ReviewSurgical neurology international2024
Perspective: Risks/adverse events for epidural spinal injections.
Review in Surgical neurology international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Intrathecal Triamcinolone for Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort of 499 Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite the lack of FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approval, cervical and lumbar epidural spinal injections are frequently performed in the US to address back pain and/or painful radiculopathy. The three major types of injections include; interlaminar/translaminar (ESI), transforaminal (TFESI), or caudal injections. Notably, most studies document little to no clear short-term, and no long-term benefits/efficacy for these injections vs. various placebos. Methods: More adverse events (AE) occurred with cervical© rather than lumbar (L) injections, and more severe AE were attributed to C-TFESI vs. CESI injections. Results: Acute post injection AE symptoms were observed immediately or within 72 post-injection hours. These symptoms included; hypotension, acute respiratory distress, chest pain, upper extremity numbness, weakness, paresthesias, paralysis, and fevers. More AE were attributed to cervical C-TFESI vs. cervical CESI. These AE included; intramedullary/cord injections, intravascular injections (i.e. vertebral artery) resulting in brain stem/cerebellar/cord strokes, epidural abscess/infection, confusion, epidural hematomas, intracranial hypotension, and/or 6 Conclusion: Epidural cervical and lumbar ESI or TFESI spinal injections demonstrated minimal to no short-term, and no long-term benefits for the treatment of cervical and/or lumbar pain/radiculopathy vs. placebos. Further, more AE were observed for cervical vs. lumbar epidural injections overall, with more AE usually seen with TFESI vs. ESI procedures.
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.