Jaydeep Nandi1, Abhishek Chowdhery2. 1. Senior Resident, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, V.C.S.G. Govt. Medical College , Srinagar, Pauri Garhwal, Uttarakhand, India . 2. Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, V.C.S.G. Govt. Medical College , Srinagar, Pauri Garhwal, Uttarakhand, India .
Abstract
INTRODUCTION:Caudal epidural steroid injection have been a part of nonsurgical management of lumbosacral sciatica since last half a century but various randomized controlled trials fail to provide convincing evidence in favour of its effectiveness. AIM: To assess the efficacy of caudal epidural steroid injection in patients of lumbosacral sciatica in comparison toplacebo. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study consisted of patients of sciatica caused by lumbosacral disc prolapse (observed on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scan). Caudal epidural injections of 80 mg methyl prednisolone were injected in 47 patients in one group. The other group consisted of 46 patients who were injectedisotonic saline as placebo. Self-evaluation was the main judgment criterion at 4th week using a descriptive four item scale (recovery, marked improvement, slight improvement, or worse). Patients rating the improvement as "recovery" or "marked improvement" were considered as success. Patients rating the improvement as "slight improvement" or "worse" were considered as failure. Only paracetamol were authorized and patients requiring Non Steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) before 4th week were also considered as failure. RESULTS: On analysis per protocol, at 4 weeks, the two groups differed significantly with respect to the primary outcome: among the 93 patients, 8/46 (17%) in the placebo group and 32/47 (68%) in the steroid group (p=0.000) were considered as success (difference 50.7%; 95% CI for the difference 33.4 to 67.99). But at the end of the study (week 12) there was no significant difference in primary outcome between the groups: 22/46 (48%) patients in the placebo group and 28/47 (60%) in the steroid group (p=0.25) were considered as success (difference 11.8%; 95% CI for the difference -8.38 to 31.9). CONCLUSION: Caudal epidural steroid injections provide no additional improvement over placebo in the long term natural history of lumbosacral sciatica. However, it can be an important component of short term management of painful sciatica.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Caudal epidural steroid injection have been a part of nonsurgical management of lumbosacral sciatica since last half a century but various randomized controlled trials fail to provide convincing evidence in favour of its effectiveness. AIM: To assess the efficacy of caudal epidural steroid injection in patients of lumbosacral sciatica in comparison to placebo. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study consisted of patients of sciatica caused by lumbosacral disc prolapse (observed on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scan). Caudal epidural injections of 80 mg methyl prednisolone were injected in 47 patients in one group. The other group consisted of 46 patients who were injected isotonic saline as placebo. Self-evaluation was the main judgment criterion at 4th week using a descriptive four item scale (recovery, marked improvement, slight improvement, or worse). Patients rating the improvement as "recovery" or "marked improvement" were considered as success. Patients rating the improvement as "slight improvement" or "worse" were considered as failure. Only paracetamol were authorized and patients requiring Non Steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) before 4th week were also considered as failure. RESULTS: On analysis per protocol, at 4 weeks, the two groups differed significantly with respect to the primary outcome: among the 93 patients, 8/46 (17%) in the placebo group and 32/47 (68%) in the steroid group (p=0.000) were considered as success (difference 50.7%; 95% CI for the difference 33.4 to 67.99). But at the end of the study (week 12) there was no significant difference in primary outcome between the groups: 22/46 (48%) patients in the placebo group and 28/47 (60%) in the steroid group (p=0.25) were considered as success (difference 11.8%; 95% CI for the difference -8.38 to 31.9). CONCLUSION: Caudal epidural steroid injections provide no additional improvement over placebo in the long term natural history of lumbosacral sciatica. However, it can be an important component of short term management of painful sciatica.
Entities:
Keywords:
Lumbar canal stenosis; Prolapsed intervertebral disc; Short term management
Authors: K P Botwin; R D Gruber; C G Bouchlas; F M Torres-Ramos; A Hanna; J Rittenberg; S A Thomas Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Laxmaiah Manchikanti; Kim A Cash; Vidyasagar Pampati; Carla D McManus; Kim S Damron Journal: Pain Physician Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Steven P Cohen; Mark C Bicket; David Jamison; Indy Wilkinson; James P Rathmell Journal: Reg Anesth Pain Med Date: 2013 May-Jun Impact factor: 6.288
Authors: William C Watters; Jamie Baisden; Thomas J Gilbert; Scott Kreiner; Daniel K Resnick; Christopher M Bono; Gary Ghiselli; Michael H Heggeness; Daniel J Mazanec; Conor O'Neill; Charles A Reitman; William O Shaffer; Jeffrey T Summers; John F Toton Journal: Spine J Date: 2007-12-21 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Crystian B Oliveira; Christopher G Maher; Manuela L Ferreira; Mark J Hancock; Vinicius Cunha Oliveira; Andrew J McLachlan; Bart W Koes; Paulo H Ferreira; Steven P Cohen; Rafael Zambelli Pinto Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-04-09
Authors: Thomas M de Bruijn; Ingrid B de Groot; Harald S Miedema; Johan Haumann; Raymond W J G Ostelo Journal: Clin J Pain Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 3.442
Authors: Eduard Verheijen; Alexander G Munts; Oscar van Haagen; Dirk de Vries; Olaf Dekkers; Wilbert van den Hout; Carmen Vleggeert-Lankamp Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2019-09-03 Impact factor: 2.474