ArticleAsian spine journal2021
Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Different Rates of Infusion in Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasound-guided selective nerve root blocks and caudal epidural injection in the management of lumbar radicular syndrome: a case series with one-year follow-up.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- Epidural steroid injections in lumbar disc herniation- Evidence synthesis from 72 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and a total of 7701 patients.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Novel approach of ultrasound-guided lateral recess block for a patient with lateral recess stenosis: A case report.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Review Update 2022.Asian spine journal · 2022Article
- Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Pathophysiology and Treatment Principle: A Narrative Review.Asian spine journal · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designProspective randomized controlled equivalence trial. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes between patients with lumbosacral radiculopathy that received caudal epidural steroid injection (CESI) at injection rates of 40 mL/min (fast rate) and 20 mL/min (slow rate) and to identify the complications associated with these different CESI rates. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: CESI is widely used for chronic low back pain with lumbar radiculopathy. However, the influence of CESI rates on clinical outcomes has not been well studied.
methodsNinety patients were randomized into two CESI groups. Two patients did not complete the study. Eighty-eight were included in the final analysis: 44 patients were in the fast infusion group, and 44 patients were in the slow infusion group. Intragroup and intergroup comparisons were conducted with regard to the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Roland 5-point pain scale, standing tolerance test, walking tolerance test, and patient satisfaction scale at pre-injection, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks post-injection. Complications associated with the different rates were recorded.
resultsBoth groups demonstrated clinical improvement in all parameters, except for VAS, after injection. There were no statistically significant differences in any outcomes at each time point between the two groups. One patient in the fast rate group and no patients in the slow rate group experienced nausea and vomiting after injection (p =0.320). Eight patents in the fast rate group and two patients in the slow rate group experienced pain at the injection site (p =0.044).
conclusionsAlthough there were no significant differences between injection rates in the short-term clinical improvement outcomes, the fast injection rate group experienced more pain at the injection site, suggesting that the use of the slow injection rate may be considered.
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.