abx for discogram

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

jsaul

Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
1,569
Reaction score
592
algos or anyone,

just wondering what others do for abx during discogram?
do you give ancef IV along with intradiscal abx?
what sort of mixutre and concentrations do you use for your intradiscal injectate?

thanks

Members don't see this ad.
 
1 G Ancef IV pre and post discogram.
150mg/ml Cleocin (4cc total) mixed into Omnipaque 240 (10cc)

14cc total ABX/Contrast solution. We suck this into an Accudisc pressure manometer.
 
2mg/ml cefazolin sodium final concentration in Omnipaque 240 plus 1g IV prior to procedure. In cases of "allergies", we use gentamycin 0.5mg/ml final concentration
 
Members don't see this ad :)
lobelsteve said:
1 G Ancef IV pre and post discogram.
150mg/ml Cleocin (4cc total) mixed into Omnipaque 240 (10cc)

14cc total ABX/Contrast solution. We suck this into an Accudisc pressure manometer.

Realizing that Dr. Lobel does what he was tought from high on the mount, is there actually any EBM reason to use the belt and suspenders approach of IV PLUS intradiscal? I have only seen litterature that backs up intradiscal alone.

The use of intradiscal antibiotics for discography: an in vitro study of gentamicin, cefazolin, and clindamycin. Klessig HT, Showsh SA, Sekorski A. Spine. 2003 Aug 1;28(15):1735-8.

STUDY DESIGN: In vitro determination of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of gentamicin, cefazolin, and clindamycin, alone and in combination with iohexol against laboratory strains of Eschericia coli B, Staphylococcus aureus, and Staphylococcus epidermidis. OBJECTIVE: To study the effects of iohexol on the efficacy of gentamicin, cefazolin, and clindamycin. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Prophylactic antibiotics have been advocated to prevent discitis following discography. Intravenous cefazolin administered before discography has been shown to penetrate the intervertebral disc. However, the use of systemic antibiotics for prophylaxis may lead to bacterial resistance. Intradiscal antibiotic administration is an attractive alternative to systemic antibiotic prophylaxis before discography, but there is no data documenting the efficacy of commonly used antibiotics in the presence of iohexol. METHODS: MICs were determined by adding standard concentrations of bacteria to serial dilutions of antibiotic with and without the addition of iohexol in Todd-Hewitt Broth medium. MICs were determined as the lowest concentration well that demonstrated inhibition of cell growth. RESULTS: Gentamicin, cefazolin, and clindamycin remain efficacious in the presence of iohexol. MICs were lower for cefazolin and gentamycin than for clindamycin. Iohexol alone also demonstrated some inhibition of cell growth. CONCLUSION: This study supports the use of intradiscal antibiotics for prophylaxis of disc space infection during discography. lntradiscal placement of antibiotic should obviate the need for systemic antibiotic prophylaxis and its attendant risk of generating antimicrobial resistance.
 
Can somebody post the literature on breathing air and drinking water. PAZ is turning blue and drying up because he is not going to do these things until several DB-RCT multi-institutional studies are published, then the meta-analysis, then it gets in Cochrane or similar.

Wait, never mind- if he keeps holding his breath, maybe I won't have to hear him talk so much. Now if I could just keep him off the net......
 
Can somebody post the literature on breathing air and drinking water. PAZ is turning blue and drying up because he is not going to do these things until several DB-RCT multi-institutional studies are published, then the meta-analysis, then it gets in Cochrane or similar.

Wait, never mind- if he keeps holding his breath, maybe I won't have to hear him talk so much. Now if I could just keep him off the net......

So sad when someone of Dr. Lobel's obvious intellect has to resort to ridicule and hominem attacks when they don't have science to bolster or defend their specious arguements
 
What percentage of the panels physicians are using disc manometry during disc stimulation. The ISIS guidelines do not necessarily recommend routine pressure monitoring, which would make it more diffucult to define a chemically sensitive vs. pressure sensitive disc. For me, determining whether a disc pressurizes or not (w/ concordant pain), would seem to be important if one is to consider percutaneous disc decompression (excluding IDET) as the next step. Also, which pressure manometer do people prefer (ie. stryker, S&N, etc.). I know billing questions are in disfavor on this forum, but what are people negotiating for these kits.

Thanks.
stim4u
😉
 
easy study --- IV ancef w/ radio-active isotope and then check how much of it actually gets into the disc....
 
Now that I'm on my own:

Cleocin 150mg/cc

4cc in as much Omnipaque as my Stryker manometer will hold- about 14cc

for a total of 18cc solution.

