Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16865379›Full record

Trial reportEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2007

Randomised placebo-controlled trial on the effectiveness of nasal salmon calcitonin in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Suhayl I Tafazal, Leslie Ng, Philip Sell

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Effects of calcitonin on lumbar spinal stenosis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. What interventions improve walking ability in neurogenic claudication with lumbar spinal stenosis? A systematic review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2014
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Calcitonin: A useful old friend.Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2020
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Surgical and nonsurgical treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2016
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Effects of calcitonin on lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Lumbar spinal stenosis.Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology · 2010
    Review
  17. A survey of the "surgical and research" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2007.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2008
    Review
  18. A survey of the "medical" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2007.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2008
    Review
  19. Investigating non-operative treatment options for lumbar spinal stenosis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2007
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Suhayl I TafazalDepartment of Orthopaedics, University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicestershire, UK. stafazal@hotmail.com
Leslie Ng
Philip Sell
University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This is a double blind randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of nasal salmon calcitonin in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. The trial compared the outcome of salmon calcitonin nasal spray to placebo nasal spray in patients with MRI confirmed lumbar spinal stenosis. Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the commonest conditions encountered by spine surgeons. It more frequently affects elderly patients and lumbar decompression has been used to treat the condition with variable success. Non operative measures have been investigated, but their success ranges from 15% to 43% in patients followed up for 1-5 years (Simotas in Clin Orthop 1(384):153-161, 2001). Salmon calcitonin injections have been investigated in previous trials and may have a treatment effect. Nasal salmon calcitonin has become available and if effective would have advantages over injections. Forty patients with symptoms of neurogenic claudication and MRI proven lumbar spinal stenosis were randomly assigned either nasal salmon calcitonin or placebo nasal spray to use for 4 weeks. This was followed by a 'washout' period of 6 weeks, and subsequent treatment with 6 weeks of nasal salmon calcitonin. Standard spine outcome measures including Oswestry disability index (ODI), low back outcome score, visual analogue score and shuttle walking test were administered at baseline, 4, 10 and 16 weeks. Twenty patients received nasal salmon calcitonin and twenty patients received placebo nasal spray. At 4 weeks post treatment there was no statistically significant difference in the outcome measures between the two groups. The change in ODI was a mean 1.3 points for the calcitonin group and 0.6 points for the placebo group (P = 0.51), the mean change in visual analogue score for leg pain was 10 mm in the calcitonin group and 0 mm in the placebo group (P = 0.51). There was no significant difference in walking distance between the two groups, with a mean improvement in walking distance of 21 m in the calcitonin group and 8 m in the placebo group (P = 0.78). At the end of the trial the ODI had improved by a mean of 3.7 points in the calcitonin group and 3.8 points in the placebo group (P = 0.44). This randomised placebo controlled trial has not shown any treatment effect in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with nasal salmon calcitonin.

Indexed as

Administration, IntranasalAgedBone Density Conservation AgentsCalcitoninDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansLumbar VertebraeMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementSeverity of Illness IndexSpinal StenosisBone Density Conservation AgentsCalcitoninsalmon calcitonin

Identifiers

PMID16865379
PMCPMC2200683
OpenAlexW2007387954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.