-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Hysteroscopy done in an outpatient setting is the 'gold standard' method for evaluating the uterine cavity. Media used to distend the uterine cavity include gas as... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hysteroscopy done in an outpatient setting is the 'gold standard' method for evaluating the uterine cavity. Media used to distend the uterine cavity include gas as carbon dioxide and liquid as saline that can be used at room temperature or warmed to body temperature. Both media offer advantages as well as disadvantages.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review is to compare the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of gas (carbon dioxide) and liquid (normal saline) used for uterine distension during outpatient hysteroscopy.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO on 28 April 2021. We checked references of relevant trials and contacted study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies. CINAHL records and ongoing trials from the trial registries were included in the CENTRAL search.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing saline with carbon dioxide, as well as RCTs comparing saline at different temperatures, for uterine distension in outpatient hysteroscopy done for any indication.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Primary review outcomes were patient tolerability and adverse events or complications related to the distending medium. Secondary outcomes were quality of the hysteroscopic view and duration of the procedure.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 RCTs (1946 women). The quality of evidence ranged from very low to high: the main limitations were risk of bias due to absence of blinding due to the nature of the procedure, imprecision, and inconsistency. Saline versus carbon dioxide Analysis ruled out a clinically relevant difference in pain scores during the procedure between saline and carbon dioxide, but the quality of evidence was low (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.02; 9 RCTs, N = 1705; I² = 86%). This translates to differences of 0.39 cm (lower) and 0.05 cm (higher) on a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Evidence was insufficient to show differences between groups in the proportion of procedures abandoned due to intense pain (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.42; 1 RCT, N = 189; very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether saline decreases the need for analgesia compared to carbon dioxide (Peto OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.99; 1 RCT, N = 189; very low-quality evidence). Saline compared to carbon dioxide is probably associated with fewer vasovagal reaction events (Peto OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.86; 6 RCTs, N = 1076; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer shoulder-tip pain events (Peto OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.54; 4 RCTs, N = 623; I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence). Evidence suggests that if 10% of women undergoing outpatient hysteroscopy experience a vasovagal reaction event with the use of carbon dioxide, this rate would be between 3% and 9% with the use of saline. Similarly, if the rate of shoulder-tip pain with carbon dioxide is 9%, it would be between 1% and 5% with saline. We are uncertain whether saline is similar to carbon dioxide in terms of endometrial bleeding (Peto OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.75; 2 RCTs, N = 349; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). Infection was not reported by any study in this comparison. Saline may result in fewer procedures with an unsatisfactory hysteroscopic view than carbon dioxide (Peto OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.82; 5 RCTs, N = 1082; I² = 67%; low-quality evidence). The duration of the procedure was shorter with saline in three of the four studies that reported this outcome, and duration was similar in both arms in the fourth study. Warm saline versus room temperature saline Use of warm saline for uterine distension during office hysteroscopy may reduce pain scores when compared with room temperature saline (mean difference (MD) -1.14, 95% CI -1.55 to -0.73; 3 RCTs, N = 241; I² = 77%; low-quality evidence). Evidence is insufficient to show differences between groups in either the proportion of procedures abandoned due to intense pain (Peto OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.87; 1 RCT, N = 77; very low-quality evidence) or the need for analgesia (Peto OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.32; 1 RCT, N = 100; very low-quality evidence). Analysis ruled out a clinically relevant difference in duration of the procedure between warm and room temperature saline, but the quality of evidence is low (MD 13.17 seconds, 95% CI -12.96 to 39.29; 2 RCTs, N = 141; I² = 21%). No cases of infection were reported in either group (1 RCT, N = 100). No other adverse events and no information on quality of the hysteroscopic view were reported by any study in this comparison.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence was insufficient to show differences between different distension media used for uterine distension in outpatient hysteroscopy in terms of patient tolerability, operator satisfaction, or duration of the procedure. However, saline was superior to carbon dioxide in producing fewer adverse events (shoulder-tip pain and vasovagal reaction).
Topics: Endometrium; Female; Humans; Hysteroscopy; Outpatients; Pain; Pregnancy; Uterus
PubMed: 34826139
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006604.pub2 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2021This study was designed to assess the efficacy of increased salt and water intake in the treatment of pediatric vasovagal syncope (VVS) based on a meta-analysis of...
This study was designed to assess the efficacy of increased salt and water intake in the treatment of pediatric vasovagal syncope (VVS) based on a meta-analysis of global data. Following the established inclusion criteria, seven databases, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, VIP, Wanfang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), were searched using specific terms. The Cochrane Bias risk assessment tool was used as a quality assessment tool of the included studies, and publication bias was assessed by funnel plots. Review Manager 5.4 software was used to analyze the efficacy of the included studies, taking the negative changing rate of the head-up tilt test (HUTT) and recurrence rate of syncope or presyncope as therapeutic efficacy evaluations. In total, 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were finally obtained, using the negative changing rate of the HUTT as an efficacy evaluation, while in 4 of the studies, the recurrence rate of syncope or presyncope was also evaluated. A total of 233 children with VVS were included in the salt and water intervention group. The cases in the control group were treated with non-medicinal conventional therapy. The results revealed that the negative changing rate of the HUTT in the intervention group (144/233, 61.8%) was higher than that in the control group (48/179, 26.8%), and the difference was significant ( < 0.00001). The recurrence rate of syncope or presyncope in the intervention group (85/195, 43.6%) was lower than that in the control group (86/144, 59.7%), and the difference was significant ( = 0.002). The current findings suggest that increased salt and water intake may increase the negative changing rates of the HUTT and reduce syncope or presyncope recurrence rates in pediatric patients with VVS.
