scholarly journals Parasagittal Approach of Epidural Steroid Injection as a Treatment for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nebojsa Nick Knezevic ◽  
Stephania Paredes ◽  
Santiago Cantillo ◽  
Albara Hamid ◽  
Kenneth D. Candido
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Post Procedure ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Background: Epidural steroid injection (ESI) has proven benefits in controlling chronic low back pain and can be performed via the midline interlaminar (MIL) or transforaminal (TF) approach. A modified interlaminar approach, the parasagittal interlaminar (PIL), has surfaced as a more reliable, safe, and suitable approach to minimize complications related to MIL and TF.Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess and compare the effectiveness and safety of PIL with both MIL and TF approaches in adult patients with a history of chronic low back pain.Methods: A literature search was conducted using major electronic databases, such as PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane. Selected studies included patients with unilateral radicular symptoms, secondary to lumbar intervertebral disc hernias or degenerative lumbar disc disease, that, additionally, received ESIs via PIL or either MIL or TF under fluoroscopic guidance. Randomized and observational studies with pain relief score and/or functional disability assessment and at least a 2-week follow-up were included.Results: The search led to the initial identification of 174 studies. Following the screening, eight studies were included in the qualitative analysis and seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the statistical analysis. PIL showed statistically significantly more pain relief and functional improvement than MIL at 1-, 3-, and 6-month post-procedure. Compared to TF, PIL showed statistically significantly more pain relief at 3- and 6-month after the procedure. Additionally, PIL showed benefits in terms of lower mean fluoroscopy time, less radiation exposure, zero adverse events in all the included studies, no cases of intravascular spread compared with the TF approach, and a higher anterior epidural spread (AES) of PIL compared with TF.Conclusions: Our systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that the PIL approach is an effective and safe alternative to the MIL and TF approaches in patients presenting with chronic low back pain when epidural injections are indicated, demonstrating a higher level of pain relief and a stronger improvement in functionality post-procedure.

scholarly journals Intervertebral disc therapies for non-specific chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 1759720X2110280
Author(s):  
Camille Daste ◽  
Stéphanie Laclau ◽  
Margaux Boisson ◽  
François Segretin ◽  
Antoine Feydy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Intervertebral Disc ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Activity Limitations ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Short Term

Objectives: We aim to evaluate the benefits and harms of intervertebral disc therapies (IDTs) in people with non-specific chronic low back pain (NScLBP). Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials of IDTs versus placebo interventions, active comparators or usual care. EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL and CINHAL databases and conference abstracts were searched from inception to June 2020. Two independent investigators extracted data. The primary outcome was LBP intensity at short term (1 week–3 months), intermediate term (3–6 months) and long term (after 6 months). Results: Of 18 eligible trials (among 1396 citations), five assessed glucocorticoids (GCs) IDTs and were included in a quantitative synthesis; 13 assessed other products including etanercept ( n = 2), tocilizumab ( n = 1), methylene blue ( n = 2), ozone ( n = 2), chymopapaine ( n = 1), glycerol ( n = 1), stem cells ( n = 1), platelet-rich plasma ( n = 1) and recombinant human growth and differentiation factor-5 ( n = 2), and were included in a narrative synthesis. Standardized mean differences (95% CI) for GC IDTs for LBP intensity and activity limitations were −1.33 (−2.34; −0.32) and −0.76 (−1.85; 0.34) at short term, −2.22 (−5.34; 0.90) and −1.60 (−3.51; 0.32) at intermediate term and −1.11 (−2.91; 0.70) and −0.63 (−1.68; 0.42) at long term, respectively. Odds ratios (95% CI) for serious and minor adverse events with GC IDTs were 1.09 (0.25; 4.65) and 0.97 (0.49; 1.91). Conclusion: GC IDTs are associated with a reduction in LBP intensity at short term in people with NScLBP. Positive effects are not sustained. IDTs have no effect on activity limitations. Our conclusions are limited by high heterogeneity and a limited methodological quality across studies. Registration PROSPERO: CRD42019106336.

