Early surgical treatment protocol for sciatic nerve injury due to injection--a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We retrospectively researched 119 patients with buttock level traumatic injury to sciatic nerves and 42 cases of sciatic nerve injuries due to intramuscular injections were observed among them. Our aim was finding out the post-operative outcomes of early intervention and describing a timing schedule for surgical intervention.

METHODS

Between 1984 and 2004 a total of 73 patients were operated on to explore the nerve lesion. These injuries consisted of post-injection injury, hip fracture/dislocation, contusion, compression, gunshot wound, hip arthroplasty and laceration. Our study took into account 29 cases operated because of injection injury. The most common presenting symptom was pain, which often masked underlying loss of function. Findings at operation were analysed according to the type of sciatic nerve damaged following intramuscular injection, the nature of this injury and the referring speciality. Some of the more common causal operations and procedures are discussed. Preventive measures are listed, and early diagnosis and treatment are recommended. The aim of the operation was to establish the diagnosis, to resolve pain and to improve function by epineural or interfasciculary neurolysis.

RESULTS

We analysed the findings at operation according to the nature of the injury and the procedures which the patients underwent. Seven patients (24.1%) had an excellent outcome, 14 patients (48.2%) had good outcome and 4 patients (13.8%) had fair outcome. The other four patients (13.8%) had poor outcome. No patients suffered from additional post-operative neurological deficits or from worsening of pre-operative deficits.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our experiences, we recommend measures by which the morbidity rate of these injuries may be reduced. We stress, however, that if the clinical evidence points to transection of a nerve, that nerve may be explored without waiting for electrophysiological confirmation. Delay in recognition and therefore treatment was a cause of litigation, and contributed to the poor outcome in many cases.