Trial reportThe Permanente journal2021
Caudal Epidural Injections in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Comparison of Nonimage, Ultrasonography-, and Fluoroscopy-Guided Techniques. A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in The Permanente journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The effect of hybrid ultrasound/fluoroscopy guidance vs only fluoroscopy guidance on procedure time and radiation exposure in caudal epidural steroid injections.Interventional pain medicine · 2025Article
- The pros and cons of ultrasound-guided procedures in pain medicine.The Korean journal of pain · 2024Review
- Effectiveness of ultrasonography-guided caudal epidural steroid injection compared to the fluoroscopic application.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCaudal epidural injections (CEIs) are widely used in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Imaging modalities, such as fluoroscopy and ultrasonography, are frequently employed to confirm proper needle placement and to prevent possible complications. This is a prospective, randomized, study aiming to compare the efficacy of nonimage, ultrasonography-, and fluoroscopy-guided CEIs for the management of LSS.
methodsA total of 45 patients were included based on their clinical symptoms and their magnetic resonance images indicative of LSS. Patients were randomized and allocated into 3 equal groups, the nonimage, the ultrasonography-guided, and the fluoroscopy-guided group. All patients received 12 mg betamethasone and 4 mg ropivacaine dissolved in 20 mL normal saline. The injections were administered twice, with a 30-day interval. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index were recorded before the injections and 1 month after the second injection. The procedure times for each group were also compared.
resultsVisual Analogue Scale scores and Oswestry Disability Index values were improved in all the groups compared to the baseline values (p < 0.001). The intergroup difference in Visual Analogue Scale scores and Oswestry Disability Index values before and after CEIs was not statistically significant (p = 0.836 and p = 0.438, respectively). The mean procedure time was higher for the fluoroscopy-guided group, followed by ultrasonography-guided, but the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.067).
conclusionCEIs are an effective analgesic method for patients suffering from LSS. Nonimage, ultrasonography-, and fluoroscopy-guided CEIs are similarly effective in terms of pain relief and functional improvement.
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.