesthesia was provided by CSE, single-shot spinal, or continuous spinal anesthesia. The authors noted that epidural anesthesia was effective for labor in patients with uncorrected scoliosis. A prospective, case-controlled, observational study did not look at completeness of sensory blockade but rather the bupivacaine consumption per hour of labor analgesia.64 The authors noted no difference in the hourly bupivacaine consumption in parturients with previous lumbar discectomy compared with control subjects. In this study, the majority of patients received a CSE anesthesia for initiation of their analgesia. The same investigators repeated their study in patients who had surgery for correction of scoliosis.65 Although they noted more analgesic failures and longer times to do the epidural anesthesia (Table 7), they noted no difference in the bupivacaine hourly consumption between the patients who had back surgery (median, 15 mg/h; interquartile range, 12.5–18.7 mg/h) compared with the patients who did not have previous surgery (median, 14 mg/h; interquartile range, 11.8–16 mg/h; Table 7).65 Overall, studies showed the efficacy of epidural for labor analgesia in women who had previous lumbar spine surgery (level 2).

Back to Top | Article Outline

PREVENTION OF BACK PAIN FROM NEURAXIAL INJECTION

Field block anesthesia, wherein the local anesthetic is injected into the interspinous space near the lamina, resulted in a decreased incidence of backache: 6% (18 of 322 epidural and spinal anesthetics) vs 14% (286 of 2046 “lumbar punctures”).66 This study, published as a Letter to the Editor, was retrospective, and it was not clear whether the “lumbar punctures” were spinal anesthetics or diagnostic lumbar punctures. It also appears that the control group was the patients who had the neuraxial procedure earlier, before the field block anesthesia was performed by the authors.

Controlled studies evaluating the prevention of back pain after neuraxial anesthesia involved mostly the use of an anti-inflammatory medication or steroid, given epidurally or as part of the intradermal injectate. Wang et al.67,68 and Wang and coworkers69 performed a series of studies wherein they added a steroid into their epidural injectate or added an anti-inflammatory medication to the local anesthetic for skin infiltration. In their first study, they noted that the addition of 5 mg dexamethasone to the epidural anesthesia resulted in a significantly lower incidence of back pain at 24, 48, and 72 hours after the epidural anesthesia (Table 8).67 In their second study, the addition of tenoxicam to the lidocaine for skin infiltration not only decreased the incidence of back pain after epidural anesthesia but also shortened the duration of the pain.68 In their third study, the addition of ketoprofen, a more lipid-soluble anti-inflammatory drug, to the lidocaine for skin infiltration also reduced the incidence and decreased the severity of back pain after epidural anesthesia.69 It is tempting to impart a high evidence score because the studies were randomized, controlled, and double blinded. However, it appears that the same control group was used in all 3 studies (the same incidences of back pain at 24, 48, and 72 hours). All patients in the 3 studies had hemorrhoidectomy, implying that 2000 patients had the surgery in the same hospital within 3 years and 4 months. In view of these limitations, we consider level 2 evidence and grade II recommendation on the efficacy of epidural dexamethasone for preventing back pain after epidural anesthesia.

Table 8

Table 8

Another group of investigators noted the beneficial effect of adding 6 mg ketorolac to the lidocaine for skin infiltration for reducing the incidence of back pain after epidural labor analgesia.70 In their vaginal delivery group, a difference in back pain scores was noted at 24 but not at 72 hours after delivery. In the cesarean delivery group, significant differences were noted at the 24 and 72 hours. Although randomized, placebo controlled, and double blinded, the study has limitations (Table 8). The results of the 3 controlled studies on the addition of an anti-inflammatory drug to the local anesthetic for skin infiltration68–70 led us to conclude that such intervention may decrease the incidence of back pain after an epidural (level 2). The presence of limitations in the 3 studies calls for prospective, randomized-controlled studies on the subject.

