ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2019
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Severity by CT or MRI Does Not Predict Response to Epidural Corticosteroid versus Lidocaine Injections.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Response predictors for lumbar epidural steroid injection outcomes for radiculopathy: a retrospective study.Pain reports · 2026Article
- Factors predicting outcomes from chronic pain management interventions.BMJ medicine · 2025Review
- Clinical effects of arthroscopic-assisted uni-portal spinal surgery and unilateral bi-portal endoscopy on unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Cross-sectional study on hearing loss and auditory reaction time before and after spinal anesthesia with marcaine 0.5% in patients undergoing elective surgery.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeEpidural steroid injections may offer little-to-no short-term benefit in the overall population of patients with symptomatic spinal stenosis compared with lidocaine alone. We investigated whether imaging could identify subgroups of patients who might benefit most. MATERIALS AND
methodsA secondary analysis of the Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injections for Spinal Stenosis prospective, double-blind trial was performed, and patients were randomized to receive an epidural injection of lidocaine with or without corticosteroids. Patients (
resultsThere was no difference in the improvement of disability or leg pain scores at 3 weeks between patients injected with epidural lidocaine alone compared with corticosteroid and lidocaine when accounting for the primary imaging measures of qualitative spinal stenosis assessment (interaction coefficients for disability score, -0.1; 95% CI, -1.3 to 1.2;
conclusionsImaging measures of spinal stenosis are not associated with differential clinical responses following epidural corticosteroid injection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.