ArticleSurgical neurology international2019
Unnecessary Cervical Epidural Injection in An Octogenarian.
Article in Surgical neurology international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical management of spinal pathologies in the octogenarian: a narrative review.GeroScience · 2024Review
- Perspective: Risks/adverse events for epidural spinal injections.Surgical neurology international · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEpidural spine injections (ESI) have no documented long-term efficacy. Furthermore, cervical ESI uniquely risk intramedullary injections with resultant neurological deficits (e.g. monoplegia to quadriplegia), and intravascular vertebral injections (e.g. which potentially contribute to stroke, brain stem infarction). CASE DESCRIPTION: A patient in his mid-eighties presented with 1 year's duration of neck pain without any accompanying numbness, tingling or weakness in the upper or lower extremities. He had no radiculopathy, myelopathy, or neurological deficit. Two years earlier, the patient sustained a myocardial infarction (MI), requiring over 5 stents and a defibrillator. At the time of presentation, he was still on a baby ASA (81 mg/day), on anti-hypertensives, and cholesterol-lowering medications. His non-contrast cervical CT scan (patient had a pacemaker/defibrillator and could not have an MR) from the summer of 2018 showed no significant spinal cord or nerve root compression at any level. Nevertheless, he was subjected to two cervical epidural injections in the early fall; his baby ASA was stopped 5 days prior to each of these injections. Notably, this placed him at increased risk of MI and/or stroke. When he was seen by neurosurgery, without any neurological deficit or significant cervical radiographic findings, he was referred back to neurology for continued conservative management.
conclusionsPatients are increasingly subjected to epidural cervical spinal injections that have no documented long-term efficacy, and expose them to significant risks/complications. This 80+ year-old patient, without a neurological deficit or significant cervical CT-documented pathology, underwent 2 cervical ESI that unnecessarily exposed him to potential cardiac-stent related thrombosis (e.g. stopping ASA for 5 days-a bona-fide requirement for ESI to avoid acute epidural hematomas).
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.