Epidural steroid compared to placebo injection in sciatica: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis caused by ligamentum flavum hypertrophy: A review

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) can cause a range of cauda equina symptoms, including lower back and leg pain, numbness, and intermittent claudication. This disease affects approximately 103 million people worldwide, particularly the elderly, and can seriously compromise their health and well-being. Ligamentum flavum hypertrophy (LFH) is one of the main contributing factors to this disease. Surgical treatment is currently recommended for LSS caused by LFH. For patients who do not meet the criteria for surgery, symptom relief can be achieved by using oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and epidural steroid injections. Exercise therapy and needle knife can also help to reduce the effects of mechanical stress. However, the effectiveness of these methods varies, and targeting the delay in LF hypertrophy is challenging. Therefore, further research and development of new drugs is necessary to address this issue. Several new drugs, including cyclopamine and N-acetyl-l-cysteine, are currently undergoing testing and may serve as new treatments for LSS caused by LFH.

Efficacy of epidural steroid injection in the treatment of sciatica secondary to lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Epidural steroid injection for the treatment of sciatica caused by disc herniation is increasingly used worldwide, but its effectiveness remains controversial. The review aiming to analyze the efficacy of epidural steroid injection on sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of epidural steroid injections in the management of sciatica induced by lumbar disc herniation were collected from PubMed and other databases from January, 2008 to December, 2023, with epidural steroid injection in the test group and epidural local anesthetic and/or placebo in the control group. Pain relief rate, assessed by numerical rating scale (NRS) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, and function recovery, evaluated by Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, were recorded and compared. Meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager. In comparison to the control group, epidural steroid injections have been shown to be effective for providing short- (within 3 months) [MD = 0.44, 95%CI (0.20, 0.68), p = 0.0003] and medium-term (within 6 months) [MD = 0.66, 95%CI (0.09,1.22), p = 0.02] pain relief for sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation, while its long-term pain-relief effect were limited. However, the administration of epidural steroid injections did not lead to a significant improvement on sciatic nerve function in short- [MD = 0.79, 95%CI = (0.39, 1.98), p = 0.19] and long-term [MD = 0.47, 95% CI = (-0.86, 1.80), p = 0.49] assessed by IOD. Furthermore, the analysis revealed that administering epidural steroid injections resulted in a reduction in opioid usage among patients with lumbar disc herniation [MD = -14.45, 95% CI = (-24.61, -4.29), p = 0.005]. The incidence of epidural steroid injection was low. Epidural steroid injection has demonstrated notable efficacy in relieving sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation in short to medium-term. Therefore, it is recommended as a viable treatment option for individuals suffering from sciatica.

Cost-effectiveness of Transforaminal epidural steroid injections for patients with ACUTE sciatica: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Transforaminal epidural injections with steroids (TESI) are increasingly being used in patients sciatica. The STAR (steroids against radiculopathy)-trial aimed to evaluate the (cost-) effectiveness of TESI in patients with acute sciatica (< 8 weeks). This article contains the economic evaluation of the STAR-trial.

METHODS

Participants were randomized to one of three study arms: Usual Care (UC), that is oral pain medication with or without physiotherapy, n = 45); intervention group 1: UC and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TESI) 1 ml of 0.5% Levobupivacaine and 1 ml of 40 mg/ml Methylprednisolone and intervention group 2: UC and transforaminal epidural injection (TEI) with 1 ml of 0,5% Levobupivacaine and 1 ml of 0.9% NaCl (n = 50). The primary effect measure was health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes were pain, functioning, and recovery. Costs were measured from a societal perspective, meaning that all costs were included, irrespective of who paid or benefited. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation, and bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty.

RESULTS

None of the between-group differences in effects were statistically significant for any of the outcomes (QALY, back pain, leg pain, functioning, and global perceived effect) at the 26-weeks follow-up. The adjusted mean difference in total societal costs was €1718 (95% confidence interval [CI]: - 3020 to 6052) for comparison 1 (intervention group 1 versus usual care), €1640 (95%CI: - 3354 to 6106) for comparison 2 (intervention group 1 versus intervention group 2), and €770 (95%CI: - 3758 to 5702) for comparison 3 (intervention group 2 versus usual care). Except for the intervention costs, none of the aggregate and disaggregate cost differences were statistically significant. The maximum probability of all interventions being cost-effective compared to the control was low (< 0.7) for all effect measures.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that adding TESI (or TEI) to usual care is not cost-effective compared to usual care in patients with acute sciatica (< 8 weeks) from a societal perspective in a Dutch healthcare setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch National trial register: NTR4457 (March, 6th, 2014).