I dropped the Ancef post-disco, but continue orals for 1 week as Cipro or Keflex.

The prior combination from my training has resulted in 1000's of discos without a discitis (most performed by fellows) and only one recognized case of c diff in a patient who has had multiple prior c diff infections.
 
Willems PC, Jacobs W, Duinkerke ES, De Kleuver
M. Lumbar discography: should we use prophylactic
antibiotics? A study of 435 consecutive discograms
and a systematic review of the literature.
J Spinal Disord Technol 2004;17:243-247.

Lumbar discography can be used in the diagnostic work-up of degenerative spine disease. The most serious complication is discitis, believed to be due to penetration of the disc by a needle contaminated with skin flora. The use of prophylactic antibiotics has been advocated, although there is great concern regarding their efficacy and possible adverse effects on disc cells. METHODS: In the current study, the incidence of postdiscography discitis without the use of prophylactic antibiotics was studied in a consecutive patient group. Additionally, a systematic literature review was performed using strict criteria: 1). Discography was performed by means of a two-needle technique, 2). complications such as discitis were specifically looked for at follow-up, and 3). the exact numbers of patients and those lost to follow-up were reported. RESULTS: The clinical results of 200 patients with 100% follow-up for a minimum period of 3 months showed no case of discitis. In the literature review, 10 studies were selected. Nine studies without prophylactic antibiotics reported an overall incidence of 12 cases in 4891 patients (0.25%) or 12770 discs (0.094%). The only study with prophylactic antibiotics (127 patients) showed no case of discitis. CONCLUSIONS: Regarding the small number of patients in the only study in which antibiotics were used and the overall low incidence of postdiscography discitis, not enough evidence was found that prophylactic antibiotics can prevent discitis. It was concluded that in lumbar discography by means of a two-needle technique without prophylactic antibiotics, the risk of postdiscography discitis is minimal and there is not enough support from the literature to justify the routine use of prophylactic antibiotics.


This review article:
Cohen et al. Lumbar discography: A comprehensive Review of Outcome Studies, Diagnostic Accuracy, and Prinicples. Regional Anesth and Pain Med 2005 30(2) 163-83.

Refers to:
Guyer RD, Ohnmeiss DD. Lumbar discography. Position
statement from the North American Spine
Society Diagnostic and Therapeutic Committee.
Spine 1995;20:2048-2059.

and states:
"In a review by Guyer and Ohnmeiss, the authors found an incidence of discitis between 0.1% and 0.2%, with most of the studies analyzed not administering prophylactic antibiotics."


Interesting.
 
What percentage of the panels physicians are using disc manometry during disc stimulation. The ISIS guidelines do not necessarily recommend routine pressure monitoring, which would make it more diffucult to define a chemically sensitive vs. pressure sensitive disc. For me, determining whether a disc pressurizes or not (w/ concordant pain), would seem to be important if one is to consider percutaneous disc decompression (excluding IDET) as the next step. Also, which pressure manometer do people prefer (ie. stryker, S&N, etc.). I know billing questions are in disfavor on this forum, but what are people negotiating for these kits.

Thanks.
stim4u
😉


the indication for percutaneuos disc decompression is (or at least should be) radicular pain. indication for discography is axial pain. im not sure you should be using provocation discography as a diagnostic test for proceed
with perc discectomy.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
the indication for percutaneuos disc decompression is (or at least should be) radicular pain. indication for discography is axial pain. im not sure you should be using provocation discography as a diagnostic test for proceed
with perc discectomy.
I believe discography's indication is to rule in or out discogenic pain, which can be axial, radicular, or mixed, in my experience.
 
while discogenic pain can mimic radicular symptoms - i agree that discography before percutaneous discectomy is a bit of an overkill...
 
while discogenic pain can mimic radicular symptoms - i agree that discography before percutaneous discectomy is a bit of an overkill...

I'll disagree.

Why do a disc procedure if the pain may be coming from somewhere else?

Now if MBB, SIJ, ESI had no effect- then there is not much else- but I'd still do the disco to make sure I was getting the only segment.
 
i am confused - are you using PDD for axial or radicular symptoms?

because if you are doing it for radicular symptoms (ie: patient has a small disc protrusion in the lateral recess with nerve irritation - that hasn't responded to multiple other modalities and isn't a candidate for micro-discectomy) then PDD makes sense...

doing PDD for axial symptoms doesn't make much sense (intuitively) and isn't supported - to my knowledge..
 
