Caudal epidural steroid injection is a very common intervention in treatment of low back pain and sciatica symptoms. Although extensively used, it is not devoid of complications. A few reports of chemical and infective arachnoiditis exist following lumbar epidural anaesthesia, but none following a caudal epidural steroid injection.We report a case of arachnoiditis following caudal epidural steroid injections for lumbar radiculopathy. The patient presented with contralateral sciatica, worsening low back pain and urinary retention few days following the injection, followed by worsening motor functions in L4/L5/S1 myotomes with resultant dense foot drop. Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging suggested infective arachnoiditis with diffuse enhancement and clumping of the nerve roots within the lumbar and sacral thecal sac. As the number of injections in the management of back pain and lumbo-sacral radicular pain is increasing annually, it is imperative to have a thorough understanding of this potentially dangerous complication and educate the patients appropriately.
Arachnoid* ; Arachnoiditis* ; Back Pain ; Foot ; Humans ; Injections, Epidural* ; Low Back Pain ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Radiculopathy ; Sciatica ; Urinary Retention

STUDY DESIGN: Modern biomaterials and instrumentation have popularised surgery of the thoraco-lumbar spine through an anterior route. The advantage of anterior surgery is that it allows for a direct decompression of the compromised spinal canal. However, the potential for devastating long-term sequelae as a result of complications is high. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to give a general overview and identify the incidence of vascular complications. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: There is limited literature describing the overall incidence and complications of anterior spinal surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospective database of 1,262 consecutive patients with anterior surgery over a twelve-year period. RESULTS: In our study, 1.58% (n=20) of patients suffered complications. Injury to a major vessel was encountered in 14 (1.11%) cases, of which nine involved an injury to the common iliac vein. In six cases, the original procedure was abandoned due to a life-threatening vascular injury (n=3) and unfavourable anatomy (n=3). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of vascular and other complications in our study was relatively low. Nevertheless, the potential for devastating long-term sequelae as a result of complications remains high. A thorough knowledge and awareness of normal and abnormal anatomy should be gained before attempting such a procedure, and a vascular surgical assistance especially should be readily accessible. We believe use of access surgeons is mandatory in cases with difficult or aberrant anatomy.
Biocompatible Materials ; Decompression ; Humans ; Iliac Vein ; Incidence* ; Prospective Studies ; Retrospective Studies ; Spinal Canal ; Spine* ; Vascular System Injuries