ReviewNorth American Spine Society journal2025
Factors associated with improved outcomes after lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections for radicular pain: A systematic review.
Review in North American Spine Society journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of epidural space contrast flow and clinical outcomes in parasagittal versus transforaminal epidural steroid injection.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Response predictors for lumbar epidural steroid injection outcomes for radiculopathy: a retrospective study.Pain reports · 2026Article
- Ten Years of Lumbar Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injections in a Tertiary Referral Center: Trends in Clinical Indications and Outcomes.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Despite numerous studies, the factors contributing to clinical success after a lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injection (LTFESI) for radicular pain remain unclear. The aim of this study was to systematically review literature evaluating preprocedural predictive factors for improved outcomes in patients receiving a LTFESI. Methods: We searched databases including PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus for studies published from 2006 through 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to identify articles evaluating prognostic factors associated with outcomes after a LTFESI. Studies were excluded if articles treated patients with axial back pain or if they were not performed under imaging guidance with contrast medium. The quality of included studies was appraised by 2 reviewers using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool (QUIPS). Results: Eighteen studies met eligibility criteria which evaluated prognostic factors across domains including patient characteristics, clinical findings, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics, anatomical variations, and electromyography findings. The largest predictive factor studied were the MRI findings causing radicular pain. A lower grade of nerve compression and a lumbar disc herniation which was central, foraminal or extraforaminal was associated with improved outcomes, as opposed to a subarticular location. Lower paraspinal mapping scores on electromyography were correlated with better outcomes than higher scores. Outcomes were not affected if a lumbar disc herniation was accompanied by degenerative changes or if the cause of radicular pain was from a lumbar disc herniation or from lumbar spinal stenosis. The risk of bias across many domains in the studies were varied being highest overall in the domains of study attrition and study confounding. Conclusions: The evidence behind factors that predict outcomes from a lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injection have varying degrees of bias, but trends appear that can be used to guide clinical decision making.
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.