Back to Top | Article Outline

SUMMARY STATEMENTS ON BACK PAIN AND NEURAXIAL ANESTHESIA WITH LEVELS OF EVIDENCE

  • The incidence of TNS after lidocaine spinal anesthesia is higher than after the other local anesthetics (level 1).
  • The incidence of TNS after spinal anesthesia with 40 to 50 mg 2-chloroprocaine spinal is low (level 1).
  • The occurrence of back pain after caudal anesthesia in children is low, mild in intensity, and self-limiting (level 2).
  • The incidence of back pain after spinal anesthesia in adult non-obstetric patients is not substantially different from that seen after general anesthesia (level 2).
  • The incidence of back pain is higher after epidural anesthesia compared with spinal anesthesia (level 2).
  • Back pain after spinal or epidural anesthesia is mild in intensity and decreases with time (level 1).
  • Preexisting low back pain is a risk factor for persistent back pain after neuraxial anesthesia. The intensity of back pain, however, is not worse after neuraxial anesthesia (level 2).
  • In non-obstetric cases, spinal anesthesia is effective in patients with back pain. Epidural anesthesia, however, may result in unblocked or delayed onset of block of the lumbosacral nerve roots (level 2). This is especially true if the patient had previous spine surgery.
  • The placement of an epidural needle or insertion of an epidural catheter can be difficult in patients with previous spine surgery (level 2). Incomplete sensory blockade may occur after epidural anesthesia in obstetric patients who had lumbar spine surgery (level 2).
  • Epidural blockade is effective for labor analgesia in women who had previous lumbar spine surgery (level 2).
  • Patients with back and radicular leg pain may improve after epidural local anesthetic injection. However, worsening of neurologic symptoms may occur after neuraxial procedures in patients with spinal stenosis (level 2).
  • The addition of dexamethasone to the epidural local anesthetic may decrease the incidence of back pain (level 2).
  • The addition of an anti-inflammatory drug to the local anesthetic infiltration may be effective for the prevention of back pain after epidural anesthesia (level 2).
Back to Top | Article Outline

RECOMMENDATIONS

  • The number of published studies on 2-chloroprocaine spinal is not sufficient to determine the risk of neurotoxicity of the drug (class III).
  • The use of neuraxial anesthesia in patients with low back pain should depend on the advantages offered by the technique and not on the possibility of worsening the patient’s symptoms (class II).
  • A risk-to-benefit analysis should be made before neuraxial anesthesia is performed in patients with known severe spinal stenosis or those with symptoms suggestive of the problem. Increased perioperative vigilance after neuraxial anesthesia should be used in these patients (class II).35
  • An anti-inflammatory drug may be added to the local anesthesia for skin infiltration before the neuraxial injection to prevent back pain after epidural anesthesia (class II).
Back to Top | Article Outline

DISCLOSURES

Name: Honorio T. Benzon, MD.

Contribution: This author helped write the manuscript.

Attestation: Honorio T. Benzon approved the final manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest: Honorio T. Benzon consulted for Pacira.

Name: Yogen G. Asher, MD.

Contribution: This author helped write the manuscript.

Attestation: Yogen G. Asher approved the final manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest: Yogen G. Asher declares no conflicts of interest.

Name: Craig T. Hartrick, MD.

Contribution: This author helped write the manuscript.

Attestation: Craig T. Hartrick approved the final manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest: Craig T. Hartrick declares no conflicts of interest.

This manuscript was handled by: Terese T. Horlocker, MD.