Biphasic release of betamethasone from an injectable HA hydrogel implant for alleviating lumbar disc herniation induced sciatica

Epidural steroid injection (ESI) is a common therapeutic approach for managing sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation (LDH). However, the short duration of therapeutic efficacy and the need for repeated injections pose challenges in LDH treatment. The development of a controlled delivery system capable of prolonging the effectiveness of ESI and reducing the frequency of injections, is highly significant in LDH clinical practice. In this study, we utilized a thiol-ene click chemistry to create a series of injectable hyaluronic acid (HA) based release systems loaded with diphasic betamethasone, including betamethasone dipropionate (BD) and betamethasone 21-phosphate disodium (BP) (BD/BP@HA). BD/BP@HA hydrogel implants demonstrated biocompatibility and biodegradability to matched neuronal tissues, avoiding artificial compression following injection. The sustained release of betamethasone from BD/BP@HA hydrogels effectively inhibited both acute and chronic neuroinflammation by suppressing the nuclear factor kappa-B (NF-κB) pathway. In a mouse model of LDH, the epidural administration of BD/BP@HA efficiently alleviated LDH-induced sciatica for at least 10 days by inhibiting the activation of macrophages and microglia in dorsal root ganglion and spinal dorsal horn, respectively. The newly developed HA hydrogels represent a valuable platform for achieving sustained drug release. Additionally, we provide a simple paradigm for fabricating BD/BP@HA for epidural injection, demonstrating greater and sustained efficiency in alleviating LDH-induced sciatica compared to traditional ESI and displaying potentials for clinical translation. This system has the potential to revolutionize drug delivery for co-delivery of both soluble and insoluble drugs, thereby making a significant impact in the pharmaceutical industry. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common degenerative disorder leading to sciatica and spine surgery. Although epidural steroid injection (ESI) is routinely used to alleviate sciatica, the efficacy is short and repeated injections are required. There remains challenging to prolong the efficacy of ESI. Herein, an injectable hyaluronic acid (HA) hydrogel implant by crosslinking acrylated-modified HA (HA-A) with thiol-modified HA (HA-SH) was designed to achieve a biphasic release of betamethasone. The hydrogel showed biocompatibility and biodegradability to match neuronal tissues. Notably, compared to traditional ESI, the hydrogel better alleviated sciatica in vivo by synergistically inhibiting the neuroinflammation in central and peripheral nervous systems. We anticipate the injectable HA hydrogel implant has the potential for clinical translation in treating LDH-induced sciatica.

1. Lumbosacral radicular pain

INTRODUCTION

Patients suffering lumbosacral radicular pain report radiating pain in one or more lumbar or sacral dermatomes. In the general population, low back pain with leg pain extending below the knee has an annual prevalence that varies from 9.9% to 25%.

METHODS

The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of lumbosacral radicular pain was reviewed and summarized.

RESULTS

Although a patient's history, the pain distribution pattern, and clinical examination may yield a presumptive diagnosis of lumbosacral radicular pain, additional clinical tests may be required. Medical imaging studies can demonstrate or exclude specific underlying pathologies and identify nerve root irritation, while selective diagnostic nerve root blocks can be used to confirm the affected level(s). In subacute lumbosacral radicular pain, transforaminal corticosteroid administration provides short-term pain relief and improves mobility. In chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) treatment adjacent to the spinal ganglion (DRG) can provide pain relief for a longer period in well-selected patients. In cases of refractory pain, epidural adhesiolysis and spinal cord stimulation can be considered in experienced centers.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of lumbosacral radicular pain is based on a combination of history, clinical examination, and additional investigations. Epidural steroids can be considered for subacute lumbosacral radicular pain. In chronic lumbosacral radicular pain, PRF adjacent to the DRG is recommended. SCS and epidural adhesiolysis can be considered for cases of refractory pain in specialized centers.

Effect of Transforaminal Epidural Corticosteroid Injections in Acute Sciatica: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TESIs) are widely administered for sciatica. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of TESIs in patients with acute sciatica (<8 wk).