Clearly there does not seem to be a universal concensus on discography and its indications.
From my training, understanding of our current guidelines, and review articles. I use discography to further evaluate axial LBP(internal disc disruption/discogenic pain) and/or radicular pain resistant to traditional therapies. A CT discogram further assists in grading the internal disruption(annular/radial tears) and can further define presumed disc herniation for surgical staging. Based on the disc stimulation and ct disco, one can make a better estimation of the correct treatment option. From my experience PDD works well for radicular pain(nl disc ht,small herniations, etc), IDET for discogenic pain(maybe, not great results), and suggesting appropiate levels for definative surgery. What are people primarily using discography for?
 
Why isn't doing a PDD without a prior disco analagous to doing RF without prior facet/MBBs?
 
what?

if you are doing PDD for radicular pain and you see a herniated disc on MRI - patient does not have sustained relief with TFESI and isn't candidate for surgery - why wouldn't you consider the temporary relief of TFESI as diagnostic block? what role would a discogram play?

if you are doing PDD for axial pain, then a discogram is absolutely appropriate - however, i have not seen any (personal experience) improvement of axial pain with PDD (and one case of worse axial pain after PDD), nor have i seen a lot of good data to support PDD for axial pain... i don't know how Smith&Nephew got IDET approved w/ medicare because i always had crappy outcomes w/ IDET and stopped performing them... maybe i have bad technique, maybe IDET doesn't work for axial pain?... blasphemy!!!!
 
what?

if you are doing PDD for radicular pain and you see a herniated disc on MRI - patient does not have sustained relief with TFESI and isn't candidate for surgery - why wouldn't you consider the temporary relief of TFESI as diagnostic block? what role would a discogram play?
Just because you got temporary relief from TFESI does not implicate the disc as the pain generator. Discography replicating concordant symptoms seems prudent before moving forward with a destructive procedure, the same way you would never destroy the medial branch before implicating it as the pain generator with a short term response to facet injections/medial branch blocks.

TFESI's are not selective for specific structures. Solution spreads along the spinal nerve and in the dorsal, lateral, and ventral epidural space, typically extending up and down one level from where it was injected. Radicular pain could be the result of neuoforaminal stenosis or facet arthopathy irritating the exiting nerve.

Multiple studies have shown that between 50-75% of "herniations" on MRI are asymptomatic. So the same reason you do discography for pre-surgical staging applies to PDD as well. A central herniation above the dermatomal level or a far lateral herniation at the level of exit could each produce the same radicular pain pattern.

What is the downside of increasing the likelihood of success of your PDD? By better delinating the pain generator in advance of a definitive procedure like nucleoplasty/dekompressor, a positive outcome seems far more likely.
 
Just because you got temporary relief from TFESI does not implicate the disc as the pain generator. Discography replicating concordant symptoms seems prudent before moving forward with a destructive procedure, the same way you would never destroy the medial branch before implicating it as the pain generator with a short term response to facet injections/medial branch blocks.

TFESI's are not selective for specific structures. Solution spreads along the spinal nerve and in the dorsal, lateral, and ventral epidural space, typically extending up and down one level from where it was injected. Radicular pain could be the result of neuoforaminal stenosis or facet arthopathy irritating the exiting nerve.

Multiple studies have shown that between 50-75% of "herniations" on MRI are asymptomatic. So the same reason you do discography for pre-surgical staging applies to PDD as well. A central herniation above the dermatomal level or a far lateral herniation at the level of exit could each produce the same radicular pain pattern.

What is the downside of increasing the likelihood of success of your PDD? By better delinating the pain generator in advance of a definitive procedure like nucleoplasty/dekompressor, a positive outcome seems far more likely.


correct me if im wrong here, but in your roundabout logic, you are advocating provocation discography for radicular pain. if thats the case, then discography can be indicated for essentially any type of back or leg pain. thats a slippery slope, dude.
 
correct me if im wrong here, but in your roundabout logic, you are advocating provocation discography for radicular pain. if thats the case, then discography can be indicated for essentially any type of back or leg pain. thats a slippery slope, dude.
Chemical radiculitis
Pain 2007 Jan;127(1-2):11-6.

