Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciatica

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Oliveira, Crystian B. [UNESP]
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: Maher, Christopher G., Ferreira, Manuela L., Hancock, Mark J., Oliveira, Vinicius Cunha, McLachlan, Andrew J., Koes, Bart W., Ferreira, Paulo H., Cohen, Steven P., Pinto, Rafael Z.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003651
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/210050
Resumo: Study Design. Systematic with meta-analysis Objectives. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of epidural corticosteroid injections compared with placebo injection in reducing leg pain and disability in patients with sciatica. Summary of Background Data. Conservative treatments, including pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments, are typically the first treatment options for sciatica but the evidence to support their use is limited. The overall quality of evidence found by previous systematic reviews varies between moderate and high, which suggests that future trials may change the conclusions. New placebo-controlled randomized trials have been published recently which highlights the importance of an updated systematic review. Methods. The searches were performed without language restrictions in the following databases from 2012 to 25 September 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and trial registers. We included placebo-controlled randomized trials investigating epidural corticosteroid injections in patients with sciatica. The primary outcomes were leg pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcomes were adverse events, overall pain, and back pain intensity. We grouped similar trials according to outcome measures and their respective follow-up time points. Short-term follow-up (>2 weeks but <= 3 months) was considered the primary follow-up time point due to the expected mechanism of action of epidural corticosteroid injection. Weighted mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. We assessed the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach and conducted the analyses using random effects. Results. We included 25 clinical trials (from 29 publications) providing data for a total of 2470 participants with sciatica, an increase of six trials when compared to the previous review. Epidural corticosteroid injections were probably more effective than placebo in reducing short-term leg pain (MD -4.93, 95% CI -8.77 to -1.09 on a 0-100 scale), short-term disability (MD -4.18, 95% CI: -6.04 to -2.17 on a 0-100 scale) and may be slightly more effective in reducing short-term overall pain (MD -9.35, 95% CI -14.05 to -4.65 on a 0-100 scale). There were mostly minor adverse events (i.e., without hospitalization) after epidural corticosteroid injections and placebo injections without difference between groups (RR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.91-1.42). The quality of evidence was at best moderate mostly due to problems with trial design and inconsistency. Conclusion. A review of 25 placebo-controlled trials provides moderate-quality evidence that epidural corticosteroid injections are effective, although the effects are small and short-term. There is uncertainty on safety due to very low-quality evidence.
id UNSP_38a142aaf15166eddc14bda023038d65
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/210050
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciaticaadrenal cortex hormonesepiduralinjectionsplacebossciaticaStudy Design. Systematic with meta-analysis Objectives. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of epidural corticosteroid injections compared with placebo injection in reducing leg pain and disability in patients with sciatica. Summary of Background Data. Conservative treatments, including pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments, are typically the first treatment options for sciatica but the evidence to support their use is limited. The overall quality of evidence found by previous systematic reviews varies between moderate and high, which suggests that future trials may change the conclusions. New placebo-controlled randomized trials have been published recently which highlights the importance of an updated systematic review. Methods. The searches were performed without language restrictions in the following databases from 2012 to 25 September 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and trial registers. We included placebo-controlled randomized trials investigating epidural corticosteroid injections in patients with sciatica. The primary outcomes were leg pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcomes were adverse events, overall pain, and back pain intensity. We grouped similar trials according to outcome measures and their respective follow-up time points. Short-term follow-up (>2 weeks but <= 3 months) was considered the primary follow-up time point due to the expected mechanism of action of epidural corticosteroid injection. Weighted mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. We assessed the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach and conducted the analyses using random effects. Results. We included 25 clinical trials (from 29 publications) providing data for a total of 2470 participants with sciatica, an increase of six trials when compared to the previous review. Epidural corticosteroid injections were probably more effective than placebo in reducing short-term leg pain (MD -4.93, 95% CI -8.77 to -1.09 on a 0-100 scale), short-term disability (MD -4.18, 95% CI: -6.04 to -2.17 on a 0-100 scale) and may be slightly more effective in reducing short-term overall pain (MD -9.35, 95% CI -14.05 to -4.65 on a 0-100 scale). There were mostly minor adverse events (i.e., without hospitalization) after epidural corticosteroid injections and placebo injections without difference between groups (RR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.91-1.42). The quality of evidence was at best moderate mostly due to problems with trial design and inconsistency. Conclusion. A review of 25 placebo-controlled trials provides moderate-quality evidence that epidural corticosteroid injections are effective, although the effects are small and short-term. There is uncertainty on safety due to very low-quality evidence.Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)Sao Paulo State Univ, Dept Physiotherapy, Presidente Prudente, BrazilUniv Sydney, Sydney Sch Publ Hlth, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaUniv Sydney, Sydney Med Sch, Inst Bone & Joint Res, Kolling Inst, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaMacquarie Univ, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Discipline Physiotherapy, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaUniv Fed Vales Jequitinhonha & Mucuri UFVJM, Dept Physiotherapy, Diamantina, BrazilUniv Sydney, Fac Pharm, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaErasmus MC, Dept Gen Practice, Rotterdam, NetherlandsUniv Southern Denmark, Ctr Muscle & Joint Hlth, Odense, DenmarkUniv Sydney, Fac Hlth Sci, Discipline Physiotherapy, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaJohns Hopkins Univ, Blaustein Pain Treatment Ctr, Sch Med, Dept Anesthesiol, Baltimore, MD USAUniv Fed Minas Gerais UFMG, Dept Physiotherapy, Belo Horizonte, MG, BrazilSao Paulo State Univ, Dept Physiotherapy, Presidente Prudente, BrazilLippincott Williams & WilkinsUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Univ SydneyMacquarie UnivUniversidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)Erasmus MCUniv Southern DenmarkJohns Hopkins UnivUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)Oliveira, Crystian B. [UNESP]Maher, Christopher G.Ferreira, Manuela L.Hancock, Mark J.Oliveira, Vinicius CunhaMcLachlan, Andrew J.Koes, Bart W.Ferreira, Paulo H.Cohen, Steven P.Pinto, Rafael Z.2021-06-25T12:38:11Z2021-06-25T12:38:11Z2020-11-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleE1405-E1415http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003651Spine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, v. 45, n. 21, p. E1405-E1415, 2020.0362-2436http://hdl.handle.net/11449/21005010.1097/BRS.0000000000003651WOS:000619513800007Web of Sciencereponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengSpineinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-06-18T18:44:27Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/210050Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T21:25:26.215279Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciatica
title Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciatica
spellingShingle Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciatica
Oliveira, Crystian B. [UNESP]
adrenal cortex hormones
epidural
injections
placebos
sciatica
title_short Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciatica
title_full Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciatica
title_fullStr Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciatica
title_full_unstemmed Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciatica
title_sort Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Sciatica
author Oliveira, Crystian B. [UNESP]
author_facet Oliveira, Crystian B. [UNESP]
Maher, Christopher G.
