Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30854599›Full record

SynthesisCurrent pain and headache reports2019

Regenerative Techniques for Neuraxial Back Pain: a Systematic Review.

Ali K Valimahomed, Paul Ryan Haffey, Richard D Urman, Alan D Kaye, R Jason Yong

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current pain and headache reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ali K ValimahomedDepartment of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Paul Ryan HaffeyDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Cornell Medical College/Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA.
Richard D UrmanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. rurman@bwh.harvard.edu.
Alan D KayeDepartment of Anesthesiology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, LA, USA.
R Jason YongDepartment of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans · USNewYork–Presbyterian Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewRegenerative modalities have been identified in numerous clinical studies as beneficial in various settings. The focus of this review is to summarize key studies and current concepts for the role of regenerative medicine in the treatment of neuraxial back pain. RECENT

findingsRecent studies have demonstrated the benefit of regenerative therapies for the treatment of neuraxial back pain. A literature review of clinical trials published between 2015 and 2017 was performed using OVID, PubMed, and Google Scholar to identify investigations attempting to determine the efficacy of various regenerative modalities on two primary sources of low back pain: facet arthropathy and degenerative disc disease. The seven articles analyzed in this systematic review present promising data regarding the use of these autologous biologic treatments, but many of these investigations have several limitations in common including small sample size. Regenerative medicine has been shown to demonstrate efficacy in the treatment of neuraxial back pain. As the field advances, new studies are needed comparing efficacy and safety profiles to better determine best practice techniques and standards in the future.

Indexed as

HumansLow Back PainRegenerative MedicineBack painBiologicsMedicineNeuraxialRegenerativeTreatment

Identifiers

PMID30854599
OpenAlexW2920879378

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.