Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32335757›Full record

SynthesisCurrent pain and headache reports2020

Does Epidural Bupivacaine with or Without Steroids Provide Long-Term Relief? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Laxmaiah Manchikanti, Nebojsa Nick Knezevic, Allan Parr, Alan D Kaye, Mahendra Sanapati, Joshua A Hirsch

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current pain and headache reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Pharmacology of spinal interventions: review of agents used in spine pain procedures.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Epidural Steroid Injections for Low Back Pain: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
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

6 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Laxmaiah ManchikantiDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of Louisville, Paducah, KY, USA. drlm@thepainmd.com.
Nebojsa Nick KnezevicDepartment of Anesthesiology; Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, College of Medicine, University of Illinois, Wellington Ave Ste 4815, Chicago, IL, 60657, USA.
Allan ParrLouisiana State University School of Medicine, 1541 Kings Hwy, Shreveport, LA, 71103, USA.
Alan D KayeDepartment of Anesthesiology, and Pharmacology, LSU Health Science Center, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Mahendra SanapatiPain Management Centers of America, Evansville, IN, USA.
Joshua A HirschMassachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans · USLouisiana State University in Shreveport · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USPain Management Center of Paducah · USPain Management Centers Of America · USUniversity of Illinois Chicago · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewLow back and lower extremity pain have been treated since 1901 with local anesthetics alone and since 1952 in combination with steroids. Over the years, multiple randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis have been reaching discordant conclusions regarding the effectiveness of sodium chloride solution, local anesthetics, and steroids in managing spinal pain. Further, related to lack of understanding, multiple reviewers have considered local anesthetics including lidocaine and bupivacaine as equivalent to placebo based on theory that steroid is the only drug effective in the epidural space. In this review, we assessed effectiveness of epidurally administered bupivacaine with or without steroids to rule out misconceptions of placebo and to show the comparative effectiveness of epidural bupivacaine alone compared to epidural bupivacaine with steroids. RECENT

findingsMultiple systematic reviews performed in assessing the effectiveness of epidural injections have converted epidurally administered lidocaine and bupivacaine to placebo. This led to inappropriate conclusions of lack of effectiveness of epidural local anesthetics with or without steroids as showing equal effectiveness when analyzed with conventional dual-arm meta-analysis. Thus, true placebo control trials with injection of an inactive substance into unrelated structures have been almost non-existent. Epidurally administered bupivacaine alone or with steroids are effective in managing low back and lower extremity pain. The findings of this review provide appropriate information of epidurally administered bupivacaine as an active agent (not a placebo) with level 1 evidence and almost equally effective as bupivacaine with steroids with level II evidence.

Indexed as

Anesthetics, LocalBack PainBupivacaineChronic PainHumansInjections, EpiduralRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSteroidsAnesthetics, LocalBupivacaineSteroidsBupivacaineChronic low back painEpidural injectionsLidocaineLocal anestheticPlacebo effectSingle-arm meta-analysisSteroids

Identifiers

PMID32335757
OpenAlexW3018682502

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.