ArticlePatient safety in surgery2024
The role of spinal injections towards optimizing patient selection for spinal surgery: A proof-of-concept study in 176 lower back pain patients.
Article in Patient safety in surgery, 2024. 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.
- Improvement in low back pain following endoscopic decompression for spinal stenosis.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Exploring strategies to enhance patient safety in spine surgery: a review.Patient safety in surgery · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundManaging degenerative lumbar diseases is challenging due to the complexity of identifying symptom causes, especially when multiple pathologies coexist. This study evaluated the impact of patient-specific lumbar spine infiltrations on therapeutic strategies in patients with multiple spinal pathologies (MSP) or specific spinal pathologies (SSP).
methodsA retrospective cohort of 176 patients treated for subacute or chronic lumbar pain with targeted spinal infiltrations was analyzed. Patients were categorized based on the presence of MSP or SSP. The primary endpoint was the relief of lumbar spine-specific symptoms following each infiltration. Secondary endpoints included epidemiological factors and comorbidities, while tertiary endpoints focused on post-treatment recommendations and performed treatments.
resultsHigh rates of spinal pain (97.1% in both groups) and radiating symptoms (88.2% in SSP and 92.3% in MSP) were reported. Psychological conditions were significantly more prevalent in female patients (19.4% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.0307), whereas hip osteoarthritis was more common in male patients (20.5% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.0490). Among all infiltration types, lumbar transforaminal injections were the most effective, leading to pain reduction in 80.1% of SSP patients and 72.2% of MSP patients. Facet joint and sacroiliac joint infiltrations also frequently resulted in pain reduction in both groups. Overall, conservative treatment was recommended for most patients (73.3%), while only 22.7% of all evaluated patients were recommended for surgical intervention. Additionally, seven patients received a hip prosthesis.
conclusionsPatient-specific lumbar spine infiltrations effectively relieve pain, support therapeutic decision-making, and tend to favor conservative treatment approaches. These findings highlight the role of infiltration therapies in managing both mixed and specific lumbar spine pathologies, suggesting their potential to reduce the need for surgical interventions.
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.