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. Dripps RD, Vandam LD. Long-term follow-up of patients who received 10,098 spinal anesthetics: failure to discover major neurological sequelae. J Am Med Assoc 1954;156:1486–91.
2. Vandam LD, Dripps RD. Long-term follow-up of patients who received 10,098 spinal anesthetics. IV. Neurological disease incident to traumatic lumbar puncture during spinal anesthesia. J Am Med Assoc 1960;172:1483–7.
3. Bonica JJ, Backup PH, Anderson CE, Hadfield D, Crepps WF, Monk BF. Peridural block: analysis of 3,637 cases and a review. Anesthesiology 1957;18:723–84.
4. Lund PC, Cwik JC, Quinn JR. Experiences with epidural anesthesia: 7730 cases. I. Anesth Analg 1961;40:153–63.
5. Cotev S, Robin GC, Davidson JT. Back pain after epidural analgesia. Anesth Analg 1967;46:259–63.
6. Brown EM, Elman DS. Postoperative backache. Anesth Analg 1961;40:683–5.
7. Rhee WJ, Chung CJ, Lim YH, Lee KH, Lee SC. Factors in patient dissatisfaction and refusal regarding spinal anesthesia. Korean J Anesthesiol 2010;59:260–4.
8. Bernards CM, Hostetter LS. Barash PG, Cullen BF, Stoelting RK, Cahalan MK, Stock MC, Ortega R, Epidural and spinal anesthesia. In: Clinical Anesthesia. 2013:7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 905–33.
9. Brull R, Macfarlane AJR, Chan VWS. Miller RD, Eriksson LI, Fleischer LA, Wiener-Kronish JP, Cohen NH, Young WL, Spinal, epidural, and caudal anesthesia. In: Miller’s Anesthesia. 2015:8th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier, 1684–1720.
10. Vercauteren M, Waets P, Pitkänen M, Förster J. Neuraxial techniques in patients with pre-existing back impairment or prior spine interventions: a topical review with special reference to obstetrics. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2011;55:910–7.
11. Zaric D, Pace NL. Transient neurologic symptoms (TNS) following spinal anesthesia with lidocaine versus other local anesthetics. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009:CD003006.
12. The Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence. Available at: http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653. Accessed June 1, 2015
13. Eagle KA, Berger PB, Calkins H, Chaitman BR, Ewy GA, Fleischmann KE, Fleisher LA, Froehlich JB, Gusberg RJ, Leppo JA, Ryan T, Schlant RC, Winters WL Jr, Gibbons RJ, Antman EM, Alpert JS, Faxon DP, Fuster V, Gregoratos G, Jacobs AK, Hiratzka LF, Russell RO, Smith SC JrAmerican College of Cardiology; American Heart Association. American College of Cardiology; American Heart AssociationACC/AHA guideline update for perioperative cardiovascular evaluation for noncardiac surgery—executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1996 Guidelines on Perioperative Cardiovascular Evaluation for Noncardiac Surgery). J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:542–53.
14. Stevens RA. Back pain following epidural anesthesia with 2-chloroprocaine. Reg Anesth 1997;22:299–302.
15. Ravindran RS, Bond VK, Tasch MD, Gupta CD, Luerssen TG. Prolonged neural blockade following regional analgesia with 2-chloroprocaine. Anesth Analg 1980;59:447–51.
16. Reisner LS, Hochman BN, Plumer MH. Persistent neurologic deficit and adhesive arachnoiditis following intrathecal 2-chloroprocaine injection. Anesth Analg 1980;59:452–4.
17. Moore DC, Spierdijk J, vanKleef JD, Coleman RL, Love GF. Chloroprocaine neurotoxicity: four additional cases. Anesth Analg 1982;61:155–9.
18. Gissen AJ, Datta S, Lambert D. The chloroprocaine controversy II. Is chloroprocaine neurotoxic? Reg Anesth 1984;9:135–45.
19. Kalichman MW, Powell HC, Reisner LS, Myers RR. The role of 2-chloroprocaine and sodium bisulfite in rat sciatic nerve edema. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 1986;45:566–75.
20. Taniguchi M, Bollen AW, Drasner K. Sodium bisulfite: scapegoat for chloroprocaine neurotoxicity? Anesthesiology 2004;100:85–91.
21. Fibuch EE, Opper SE. Back pain following epidurally administered Nesacaine-MPF. Anesth Analg 1989;69:113–5.
22. Ackerman WE. Back pain after epidural Nesacaine MPF. Anesth Analg 1990;70:224–5.
23. Hynson JM, Sessler DI, Glosten B. Back pain in volunteers after epidural anesthesia with chloroprocaine. Anesth Analg 1991;72:253–6.
24. Stevens RA, Chester WL, Artuso JD, Bray JG, Nellestein JA. Back pain after epidural anesthesia with chloroprocaine in volunteers: preliminary report. Reg Anesth 1991;16:199–203.
