Literature DB >> 18789773

Prospective, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials in interventional spine: what the highest quality literature tells us.

Joshua H Levin1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study design is essential in the interventional spine literature to truly evaluate whether or not a procedure is effective.
PURPOSE: This article will critically evaluate the highest quality interventional spine literature with strict interpretation of the results of these trials. STUDY
DESIGN: Review article.
METHODS: Extensive Medline/Pubmed searches and searches of the large review articles on the major interventional spine topics were performed to find all prospective, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials in the English language interventional spine literature.
RESULTS: Fluoroscopically-guided lumbosacral transforaminal epidural corticosteroid injections are effective in the treatment of acute/subacute lumbosacral radicular pain, and in preventing future surgeries. Injection of corticosteroid or Sarapin on the cervical or lumbar medical branch nerves is not effective. When done with proper technique, percutaneous radiofrequency lumbar and cervical medial branch neurotomy are both effective. Intraarticular sacroiliac joint corticosteroid injections are effective in patients with spondyloarthropathy. IDET is modestly effective in the treatment of lumbosacral discogenic pain in carefully selected patients. Percutaneous radio frequency neurotomy of the ramus communicans is effective in the treatment of lumbosacral discogenic pain. No firm conclusions can be drawn about cervical epidural corticosteroid injections, lumbosacral epidural corticosteroid injections for the treatment of chronic radicular pain, cervical or lumbosacral intraarticular zygapophysial joint corticosteroid injections for the treatment of degenerative zygapophysial joint pain, or intradiscal corticosteroid injections.
CONCLUSIONS: The prospective, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials in the interventional spine literature demonstrate efficacy from several different procedures when properly performed on appropriate patients. Other procedures have been shown to lack efficacy, while inconclusive evidence exists from multiple other interventional spine procedures. Further details are discussed in the text.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18789773     DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2008.06.447

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  6 in total

1.  Evaluation of lumbar facet joint nerve blocks in managing chronic low back pain: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial with a 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  Laxmaiah Manchikanti; Vijay Singh; Frank J E Falco; Kimberly A Cash; Vidyasagar Pampati
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 3.738

2.  [Acute neural hearing loss after cervical spine injection treatment].

Authors:  B P Ernst; K Helling; S Strieth
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 1.284

3.  Cost effectiveness of epidural steroid injections to manage chronic lower back pain.

Authors:  David K Whynes; Robert A McCahon; Andrew Ravenscroft; Jonathan Hardman
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 2.217

4.  Randomized sham-controlled, double-blind, multicenter clinical trial on the effect of percutaneous radiofrequency at the ramus communicans for lumbar disc pain.

Authors:  C W J van Tilburg; D L Stronks; J G Groeneweg; F J P M Huygen
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 3.931

5.  Percutaneous disc decompression with nucleoplasty-volumetry of the nucleus pulposus using ultrahigh-field MRI.

Authors:  Richard Kasch; Birger Mensel; Florian Schmidt; Wolf Drescher; Ralf Pfuhl; Sebastian Ruetten; Harry R Merk; Ralph Kayser
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-07-25       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Disc volume reduction with percutaneous nucleoplasty in an animal model.

Authors:  Richard Kasch; Birger Mensel; Florian Schmidt; Sebastian Ruetten; Thomas Barz; Susanne Froehlich; Rebecca Seipel; Harry R Merk; Ralph Kayser
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.