METHODS

This study was conducted in 2 Dutch hospitals. Participants (n=141) were randomly assigned to (1) usual care and TESI of 1 ml of 40 mg/ml Methylprednisolone plus 1 ml of 0.5% Levobupivacaine (intervention 1); (2) usual care and transforaminal epidural injection with 1 ml of 0.5% Levobupivacaine and 1 ml NaCl 0.9% (intervention 2); (3) usual care consisting of oral pain medication with or without physiotherapy (control). Co-primary outcomes were back pain and leg pain intensity, physical functioning, and recovery measured during 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant mean differences in co-primary outcomes between groups during follow-up, except for leg pain when comparing intervention group 1 with control (-0.96 95%CI:-1.83 to -0.09). For secondary outcomes, some statistical significant between-group differences were found for treatment satisfaction and surgery, but only when comparing intervention group 2 to control. Post hoc analyses showed a statistically significant difference in response [50% improvement of leg pain (yes/no)] between intervention 1 and the control group at 3 months and that both intervention groups used less opioids.

DISCUSSION

Except for a statistically significant effect of TESI on leg pain for patients with acute sciatica compared with usual care, there were no differences in co-primary outcomes. Nonetheless, transforaminal epidural injections seem to be associated with less opioid use, which warrants further exploration.

Predictors of outcome in sciatica patients following an epidural steroid injection: the POiSE prospective observational cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Sciatica can be very painful and, in most cases, is due to pressure on a spinal nerve root from a disc herniation with associated inflammation. For some patients, the pain persists, and one management option is a spinal epidural steroid injection (ESI). The aim of an ESI is to relieve leg pain, improve function and reduce the need for surgery. ESIs work well in some patients but not in others, but we cannot identify these patient subgroups currently. This study aims to identify factors, including patient characteristics, clinical examination and imaging findings, that help in predicting who does well and who does not after an ESI. The overall objective is to develop a prognostic model to support individualised patient and clinical decision-making regarding ESI.

METHODS

POiSE is a prospective cohort study of 439 patients with sciatica referred by their clinician for an ESI. Participants will receive weekly text messages until 12 weeks following their ESIand then again at 24 weeks following their ESI to collect data on leg pain severity. Questionnaires will be sent to participants at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 weeks after their ESI to collect data on pain, disability, recovery and additional interventions. The prognosis for the cohort will be described. The primary outcome measure for the prognostic model is leg pain at 6 weeks. Prognostic models will also be developed for secondary outcomes of disability and recovery at 6 weeks and additional interventions at 24 weeks following ESI. Statistical analyses will include multivariable linear and logistic regression with mixed effects model.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The POiSE study has received ethical approval (South Central Berkshire B Research Ethics Committee 21/SC/0257). Dissemination will be guided by our patient and public engagement group and will include scientific publications, conference presentations and social media.

How Does Anxiety and Depression Affect the Outcome after Periradicular Infiltration Therapy?-A Retrospective Analysis of Patients Undergoing CT-Guided Single-Level Nerve Root Infiltration Due to Chronic Monoradicular Pain

The aim of this study was to research the influence of psychological confounders on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after lumbar infiltration therapies of periradicular infiltrations (PRI). Patients who underwent PRI in a single center between June 2018 and December 2019 were included. PRI was performed in patients with predominantly unilateral lumbar radiculopathy which existed for at least 6 weeks based on single-level nerve root compression (caused by a herniated disc, stenosis of the lateral recess, or neuroforamen), confirmed by morphological imaging. The numeric pain rating scale (NRS) for back pain (BP) and leg pain (LP) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were assessed preinterventionally, on the first day (only NRS) and at 6 weeks, and then 3, 6, and 12 months postinterventionally. The minimally clinically important difference (MCID) served as the threshold for the therapeutic effectiveness evaluation. The health-related quality of life (SF-36) was recorded preinterventionally and after 12 months. Based on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the patients were dichotomized into depressed or nondepressed and anxious or nonanxious. Categorical data were evaluated using Fisher's exact test, and continuous data were evaluated using Student's t test. Separate linear mixed models were built to estimate the effect of anxiety or depression on repeatedly measured PROs following PRI. Data were analyzed using SPSS software. The analysis included 102 patients. Most mean baseline PROs were significantly worse in anxious or depressed patients than in nonanxious or nondepressed patients: Anxiety NRS-BP (p = 0.007), ODI (p < 0.001); Depression NRS-BP (p = 0.026), NRS-LP (p < 0.001), ODI (p < 0.001). All patients showed a clinically meaningful reduction in pain and functional improvement over a 12-month follow-up. There was no significant difference in the estimated overall mean PRO between all patients (p > 0.05). In conclusion, anxiety and depression are associated with worse PROs before and after PRI. However, patients with underlying depression or anxiety can expect a similar gain in PRO compared to patients without depressive or anxious symptoms.

Epidural Steroid Injection Prior to Spinal Surgery: A Step-Wise and Wise Approach

BACKGROUND

An epidural steroid injection (ESI) is used to treat a number of morbid central nervous system pathologies and is considered a reasonably safe procedure. This study aimed to determine the relative infection risk after spinal surgery by comparing outcomes in spinal surgery patients who received an ESI shortly prior to the surgery against those who did not receive an ESI shortly prior to the surgery.

