ReviewJournal of pain research2021
Electromyography and Therapeutic Response to Lumbosacral Epidural Steroid Injections: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of pain research, 2021. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Managing radicular pain in patients with normal MRIs: Challenges and insights?Interventional pain medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The association between electromyography (EMG)-confirmed lumbosacral (LS) radiculopathy and pain outcomes following epidural steroid injection (ESI) has not been systematically summarized. The primary objective of this systematic review was to summarize the effects of EMG-confirmed LS radiculopathy on pain intensity following ESI. A secondary objective was to summarize the effects of EMG-confirmed LS radiculopathy on physical functioning following ESI. An a priori protocol was registered and a database search conducted by a reference librarian from January 2000 through December 2020. The search was date-limited to ensure the results of the systematic review represented contemporary clinical practice. Study-inclusion criteria included randomized trials, prospective and retrospective studies, cross-sectional studies, case series, and case reports, age ≥18 years, and use of EMG as a prognostic tool prior to an ESI. Two independent reviewers screened all titles, abstracts, and full texts. Data were extracted using a templated electronic database. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tool and certainty in evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Due to clinical heterogeneity in study characteristics, a meta-analysis was not performed. A total of 454 studies were screened, and eight nonrandomized studies met the inclusion criteria. Five studies had a moderate risk of bias, two serious risks, and one a critical risk. The key findings included four of eight nonrandomized studies reporting a significant association between EMG-confirmed radiculopathy and ESI response and four of eight nonrandomized studies reporting no significant association. Important sources of bias limited interpretation of individual study findings, and multiple sources of clinical heterogeneity limited between-study comparisons. The findings of this systematic review demonstrate that associations existed between EMG-confirmed LS radiculopathy and pain outcomes after ESI in some, but not all studies. These results should be carefully interpreted with full understanding of the risk of bias and very low certainty in evidence that characterize the nonrandomized studies comprising this systematic review.
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.