Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33974132›Full record

SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2021

Epidural steroid compared to placebo injection in sciatica: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

E J A Verheijen, C A Bonke, E M J Amorij, C L A Vleggeert-Lankamp

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06956664 (Comparative Efficacy of Physiotherapeutic Exercise Regimens Implemented After Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection), which is not on this map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

NCT06956664 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Comparative Efficacy of Physiotherapeutic Exercise Regimens Implemented After Caudal Epidural Steroid Injection

TypeinterventionalSponsorÇankırı Karatekin UniversityRan2025 to 2026Enrolled42ConditionsIntervertebral Disc Displacement, Low Back Pain, RadiculopathyArmsConventional Physiotherapy, Aerobic Exercise Programme, Core-Stabilization Exercise Programme
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Prognostic factors associated with outcome following an epidural steroid injection for disc-related sciatica: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

E J A VerheijenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands. e.j.a.verheijen@lumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-9202-4496
C A BonkeDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands.
E M J AmorijDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands.
C L A Vleggeert-LankampDepartment of Neurosurgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Leiden University Medical Center · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine whether epidural steroid injections (ESI) are superior to epidural or non-epidural placebo injections in sciatica patients.

methodsThe PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of science databases were searched for trials comparing ESI to epidural or non-epidural placebo. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. The primary outcome measures were pooled using a random-effects model for 6-week, 3-month, and 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were described qualitatively. Quality of evidence was graded using GRADE classification.

resultsSeventeen out of 732 articles were included. ESI was superior compared to epidural placebo at 6 weeks (- 8.6 [- 13.4; - 3.9]) and 3 months (- 5.2 [- 10.1; - 0.2]) for leg pain and at 6 weeks for functional status (- 4.1 [- 6.5; - 1.6]), though the minimally clinical important difference (MCID) was not met. There was no difference in ESI and placebo for back pain, except for non-epidural placebo at 3 months (6.9 [1.3; 12.5]). Proportions of treatment success were not different. ESI reduced analgesic intake in some studies and complication rates are low.

conclusionThe literature indicates that ESI induces larger improvements in pain and disability on the short term compared to epidural placebo, though evidence is of low to moderate quality and MCID is not met. Strong conclusions for longer follow-up or for comparisons with non-epidural placebo cannot be drawn due to general low quality of evidence and limited number of studies. Epidural injections can be considered a safe therapy.

Indexed as

SciaticaAnalgesicsHumansInjections, EpiduralPainSteroidsTreatment OutcomeAnalgesicsSteroidsEpidural steroid injectionLumbar disc herniationLumbar radiculopathyPlacebo

Identifiers

PMID33974132
OpenAlexW3161469726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.