Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37120532›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2023

Efficacy of ultrasound guided caudal epidural steroid injection with or without ozone in patients with lumbosacral canal stenosis; a randomized clinical controlled trial.

Seyed Mansoor Rayegani, Vahid Soltani, Mohsen Cheraghi, Mohammad Reza Omid Zohor, Arash Babaei-Ghazani, Seyed Ahmad Raeissadat

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Seyed Mansoor RayeganiPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Vahid SoltaniPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohsen CheraghiPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad Reza Omid ZohorPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Arash Babaei-GhazaniNeuromusculoskeletal Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Seyed Ahmad RaeissadatPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. a_raeissadat@sbmu.ac.ir.
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · IRIran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLumbosacral canal stenosis is known as the most common cause of back surgery with several complications. Selecting a minimally invasive treatment with high efficacy in such patients is necessary. This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of ozone therapy in combination with caudal epidural steroid in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

methodsA double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted on 50 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis allocated into two study groups. Under ultrasound guidance, the first group received 80 mg of triamcinolone hexavalent with 4 mL of Marcaine 0.5% and 6 mL of distilled water to the caudal epidural space. The second group received an injection similar to the first group, combined with 10 mL of ozone (O2-O3) gas at a concentration of 10 µg/cc. The patients were followed at baseline, one, and six months after injection with clinical outcomes measures using Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Walking Distance (WD) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

resultsThe mean age of subjects, 30 males (60%) and 20 females (40%), was reported as 64.51 ± 7.19 years old. Reduction of pain intensity based on VAS score was statistically significant in both groups at follow-up periods (P < 0.001). The VAS changes in the first month and sixth months showed no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.28 and P = 0.33, respectively). The improvement in disability index (ODI) in both types of treatment during follow-up was significant (P < 0.0001), and there was no difference between the two treatment groups in one month and six months (P = 0.48 and P = 0.88, respectively). As for walking distance, the improvement process with both types of treatment during follow-up periods was significant (P < 0.001). However, after one and six months of treatment, the rate of improvement in patients' walking distance in the caudal epidural steroid injection plus ozone group was significantly higher than in the epidural steroid group (p = 0.026 and p = 0.017, respectively).

conclusionsIn this study, the results of VAS and ODI outcomes showed that caudal epidural steroid injection combined with ozone has no advantage over caudal epidural steroid injection alone. Interestingly, our results demonstrated that the group receiving caudal epidural steroid injection plus ozone scored significantly higher on the walking distance index than the group receiving caudal epidural steroid alone.

trial registrationIRCT IRCT20090704002117N2 (registration date: 07/08/2019).

Indexed as

Spinal StenosisAgedConstriction, PathologicDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansInjections, EpiduralLumbar VertebraeMaleMiddle AgedSteroidsTreatment OutcomeUltrasonography, InterventionalSteroidsCaudal epidural steroidLumbar spinal stenosisOzone therapyUltrasound Guidance

Identifiers

PMID37120532
PMCPMC10148427
OpenAlexW4367368886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.