25. Stevens RA, Urmey WF, Urquhart BL, Kao TC. Back pain after epidural anesthesia with chloroprocaine. Anesthesiology 1993;78:492–7.
26. Toledo P, McCarthy RJ, Ebarvia MJ, Huser CJ, Wong CA. The interaction between epidural 2-chloroprocaine and morphine: a randomized controlled trial of the effect of drug administration timing on the efficacy of morphine analgesia. Anesth Analg 2009;109:168–73.
27. Tarkkila P, Huhtala J, Tuominen M. Transient radicular irritation after spinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric 5% lignocaine. Br J Anaesth 1995;74:328–9.
28. Hartrick CT. Transient radicular irritation: a misnomer? Anesth Analg 1997;84:1392–3.
29. Freedman JM, Li DK, Drasner K, Jaskela MC, Larsen B, Wi S. Transient neurologic symptoms after spinal anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1998;89:633–41.
30. Hampl KF, Schneider MC, Thorin D, Ummenhofer W, Drewe J. Hyperosmolarity does not contribute to transient radicular irritation after spinal anesthesia with hyperbaric 5% lidocaine. Reg Anesth 1995;20:363–8.
31. Hampl KF, Schneider MC, Pargger H, Gut J, Drewe J, Drasner K. A similar incidence of transient neurologic symptoms after spinal anesthesia with 2% and 5% lidocaine. Anesth Analg 1996;83:1051–4.
32. Pollock JE, Liu SS, Neal JM, Stephenson CA. Dilution of spinal lidocaine does not alter the incidence of transient neurologic symptoms. Anesthesiology 1999;90:445–50.
33. Tong D, Wong J, Chung F, Friedlander M, Bremang J, Mezei G, Streiner D. Prospective study on incidence and functional impact of transient neurologic symptoms associated with 1% versus 5% hyperbaric lidocaine in short urologic procedures. Anesthesiology 2003;98:485–94.
34. Aouad MT, Siddik SS, Jalbout MI, Baraka AS. Does pregnancy protect against intrathecal lidocaine-induced transient neurologic symptoms? Anesth Analg 2001;92:401–4.
35. Neal JM, Barrington MJ, Brull R, Hadzic A, Hebl JR, Horlocker TT, Huntoon MA, Kopp SL, Rathmell JP, Watson JC. The Second ASRA Practice Advisory on Neurologic Complications Associated With Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine: executive summary 2015. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2015;40:401–30.
36. Llewellyn N, Moriarty A. The national pediatric epidural audit. Paediatr Anaesth 2007;17:520–33.
37. Lacroix F. Epidemiology and morbidity of regional anaesthesia in children. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2008;21:345–9.
38. Valois T, Otis A, Ranger M, Muir JG. Incidence of self-limiting back pain in children following caudal blockade: an exploratory study. Paediatr Anaesth 2010;20:844–50.
39. Urbach KF, Lee WR, Sheely LL, Lang FL, Sharp RP. Spinal or general anesthesia for inguinal hernia repair? A comparison of certain complications in a controlled series. JAMA 1964;190:25–9.
40. Standl T, Eckert S, Schulteam Esch J. Postoperative complaints after spinal and thiopentone-isoflurane anaesthesia in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Spinal versus general anaesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1996;40:222–6.
41. Hakim SM, Narouze S, Shaker NN, Mahran MA. Risk factors for new-onset persistent low-back pain following nonobstetric surgery performed with epidural anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2012;37:175–82.
42. Dahl JB, Schultz P, Anker-Møller E, Christensen EF, Staunstrup HG, Carlsson P. Spinal anaesthesia in young patients using a 29-gauge needle: technical considerations and an evaluation of postoperative complaints compared with general anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 1990;64:178–82.
43. Schwabe K, Hopf HB. Persistent back pain after spinal anaesthesia in the non-obstetric setting: incidence and predisposing factors. Br J Anaesth 2001;86:535–9.
44. Pan PH, Fragneto R, Moore C, Ross V. Incidence of postdural puncture headache and backache, and success rate of dural puncture: comparison of two spinal needle designs. South Med J 2004;97:359–63.
45. Tekgül ZT, Pektaş S, Turan M, Karaman Y, Çakmak M, Gönüllü M. Acute back pain following surgery under spinal anesthesia. Pain Pract 2015;15:706–11.
46. Chan ST. Incidence of back pain after lumbar epidural anaesthesia for non-obstetric surgery—a preliminary report. Med J Malaysia 1995;50:241–5.
