Image Guidance Technologies for Interventional Pain Procedures: Ultrasound, Fluoroscopy, and CT

Chronic pain is a common medical condition. Patients who suffer uncontrolled chronic pain may require interventions including spinal injections and various nerve blocks. Interventional procedures have evolved and improved over time since epidural injection was first introduced for low back pain and sciatica in 1901. One of the major contributors in the improvement of these interventions is the advancement of imaging guidance technologies. The utilization of image guidance has dramatically improved the accuracy and safety of these interventions. The first image guidance technology adopted by pain specialists was fluoroscopy. This was followed by CT and ultrasound. Fluoroscopy can be used to visualize bony structures of the spine. It is still the most commonly used guidance technology in spinal injections. In the recent years, ultrasound guidance has been increasingly adopted by interventionists to perform various injections. Because its ability to visualize soft tissue, vessels, and nerves, this guidance technology appears to be a better option than fluoroscopy for interventions including SGB and celiac plexus blocks, when visualization of the vessels may prevent intravascular injection. The current evidence indicates the efficacies of these interventions are similar between ultrasound guidance and fluoroscopy guidance for SGB and celiac plexus blocks. For facet injections and interlaminar epidural steroid injections, it is important to visualize bony structures in order to perform these procedures accurately and safely. It is worth noting that facet joint injections can be done under ultrasound guidance with equivalent efficacy to fluoroscopic guidance. However, obese patients may present challenge for ultrasound guidance due to its poor visualization of deep anatomical structures. Regarding transforaminal epidural steroid injections, there are limited evidence to support that ultrasound guidance technology has equivalent efficacy and less complications comparing to fluoroscopy. However, further studies are required to prove the efficacy of ultrasound-guided transforaminal epidural injections. SI joint is unique due to its multiplanar orientation, irregular joint gap, partial ankylosis, and thick dorsal and interosseous ligament. Therefore, it can be difficult to access the joint space with fluoroscopic guidance and ultrasound guidance. CT scan, with its cross-sectional images, can identify posterior joint gap, is most likely the best guidance technology for this intervention. Intercostal nerves lie in the subcostal grove close to the plural space. Significant risk of pneumothorax is associated with intercostal blocks. Ultrasound can provide visualization of ribs and pleura. Therefore, it may improve the accuracy of the injection and reduce the risk of pneumothorax. At present time, most pain specialists are familiar with fluoroscopic guidance techniques, and fluoroscopic machines are readily available in the pain clinics. In the contrast, CT guidance can only be performed in specially equipped facilities. Ultrasound machine is generally portable and inexpensive in comparison to CT scanner and fluoroscopic machine. As pain specialists continue to improve their patient care, ultrasound and CT guidance will undoubtedly be incorporated more into the pain management practice. This review is based on a paucity of clinical evidence to compare these guidance technologies; clearly, more clinical studies is needed to further elucidate the pro and cons of each guidance method for various pain management interventions.