Is transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) effective for chronic low back pain? A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 127 (9) ◽  
pp. 1257-1270
Author(s):  
Mohammad Alwardat ◽  
Antonio Pisani ◽  
Mohammad Etoom ◽  
Roberta Carpenedo ◽  
Elisabetta Chinè ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Direct Current ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Direct Current Stimulation

The effectiveness of walking versus exercise on pain and function in chronic low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 622-632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Vanti ◽  
Simone Andreatta ◽  
Silvia Borghi ◽  
Andrew Anthony Guccione ◽  
Paolo Pillastrini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Back ◽  
And Function

scholarly journals Efficacy of Auricular Acupressure for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li-Hua Yang ◽  
Pei-Bei Duan ◽  
Qing-Mei Hou ◽  
Shi-Zheng Du ◽  
Jin-Fang Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Auricular Acupressure

Objectives. To identify the efficacy of auricular acupressure on pain and disability for chronic LBP by systematic review.Methods. A search of randomized controlled trials was conducted in four English medical electronic databases and three Chinese databases. Two reviewers independently retrieved related studies, assessed the methodological quality, and extracted data with a standardized data form. Meta-analyses were performed using all time-points meta-analysis.Results. A total of 7 trials met the inclusion criteria, of which 4 had the low risk of bias. The findings of this study showed that, for the immediate effect, auricular acupressure had large, significant effects in improving pain within 12 weeks. As for the follow-up effect, the pooled estimates also showed promising effect at 4-week follow-up after 4-week intervention (standardized mean difference = −1.13, 95% CI (-1.70,-0.56),P<0.001). But, for the disability level, the therapeutic effect was not significant (mean difference = −1.99, 95% CI (-4.93, 0.95),P=0.18). No serious adverse effects were recorded.Conclusions. The encouraging evidence of this study indicates that it is recommended to provide auricular acupressure to patients with chronic low back pain. However, a more accurate estimate of the effect will require further rigorously designed large-scale RCTs on chronic LBP for improving pain and disability.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Platelet-rich Plasma for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 81 (06) ◽  
pp. 529-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhaopeng Xuan ◽  
Wenjun Yu ◽  
Yichen Dou ◽  
Tao Wang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Pain Relief ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Control Intervention

Abstract Background Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) may be beneficial for patients with low back pain. However, the results remain controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the efficacy of PRP for low back pain. Methods PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of PRP on low back pain were included. Two investigators independently searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. The primary outcome was pain scores within 8 weeks. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model. Results Three RCTs involving 131 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with control intervention for low back pain, PRP injection was found to reduce pain scores significantly (mean difference: − 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], − 2.12 to − 0.81; p < 0.0001), improve the number of patients with > 50% pain relief at 3 months (risk ratio [RR]: 4.14; 95% CI, 2.22–7.74; p < 0.00001), and offer relatively good patient satisfaction (RR: 1.91; 95% CI, 1.04–3.53; p = 0.04). No increase in adverse events was reported after PRP injection (RR: 1.92; 95% CI, 0.94-3.91; p = 0.07). Conclusions Compared with control intervention for low back pain, PRP injection was found to improve pain relief and patient satisfaction significantly with no increase in adverse events.

EPIDURAL STEROID INJECTION THERAPY FOR LOW BACK PAIN: A META-ANALYSIS

2013 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 244-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyun Jin Choi ◽  
Seokyung Hahn ◽  
Chi Heon Kim ◽  
Bo Hyoung Jang ◽  
Soyoung Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Epidural Steroid

Objectives: The aim of this study was to systematically assess the long-term (≥ 6 months) benefits of epidural steroid injection therapies for patients with low back pain.Methods: We identified randomized controlled trials by database searches up to October 2011 and by additional hand searches without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials on the effects of epidurals for low back pain with follow-up for at least 6 months were included. Outcomes considered were pain relief, functional improvement in 6 to 12 months after epidural steroid injection treatment and the number of patients who underwent subsequent surgery. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.Results: Twenty-nine articles were selected. The meta-analysis suggested that a significant treatment effect on pain was noted at 6 months of follow-up (weighted mean difference [WMD], −0.41; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], −0.66 to −0.16), but was no longer statistically significant after adjusting for the baseline pain score (WMD, −0.19; 95 percent CI, −0.61 to 0.24). Epidural steroid injection did not improve back-specific disability more than a placebo or other procedure. Epidural steroid injection did not significantly decrease the number of patients who underwent subsequent surgery compared with a placebo or other treatments (relative risk, 1.02; 95 percent CI, 0.83 to 1.24).Conclusions: A long-term benefit of epidural steroid injections for low back pain was not suggested at 6 months or longer. Introduction of selection bias in the majority of injection studies seems apparent. Baseline adjustment is essential when we evaluate pain as a main outcome of injection therapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document