The theory of chemical radiculitis had been put forward about 30 years ago, but as yet it has not been proved by clinical studies. The aim of the current studies was to determine whether the annular tear of a painful disc proved by discography is the cause of radiating leg pain (radiculopathy) in patients with discogenic low back pain. Forty-two patients with discogenic low back pain at single disc level with concomitant radiating leg pain were studied in order to analyse the relationship between site of annular tear and side of radiating leg pain. Electromyogram and motor nerve conduction velocity were monitored to examine nerve root injury. The current studies found that there was a significant positive correlation between the site of annular tear and the side of radiation pain. Abnormalities of electromyogram and reduction of motor nerve conduction velocity were found on the side of radiating leg pain. The studies indicated that leakage of chemical mediators or inflammatory cytokines, which are produced in the painful disc, into epidural space through annular tear could lead to injury to adjacent nerve roots, and it might constitute the primary pathophysiologic mechanism of radiating leg pain in patients with discogenic low back pain but with no disc herniation.


The results of nucleoplasty in patients with lumbar herniated disc: a prospective clinical study of 52 consecutive patients.

Spine Journal 2007 Jan-Feb;7(1):88-92.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Nucleoplasty is a minimally invasive, percutaneous procedure that uses radiofrequency energy to ablate nuclear material and create small channels within the disc.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of nucleoplasty technique in patients with leg pain caused by radicular encroachment.
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A prospective clinical study of subjects with lumbar disc herniation, and radicular pain resistant to previous medical treatment and physiotherapy for a period of at least 3 months.
PATIENT SAMPLE: Fifty-two consecutive patients with leg pain and magnetic resonance imaging evidence of small and medium-sized herniated discs correlating with the patient's symptoms (contained disc herniation<6 mm, with a disc height>/=50% in comparison to normal adjacent discs) were included.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual analogue scale (VAS) was administered and Oswestry disability questionnaires were filled out at preprocedure and postprocedure 2 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. Reduction of analgesic treatment and the patients' satisfaction were also recorded. METHODS: All procedures were performed under local anesthesia and fluoroscopic guidance on an outpatient basis. Patients underwent discography to evaluate annular integrity just before nucleoplasty. Channels were created in the nucleus by advancing the radiofrequency probe (ablating) and withdrawing it (coagulation). In all patients six channels were created. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients had one and 18 had two discs treated; a total of 70 procedures were performed. Mean age of patients was 44.8+/-8.6 years. The mean follow-up period was 12.1+/-1.6 months. Mean VAS reduced from preprocedure 7.5 to 3.1 at postprocedure 6 months and to 2.1 at the latest follow-up. Mean Oswestry index decreased from 42.2 to 24.8 at 6 months and to 20.5 at the latest examination. Analgesic consumption was stopped or reduced in 42 patients (85%) at 6 months and in 46 patients (94%) 1 year after the procedure. Overall patient satisfaction was 81% at 2 weeks, 85% at 6 months, and 88% at the latest follow-up. There were no complications related to the procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results encourage us to use nucleoplasty in carefully selected patients with leg pain caused by radicular encroachment. We recommend applying this minimally invasive technique only in those patients with small (<6 mm) contained disc herniations, with a disc height of>or=50% and with annular integrity.
 
arguing discography to evaluate for annular integrity is plausible...

however, i don't understand the thought process of how discography would prove/disprove whether a disc bulge is contributing to severe lateral recess stenosis

you can't use studies that show that asymptomatic herniations exist as a reason to argue for discography in symptomatic herniations...

then why don't you do a discogram before you do a TFESI...

i am not following your logic ...
 
Maybe I misunderstood - I thought you said in the setting where the patient had "radicular pain and you see a herniated disc on MRI ... does not have sustained relief with TFESI and isn't candidate for surgery" you would go straight to PDD.

You seemed to be attributing the radicular pain to the disc based on the MRI findings. My point was, that MRIs are not in and of themselves dispositive, given the high percentage of asymptomatic "herniations". I would not rely on a herniation on MRI as sufficient evidence that the disc is the causative agent of the patient's pain, and would first do a diagnostic study to be more certain that it is, in fact, the offending structure.
 
I am dealing with a WC right now on a patient with back and leg pain. L4-5 and L5-S1 HNP's with mild mass effect on the root, canal looks good. L4-5 is right side with concordant leg pain, L5-S1 is left sided with concordant leg pain.

They are holding up the disco because they think I'm sending her for fusion.
They would rather have me do a 2 level PDD before the discogram. I argued that the discogram would let me know if the pain is concordant (and to really make sure as heck that L3-4 doesn't cause 10/10 pain).

She had good short term relief with TF-ESI, then IL-ESI, than Caudal ESI with catheter.