METHODS

The present study is a retrospective cohort study using a multi-institutional healthcare database, TriNetX, to collect data on patients who received spinal surgery with and without having had ESIs six months before surgery. Two cohorts were generated: Cohort 1 included patients who had received an ESI in the six months prior to spinal surgery, and cohort 2 included patients who did not have an ESI in the six months prior to spinal surgery. The patients in cohort 2 had propensity scores matched 1:1 to those in cohort 1 using common baseline demographics, comorbidities and spinal procedure indications. The spinal procedures and surgeries considered for the analysis included open procedures for any purpose, including exploration, decompression, resection, revision or biopsy. Multiple outcomes were compared across these two cohorts in the three months following the spinal procedure/surgery, including the occurrence of death, surgical site infection, epidural and/or spinal abscess, and dural tear.

RESULTS

An ESI in the six months prior to spinal surgery was associated with a significant decrease in the likelihood epidural/spinal abscess in the three months after surgery. There was no change in mortality, wound infection or identification of dural tear in the three months after spinal surgery for those who received an ESI six months before spinal surgery.

CONCLUSION

This data suggests that epidural steroid injections' anti-inflammatory effects provide benefits before surgery beyond symptomatic relief. Given that the degeneration of spinal pathologies is typically advanced rather than corrected by the body's inflammatory response, it is likely that preventing hyperactivation of the body's immune system in the months preceding surgical intervention, a traumatic insult, is protective compared to no intervention and, importantly, without major adverse effects.

Interventional Pain Procedures: A Narrative Review Focusing on Safety and Complications. Part 1 Injections for Spinal Pain

In recent years, there has been a considerable increase in the number of image-guided interventional procedures performed for the management of acute and chronic pain. Concomitantly, there has also been an increase in the complication rate related to these procedures. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the primary complications associated with commonly performed image-guided (fluoroscopic- or ultrasound-guided) interventional procedures. We conclude that although complications from interventional pain procedures can be mitigated to a certain degree, they cannot be eliminated altogether. In order to avoid adverse events, patient safety should be given considerable attention and physicians should be constantly aware of the possibility of developing complications.

Prognostic factors associated with outcome following an epidural steroid injection for disc-related sciatica: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

PURPOSE

Clinical guidelines recommend epidural steroid injection (ESI) as a treatment option for severe disc-related sciatica, but there is considerable uncertainty about its effectiveness. Currently, we know very little about factors that might be associated with good or poor outcomes from ESI. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise and appraise the evidence investigating prognostic factors associated with outcomes following ESI for patients with imaging confirmed disc-related sciatica.

METHODS

The search strategy involved the electronic databases Medline, Embase, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO and reference lists of eligible studies. Selected papers were quality appraised independently by two reviewers using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. Between-study heterogeneity precluded statistical pooling of results.

RESULTS

3094 citations were identified; 15 studies were eligible. Overall study quality was low with all judged to have moderate or high risk of bias. Forty-two prognostic factors were identified but were measured inconsistently. The most commonly assessed prognostic factors were related to pain and function (n = 10 studies), imaging features (n = 8 studies), patient socio-demographics (n = 7 studies), health and lifestyle (n = 6 studies), clinical assessment findings (n = 4 studies) and injection level (n = 4 studies). No prognostic factor was found to be consistently associated with outcomes following ESI. Most studies found no association or results that conflicted with other studies.

CONCLUSIONS

There is little, and low quality, evidence to guide practice in terms of factors that predict outcomes in patients following ESI for disc-related sciatica. The results can help inform some of the decisions about potential prognostic factors that should be assessed in future well-designed prospective cohort studies.

Novel pentacyclic derivatives and benzylidenes of the progesterone series cause anti-estrogenic and antiproliferative effects and induce apoptosis in breast cancer cells

