ReviewPain and therapy2025
The Importance of Image Guidance in Common Spine Interventional Procedures for Pain Management: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.
Review in Pain and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative study of ultrasound shape completion and CBCT-based AR workflows for spinal needle interventions.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- PET/MRI as a complement to PET/CT in chronic osteomyelitis with soft-tissue involvement: implications for surgical outcomes.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Efficacy of nerve blocks for postoperative analgesia in lung cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- Safer fluoroscopy guided femoral access using a passive robotic support with a 3D printed needle and guidewire inserter.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Epidural Methylprednisolone Injection in Management of Lumbar Prolapsed Intervertebral Disc: A Comparison of Caudal, Transforaminal and Interlaminar Routes.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 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
introductionImage-guided spinal injections are commonly performed by pain physicians and supported by literature. A recent survey showed that half of the Canadian providers still perform landmark-guided injections. This comprehensive review aims to describe the evidence supporting imaging modalities (fluoroscopy, computed tomography (CT) and ultrasound) in improving the accuracy and safety in several commonly performed spine injections. Relevant anatomy and pitfalls of landmark-guided injections are also discussed.
methodsAn extensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Medline and Embase databases, complemented by a manual search. Search terms included all spine interventions and imaging modalities.
resultsLiterature shows that incorrect needle placement without imaging guidance can reach 50% in caudal, 30.4% in lumbar interlaminar and 53% in cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections. Lumbar and cervical transforaminal steroid injections require imaging to identify intravascular or intradiscal needle placement; misplacement rates can be as high as 20% at cervical, 8% at thoracic, 6-15% at lumbar and 16.5-21% at sacral levels. Imaging techniques for sacroiliac joint steroid injections are superior to non-imaging techniques, while medial branch blocks and facet joint injections require image guidance.
conclusionImage guidance is a mandatory requirement when performing spinal procedures for pain management. Fluoroscopy enhances the safety and accuracy of spinal injections, with stored images benefiting patient records. Ultrasound also has an increasingly important role either alone or with fluoroscopy. CT is also effective but with limited accessibility.
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.