Was otherwise normal until work injury 4 months ago when she fell into a dumpster.
 
2mg/ml cefazolin sodium final concentration in Omnipaque 240 plus 1g IV prior to procedure. In cases of "allergies", we use gentamycin 0.5mg/ml final concentration

Why use cefazolin at all with the risk of seizures or death if it gets subarachnoid? Is there any benefit of cefazolin over clindamycin? Why not use clindamycin more often? 😀

Also, while Osti's article recommends 1mg/cc of cefazolin in the contrast, why do people routinely use up to 10mg/cc cefazolin or clindamycin in the contrast (as espoused by ISIS guidelines)?
 
i haven't used cefazolin in over 3 years specifically because of those issues...
 
Steve,

<They are holding up the disco because they think I'm sending her for fusion.
They would rather have me do a 2 level PDD before the discogram.>

Surely you're joking...WC actually said that? Etch it in gold and frame it!
 
Steve,

<They are holding up the disco because they think I'm sending her for fusion.
They would rather have me do a 2 level PDD before the discogram.>

Surely you're joking...WC actually said that? Etch it in gold and frame it!

Out the door pricing saves them 1-2 years until MMI and $75000. I feel like a tool in the middle of a negotiation.

Steve
 
hello everyone first of all I just want to tell everyone I am no doctor but someone who needs answers for someone who has a major back problem. and needs to do the discogram. The problem with that is her degeneration in her spine is so bad that the last time she did the procedure she couldnt handle the pain. Now I have two questions, the first is how does the accuracy get messed up when they put someone under? because that is what they told her. and the second is she was told that some doctors can do the procedure when they are put under sedation and if so do you know any on the western part of the U.S that does??? thank you for your time take care everyone and hope to hear back from anyone soon
 
hello everyone first of all I just want to tell everyone I am no doctor but someone who needs answers for someone who has a major back problem. and needs to do the discogram. The problem with that is her degeneration in her spine is so bad that the last time she did the procedure she couldnt handle the pain. Now I have two questions, the first is how does the accuracy get messed up when they put someone under? because that is what they told her. and the second is she was told that some doctors can do the procedure when they are put under sedation and if so do you know any on the western part of the U.S that does??? thank you for your time take care everyone and hope to hear back from anyone soon

Light sedation is an appropriate part of performing a discogram. I give almost all of my discogram patients light sedation to allow the insertion of the needles into the discs without causing a painful response in the patient to avoid a sensitization response. The patient feels the pinprick on the skin and some pressure when the needle is going through the fibrous outer portion of the disc. They are fully awake and carry on a normal conversation before I pressurize the disc. If the patient is at all groggy for this portion, or had severe pain with placement of the needles, I feel the study is not going to be valid. So my answer is sedation should be given, but only at the onset and only a minimal amount to allow the patient to be fully awake and aware for the provocative portion of the study.
 
Light sedation is an appropriate part of performing a discogram. I give almost all of my discogram patients light sedation to allow the insertion of the needles into the discs without causing a painful response in the patient to avoid a sensitization response. The patient feels the pinprick on the skin and some pressure when the needle is going through the fibrous outer portion of the disc. They are fully awake and carry on a normal conversation before I pressurize the disc. If the patient is at all groggy for this portion, or had severe pain with placement of the needles, I feel the study is not going to be valid. So my answer is sedation should be given, but only at the onset and only a minimal amount to allow the patient to be fully awake and aware for the provocative portion of the study.


thank you very much for the information about the procedure. I talked to the person about this and she likes the way you do the procedure. I have one more question. sense you are not on the west coast we cant actually come to you so, I was wondering if you know any doctors that do it the same as you in las vegas?????? thank you again for the information and getting back to me so soon. take care and keep saving lives because that means so much to people even though they don't say it sometimes
 
thank you very much for the information about the procedure. I talked to the person about this and she likes the way you do the procedure. I have one more question. sense you are not on the west coast we cant actually come to you so, I was wondering if you know any doctors that do it the same as you in las vegas?????? thank you again for the information and getting back to me so soon. take care and keep saving lives because that means so much to people even though they don't say it sometimes



I do. Phoenix, Arizona
 
ok my first question is do you do it the same as the others and can I get your office number so we can go over the insurence information????

Same way as Dr. Lobel. Office number is 602-944-2222. Ask for Maria or Millie to discuss insurance information. Dr. Ratcliffe.
 
that's a bit scary... advertising for procedures on-line...

yikes...
 
you must have Verizon...
 
Top