Ferreira, Manuela L.
Hancock, Mark J.
Oliveira, Vinicius Cunha
McLachlan, Andrew J.
Koes, Bart W.
Ferreira, Paulo H.
Cohen, Steven P.
Pinto, Rafael Z.
author_role author
author2 Maher, Christopher G.
Ferreira, Manuela L.
Hancock, Mark J.
Oliveira, Vinicius Cunha
McLachlan, Andrew J.
Koes, Bart W.
Ferreira, Paulo H.
Cohen, Steven P.
Pinto, Rafael Z.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Univ Sydney
Macquarie Univ
Universidade Federal de Viçosa (UFV)
Erasmus MC
Univ Southern Denmark
Johns Hopkins Univ
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Oliveira, Crystian B. [UNESP]
Maher, Christopher G.
Ferreira, Manuela L.
Hancock, Mark J.
Oliveira, Vinicius Cunha
McLachlan, Andrew J.
Koes, Bart W.
Ferreira, Paulo H.
Cohen, Steven P.
Pinto, Rafael Z.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv adrenal cortex hormones
epidural
injections
placebos
sciatica
topic adrenal cortex hormones
epidural
injections
placebos
sciatica
description Study Design. Systematic with meta-analysis Objectives. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of epidural corticosteroid injections compared with placebo injection in reducing leg pain and disability in patients with sciatica. Summary of Background Data. Conservative treatments, including pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments, are typically the first treatment options for sciatica but the evidence to support their use is limited. The overall quality of evidence found by previous systematic reviews varies between moderate and high, which suggests that future trials may change the conclusions. New placebo-controlled randomized trials have been published recently which highlights the importance of an updated systematic review. Methods. The searches were performed without language restrictions in the following databases from 2012 to 25 September 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and trial registers. We included placebo-controlled randomized trials investigating epidural corticosteroid injections in patients with sciatica. The primary outcomes were leg pain intensity and disability. The secondary outcomes were adverse events, overall pain, and back pain intensity. We grouped similar trials according to outcome measures and their respective follow-up time points. Short-term follow-up (>2 weeks but <= 3 months) was considered the primary follow-up time point due to the expected mechanism of action of epidural corticosteroid injection. Weighted mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. We assessed the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach and conducted the analyses using random effects. Results. We included 25 clinical trials (from 29 publications) providing data for a total of 2470 participants with sciatica, an increase of six trials when compared to the previous review. Epidural corticosteroid injections were probably more effective than placebo in reducing short-term leg pain (MD -4.93, 95% CI -8.77 to -1.09 on a 0-100 scale), short-term disability (MD -4.18, 95% CI: -6.04 to -2.17 on a 0-100 scale) and may be slightly more effective in reducing short-term overall pain (MD -9.35, 95% CI -14.05 to -4.65 on a 0-100 scale). There were mostly minor adverse events (i.e., without hospitalization) after epidural corticosteroid injections and placebo injections without difference between groups (RR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.91-1.42). The quality of evidence was at best moderate mostly due to problems with trial design and inconsistency. Conclusion. A review of 25 placebo-controlled trials provides moderate-quality evidence that epidural corticosteroid injections are effective, although the effects are small and short-term. There is uncertainty on safety due to very low-quality evidence.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-11-01
2021-06-25T12:38:11Z
2021-06-25T12:38:11Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003651
Spine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, v. 45, n. 21, p. E1405-E1415, 2020.
0362-2436
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/210050
10.1097/BRS.0000000000003651
WOS:000619513800007
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003651
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/210050
identifier_str_mv Spine. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, v. 45, n. 21, p. E1405-E1415, 2020.
0362-2436
10.1097/BRS.0000000000003651
WOS:000619513800007
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Spine
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv E1405-E1415
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Web of Science
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1808129318217318400