The promising antitumor effects of progesterone derivatives have been identified in many studies. However, the specific mechanism of action of this class of compounds has not been fully described. Therefore, in this study, we investigated the antiproliferative and (anti)estrogenic activities of novel pentacyclic derivatives and benzylidenes of the progesterone series. The antiproliferative effects of the compounds were evaluated on hormone-dependent MCF7 breast cancer cells using the MTT test. Estrogen receptor α (ERα) activity was assessed by a luciferase-based reporter assay. Immunoblotting was used to evaluate the expression of signaling proteins. All benzylidenes demonstrated inhibitory effects with IC₅₀ values below 10 µM, whereas pentacyclic derivatives were less active. These patterns may be associated with the lability of the geometry of benzylidene molecules, which contributes to an increase in the affinity of interaction with the receptor. The selected compounds showed significant anti-estrogenic potency. Benzylidene 1d ((8 S,9 S,10R,13 S,14 S,17 S)-17-[(2E)-3-(4-fluorophenyl)prop-2-enoyl]-10,13-dimethyl-1,2,6,7,8,9,11,12,14,15-decahydrocyclopenta[a]phenanthren-3-one) was the most active in antiproliferative and anti-estrogenic assays. Apoptosis induced by compound 1d was accompanied by decreases in CDK4, ERα, and Cyclin D1 expression. Compounds 1d and 3d were characterized by high inhibitory potency against resistant breast cancer cells. Apoptosis induced by the leader compounds was confirmed by PARP cleavage and flow cytometry analysis. Compound 3d caused cell arrest in the G2/M phase. Further analysis of novel derivatives of the progesterone series is of great importance for medicinal chemistry, drug design, and oncology.

Pharmacotherapy for Spine-Related Pain in Older Adults

As the population ages, spine-related pain is increasingly common in older adults. While medications play an important role in pain management, their use has limitations in geriatric patients due to reduced liver and renal function, comorbid medical problems, and polypharmacy. This review will assess the evidence basis for medications used for spine-related pain in older adults, with a focus on drug metabolism and adverse drug reactions. A PubMed/OVID search crossing common spine, neck, and back pain terms with key words for older adults and geriatrics was combined with common drug classes and common drug names and limited to clinical trials and age over 65 years. The results were then reviewed with identification of commonly used drugs and drug categories: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, corticosteroids, gabapentin and pregabalin, antispastic and antispasmodic muscle relaxants, tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tramadol, and opioids. Collectively, 138 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were the focus of the review. The review found a variable contribution of high-quality studies examining the efficacy of medications for spine pain primarily in the geriatric population. There was strong evidence for NSAID use with adjustments for gastrointestinal and renal risk factors. Gabapentin and pregabalin had mixed evidence for neuropathic pain. SNRIs had good evidence for neuropathic pain and a more favorable safety profile than TCAs. Tramadol had some evidence in older patients, but more so in persons aged < 65 years. Rational therapeutic choices based on geriatric spine pain diagnosis are helpful, such as NSAIDs and acetaminophen for arthritic and myofascial-based pain, gabapentinoids or duloxetine for neuropathic and radicular pain, antispastic agents for myofascial-based pain, and combination therapy for mixed etiologies. Tramadol can be well tolerated in older patients, but has risks of cognitive and classic opioid side effects. Otherwise, opioids are typically avoided in the treatment of spine-related pain in older adults due to their morbidity and mortality risk and are reserved for refractory severe pain. Whenever possible, beneficial geriatric spine pain pharmacotherapy should employ the lowest therapeutic doses with consideration of polypharmacy, potentially decreased renal and hepatic metabolism, and co-morbid medical disorders.

NSAIDs in sciatica (NIS): study protocol for an investigator-initiated multicentre, randomized placebo-controlled trial of naproxen in patients with sciatica

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely used to treat sciatica, despite insufficient evidence from placebo-controlled trials. NSAIDs may cause serious side effects; hence, there is a strong need to clarify their potential beneficial effects in patients with sciatica.

METHODS

This is a multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group superiority trial. Participants will be recruited among sciatica patients referred to outpatient clinics at hospitals in Norway who have radiating pain below the knee with a severity score of ≥ 4 on a 0-10 numeric rating scale and clinical signs of nerve root or spinal nerve involvement. The intervention consists of oral naproxen 500 mg or placebo twice daily for 10 days. Participants will report the outcomes and adverse events daily using an electronic case report form. The primary endpoint is change in leg pain intensity from baseline to day 10 based on daily observations. The secondary outcomes are back pain intensity, disability, sciatica symptom severity, rescue medication (paracetamol) consumption, opioid use, ability to work or study, 30% and 50% improvement in leg pain, and global perceived change of sciatica/back problem. The outcomes will be analysed using mixed effects models for repeated measurements. The total duration of follow-up is 12 (± 2) days.

DISCUSSION

This trial aims to evaluate the benefits of naproxen, a non-selective NSAID, in patients with sciatica. No important differences in efficacy have been demonstrated between different NSAIDs in the management of musculoskeletal disorders; hence, the results of this trial will likely be applicable to other NSAIDs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03347929 . Registered on November 20, 2017.