Epidural steroid injections are associated with less improvement in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a subgroup analysis of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial - Spinal DISC Center | Kris Radcliff, MD | New Jersey
Dr. Kris Radcliff specializes in simplifying the management of complex spine conditions and traumatic spine injuries, focusing exclusively on spine surgery, with particular expertise in the area of artificial disc replacement. Dr. Radcliff is highly experienced, having performed more than 10,000 spine surgeries. He combines conservative decision-making judgment with state-of-the-art and minimally invasive surgical techniques, endoscopic spine surgery, and artificial disc replacement.
Dr. Kris Radcliff, Kris Radcliff MD, Kris Radcliff, spinal disc center, spinal disc center new jersey, artificial disc replacement, artificial disc replacement specialist, endoscopic spine surgeon, endoscopic spine surgeon new jersey, new jersey spine surgeon, best spine surgeon in new jersey, minimally invasive spine surgery, MISS New Jersey, cervical spine surgery, cervical lamino-foraminatomy, cervical radiculopathy, artificial cervical disc replacement, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, posterior cervical discectomy and fusion, lumbar microdiscectomy, lumbar laminectomy, minimally invasive tlif, ALIF, kyphoplasty, SI joint fusion, facet joint injections, treatment for neck pain, treatment for back pain, treatment for cervical myelopathy, treatment for cervical radiculopathy, treatment for cervical stenosis, treatment for compression fractures, treatment for degenerative disc disease, treatment for herniated disc, treatment for sciatica, treatment for si joint disorders, treatment for spinal stenosis
16765
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-16765,single-format-standard,bridge-core-3.3,wp-schema-pro-2.7.23,qode-page-transition-enabled,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode-theme-ver-30.8.1,qode-theme-bridge,disabled_footer_bottom,qode_advanced_footer_responsive_1000,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-7.9,vc_responsive,elementor-default,elementor-kit-16783
 

Epidural steroid injections are associated with less improvement in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a subgroup analysis of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial

Kris Radcliff, Christopher Kepler, Alan Hilibrand, Jeffrey Rihn, Wenyan Zhao, Jon Lurie, Tor Tosteson, Alexander Vaccaro, Todd Albert, James Weinstein: Epidural steroid injections are associated with less improvement in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a subgroup analysis of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial. In: Spine (Phila Pa 1976), vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 279–291, 2013, ISSN: 1528-1159.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Subgroup analysis of prospective, randomized database from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT).

OBJECTIVE: The hypothesis of this study was that patients who received ESI during initial treatment as part of SPORT (The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial) would have improved clinical outcome and a lower rate of crossover to surgery than patients who did not receive ESI.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The use of epidural steroid injection (ESI) in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis is common, although there is little evidence in the literature to demonstrate its long-term benefit in the treatment of lumbar stenosis.

METHODS: Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who received ESI within the first 3 months of enrollment in SPORT (ESI) were compared with patients who did not receive epidural injections during the first 3 months of the study (no-ESI).

RESULTS: There were 69 ESI patients and 207 no-ESI patients. There were no significant differences in demographic factors, baseline clinical outcome scores, or operative details between the groups, although there was a significant increase in baseline preference for nonsurgical treatment among ESI patients (ESI 62% vs. no-ESI 33%, P < 0.001). There was an average 26-minute increase in operative time and an increased length of stay by 0.9 days among the ESI patients who ultimately underwent surgical treatment. Averaged over 4 years, there was significantly less improvement in 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Function among surgically treated ESI patients (ESI 14.8 vs. no-ESI 22.5, P = 0.025). In addition, there was significantly less improvement among the nonsurgically treated patients in SF-36 Body Pain (ESI 7.3 vs. no-ESI 16.7, P = 0.007) and SF-36 Physical Function (ESI 5.5 vs. no-ESI 15.2, P = 0.009). Of the patients assigned to the surgical treatment group, there was a significantly increased crossover to nonsurgical treatment among patients who received an ESI (ESI 33% vs. no-ESI 11%, P = 0.012). Of the patients assigned to the nonoperative treatment group, there was a significantly increased crossover to surgical treatment in the ESI patients (ESI 58% vs. no-ESI 32%, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION: Despite equivalent baseline status, ESIs were associated with significantly less improvement at 4 years among all patients with spinal stenosis in SPORT. Furthermore, ESIs were associated with longer duration of surgery and longer hospital stay. There was no improvement in outcome with ESI whether patients were treated surgically or nonsurgically.

BibTeX (Download)

@article{pmid23238485,
title = {Epidural steroid injections are associated with less improvement in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a subgroup analysis of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial},
author = {Kris Radcliff and Christopher Kepler and Alan Hilibrand and Jeffrey Rihn and Wenyan Zhao and Jon Lurie and Tor Tosteson and Alexander Vaccaro and Todd Albert and James Weinstein},
doi = {10.1097/BRS.0b013e31827ec51f},
issn = {1528-1159},
year  = {2013},
date = {2013-02-01},
urldate = {2013-02-01},
journal = {Spine (Phila Pa 1976)},
volume = {38},
number = {4},
pages = {279--291},
abstract = {STUDY DESIGN: Subgroup analysis of prospective, randomized database from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT).

OBJECTIVE: The hypothesis of this study was that patients who received ESI during initial treatment as part of SPORT (The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial) would have improved clinical outcome and a lower rate of crossover to surgery than patients who did not receive ESI.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The use of epidural steroid injection (ESI) in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis is common, although there is little evidence in the literature to demonstrate its long-term benefit in the treatment of lumbar stenosis.

METHODS: Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who received ESI within the first 3 months of enrollment in SPORT (ESI) were compared with patients who did not receive epidural injections during the first 3 months of the study (no-ESI).

RESULTS: There were 69 ESI patients and 207 no-ESI patients. There were no significant differences in demographic factors, baseline clinical outcome scores, or operative details between the groups, although there was a significant increase in baseline preference for nonsurgical treatment among ESI patients (ESI 62% vs. no-ESI 33%, P < 0.001). There was an average 26-minute increase in operative time and an increased length of stay by 0.9 days among the ESI patients who ultimately underwent surgical treatment. Averaged over 4 years, there was significantly less improvement in 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Physical Function among surgically treated ESI patients (ESI 14.8 vs. no-ESI 22.5, P = 0.025). In addition, there was significantly less improvement among the nonsurgically treated patients in SF-36 Body Pain (ESI 7.3 vs. no-ESI 16.7, P = 0.007) and SF-36 Physical Function (ESI 5.5 vs. no-ESI 15.2, P = 0.009). Of the patients assigned to the surgical treatment group, there was a significantly increased crossover to nonsurgical treatment among patients who received an ESI (ESI 33% vs. no-ESI 11%, P = 0.012). Of the patients assigned to the nonoperative treatment group, there was a significantly increased crossover to surgical treatment in the ESI patients (ESI 58% vs. no-ESI 32%, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION: Despite equivalent baseline status, ESIs were associated with significantly less improvement at 4 years among all patients with spinal stenosis in SPORT. Furthermore, ESIs were associated with longer duration of surgery and longer hospital stay. There was no improvement in outcome with ESI whether patients were treated surgically or nonsurgically.},
keywords = {},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
No Comments

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.