47. Kock S, Hopf HB. [Incidence and predisposing factors of persistent backache after lumbar catheter epidural anesthesia in a non-obstetrical settingø]. Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther 1998;33:648–52.
48. Seeberger MD, Lang ML, Drewe J, Schneider M, Hauser E, Hruby J. Comparison of spinal and epidural anesthesia for patients younger than 50 years of age. Anesth Analg 1994;78:667–73.
49. Sharrock NE, Urquhart B, Mineo R. Extradural anaesthesia in patients with previous lumbar spine surgery. Br J Anaesth 1990;65:237–9.
50. Schachner SM, Abram SE. Use of two epidural catheters to provide analgesia of unblocked segments in a patient with lumbar disc disease. Anesthesiology 1982;56:150–1.
51. Benzon HT. Epidural steroid injections for low back pain and lumbosacral radiculopathy. Pain 1986;24:277–95.
52. Bicket MC, Gupta A, Brown CH IV, Cohen SP. Epidural injections for spinal pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the “control” injections in randomized controlled trials. Anesthesiology 2013;119:907–31.
53. Hebl JR, Horlocker TT, Kopp SL, Schroeder DR. Neuraxial blockade in patients with preexisting spinal stenosis, lumbar disk disease, or prior spine surgery: efficacy and neurologic complications. Anesth Analg 2010;111:1511–9.
54. Kopp SL, Peters SM, Rose PS, Hebl JR, Horlocker TT. Worsening of neurologic symptoms after spinal anesthesia in two patients with spinal stenosis. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2015;40:502–5.
55. Trindle MR, McKay WR. Dorsal primary ramus nerve block for treatment of low back pain after epidural analgesia. Anesth Analg 1992;75:1038–40.
56. Benzon HT, Braunschweig R, Molloy RE. Delayed onset of epidural anesthesia in patients with back pain. Anesth Analg 1981;60:874–7.
57. Berkowitz S, Gold MI. Spinal anesthesia for surgery in patients with previous lumbar laminectomy. Anesth Analg 1980;59:881–2.
58. Feldstein G, Ramanathan S. Obstetrical lumbar epidural anesthesia in patients with previous posterior spinal fusion for kyphoscoliosis. Anesth Analg 1985;64:83–5.
59. Kardash K, King BW, Datta S. Spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section after Harrington instrumentation. Can J Anaesth 1993;40:667–9.
60. Crosby ET, Halpern SH. Obstetric epidural anaesthesia in patients with Harrington instrumentation. Can J Anaesth 1989;36:693–6.
61. Daley MD, Rolbin SH, Hew EM, Morningstar BA, Stewart JA. Epidural anesthesia for obstetrics after spinal surgery. Reg Anesth 1990;15:280–4.
62. Villevieille T, Mercier FJ, Benhamou D. [Is obstetric epidural anaesthesia technically possible after spinal surgery and does it work?]. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim 2003;22:91–5.
63. Smith PS, Wilson RC, Robinson AP, Lyons GR. Regional blockade for delivery in women with scoliosis or previous spinal surgery. Int J Obstet Anesth 2003;12:17–22.
64. Bauchat JR, McCarthy RJ, Koski TR, Cambic CR, Lee AI, Wong CA. Prior lumbar discectomy surgery does not alter the efficacy of neuraxial labor analgesia. Anesth Analg 2012;115:348–53.
65. Bauchat JR, McCarthy RJ, Koski TR, Wong CA. Labor analgesia consumption and time to neuraxial catheter placement in women with a history of surgical correction for scoliosis: a case-matched study. Anesth Analg 2015;121:981–7.
66. Peng AT, Behar S, Blancato LS. Reduction of postlumbar puncture backache by the use of field block anesthesia prior to lumbar puncture. Anesthesiology 1985;63:227–8.
67. Wang YL, Tan PP, Yang CH, Tsai SC, Chung HS. Epidural dexamethasone reduces the incidence of backache after lumbar epidural anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1997;84:376–8.
68. Wang YL, Hsieh JR, Chung HS, Yu CL, Ho AC, Lu PP, Tan PP. The local addition of tenoxicam reduces the incidence of low back pain after lumbar epidural anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1998;89:1414–7.
69. Hsieh JR, Hui YL, Yu CC, Lau WM, Ng YT, Wang YL. Local supplementation of ketoprofen reduces the incidence of low back pain after lumbar epidural anesthesia. Changgeng Yi Xue Za Zhi 1999;22:439–44.
70. Todd G, John A, Vacchiano C, Pellegrini J. Intradermal ketorolac for reduction of epidural back pain. Int J Obstet Anesth 2002;11:100–4.
© 2016 International Anesthesia Research Society