ArticleHeliyon2023
The efficacy of intrathecal methyl-prednisolone for acute spinal cord injury: A pilot study.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- An updated systematic review of neuroprotective agents in the treatment of spinal cord injury.Neurosurgical review · 2024Pooled it
- Exploring Innovative Approaches for Managing Spinal Cord Injury: A Comprehensive Review of Promising Probiotics and Postbiotics.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study design: Randomized clinical trial. Objectives: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of intrathecal methyl-prednisolone compared to intravenous methyl-prednisolone in acute spinal cord injuries. Setting: Imam Reza Hospital, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences. Methods: Patients meeting our inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled in the study and divided randomly into two treatment arms: intrathecal and intravenous. Standard spinal cord injury care (including surgery) was given to each patient based on our institutional policy. Patients were then assessed for neurological status (based on ASIA scores, Frankel scores) and complications for six months and compared to baseline status after injury. To better understand the biological bases of methyl-prednisolone on spinal cord injuries, we measured two biomarkers for oxidative stress (serum malondialdehyde and total antioxidant capacity) in these patients at arrival and day three after injury. Results: The present study showed no significant difference between the treatment arms in neurological status (sensory scores or motor scores) or complications. However, the within-group analysis showed improvement in neurological status in each treatment arm within six months. Serum malondialdehyde and total antioxidant capacity were analyzed, and no significant difference between the groups was seen. Conclusion: This is the first known clinical trial investigating the effect of intrathecal MP in acute SCI patients. Our finding did not show any significant differences in complication rates and neurological outcomes between the two study arms. Further studies should be conducted to define the positive and negative effects of this somehow novel technique in different populations as well.
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.