PubMed: 34055695
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.663016 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Orthostatic hypotension is an excessive fall in blood pressure (BP) while standing and is the result of a decrease in cardiac output or defective or inadequate...
BACKGROUND
Orthostatic hypotension is an excessive fall in blood pressure (BP) while standing and is the result of a decrease in cardiac output or defective or inadequate vasoconstrictor mechanisms. Fludrocortisone is a mineralocorticoid that increases blood volume and blood pressure. Fludrocortisone is considered the first- or second-line pharmacological therapy for orthostatic hypotension alongside mechanical and positional measures such as increasing fluid and salt intake and venous compression methods. However, there has been no Cochrane Review of the benefits and harms of this drug for this condition.
OBJECTIVES
To identify and evaluate the benefits and harms of fludrocortisone for orthostatic hypotension.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases on 11 November 2019: Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL. We also searched trials registries.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all studies evaluating the benefits and harms of fludrocortisone compared to placebo, another drug for orthostatic hypotension, or studies without comparators, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and observational studies. We included studies in people with orthostatic hypotension due to a chronic peripheral neuropathy, a central autonomic neuropathy, or autonomic failure from other causes, but not medication-induced orthostatic hypotension or orthostatic hypotension from acute volume depletion or blood loss.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used Cochrane methodological procedures for most of the review. We developed and used a tool to prioritize observational studies that offered the best available evidence where there are gaps in the evidence from RCTs. We assessed the certainty of evidence for fludrocortisone versus placebo using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 studies of 513 participants, including three cross-over RCTs and 10 observational studies (three cohort studies, six case series and one case-control study). The included RCTs were small (total of 28 participants in RCTs), short term (two to three weeks), only examined fludrocortisone for orthostatic hypotension in people with two conditions (diabetes and Parkinson disease), and had variable risk of bias (two had unclear risk of bias and one had low risk of bias). Heterogeneity in participant populations, comparators and outcome assessment methods prevented meta-analyses of the RCTs. We found very low-certainty evidence about the effects of fludrocortisone versus placebo on drop in BP in people with diabetes (-26 mmHg versus -39 mmHg systolic; -7 mmHg versus -11 mmHg diastolic; 1 cross-over study, 6 participants). For people with Parkinson disease, we found very-low certainty evidence about the effects of fludrocortisone on drop in BP compared to pyridostigmine (-14 mmHg versus -22.1 mmHg diastolic; P = 0.036; 1 cross-over study, 9 participants) and domperidone (no change after treatment in either group; 1 cross-over study, 13 participants). For orthostatic symptoms, we found very low-certainty evidence for fludrocortisone versus placebo in people with diabetes (4 out of 5 analyzed participants had improvements in orthostatic symptoms, 1 cross-over study, 6 participants), for fludrocortisone versus pyridostigmine in people with Parkinson disease (orthostatic symptoms unchanged; 1 cross-over study, 9 participants) or fludrocortisone versus domperidone (improvement to 6 for both interventions on the Composite Autonomic Symptom Scale-Orthostatic Domain (COMPASS-OD); 1 cross-over study, 13 participants). Evidence on adverse events was also very low-certainty in both populations, but indicated side effects were minimal. Observational studies filled some gaps in evidence by examining the effects in larger groups of participants, with more diverse conditions, over longer periods of time. One cohort study (341 people studied retrospectively) found fludrocortisone may not be harmful in the long term for familial dysautonomia. However, it is unclear if this translates to long-term improvements in BP drop or a meaningful improvement in orthostatic symptoms.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of fludrocortisone on blood pressure, orthostatic symptoms or adverse events in people with orthostatic hypotension and diabetes or Parkinson disease. There is a lack of information on long-term treatment and treatment of orthostatic hypotension in other disease states. There is a need for standardized reporting of outcomes and for standardization of measurements of blood pressure in orthostatic hypotension.
Topics: Bias; Diabetes Mellitus; Domperidone; Dysautonomia, Familial; Fludrocortisone; Humans; Hypotension, Orthostatic; Observational Studies as Topic; Parkinson Disease; Pyridostigmine Bromide; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34000076
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012868.pub2 -
Transfusion Jun 2021Knowledge translation focuses on the transfer of research findings into policy and practice. To provide insight into the state of knowledge translation in blood donor...
BACKGROUND
Knowledge translation focuses on the transfer of research findings into policy and practice. To provide insight into the state of knowledge translation in blood donor research, we undertook a rapid review of a key research area in the field with high potential for translation, vasovagal reactions (VVRs). We examined the number and nature of VVR-related studies to determine the availability of research evidence, and mapped the included articles along the research-to-practice trajectory using the Knowledge to Action framework.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched for peer-reviewed journal articles from inception to October 2019 using the terms blood don* AND vasovagal OR faint* OR syncope.
RESULTS
A total of 176 articles met our inclusion criteria. Studies relating to VVRs increased substantially from 1942 to 2019, with 84% published in the last 20 years. Articles were predominately observation (non-intervention) studies (117; 66%), followed by intervention (knowledge inquiry) studies (31; 18%) and review (knowledge synthesis) studies (20; 11%). The evidence from intervention research was limited, with 14 strategies tested in 31 studies and often by the same research groups. Only 5 (3%) implementation and evaluation studies were found; all focused on evaluating the effects of a newly introduced intervention on VVR rates through uncontrolled or cross-sectional study designs.
DISCUSSION
VVR research is in the early stages of knowledge translation. More intervention research is needed to provide a robust evidence base as well as more published implementation research to share knowledge of translating research into policy and practice.
Topics: Blood Donors; Humans; Risk Factors; Syncope, Vasovagal; Translational Research, Biomedical
PubMed: 33797069
DOI: 10.1111/trf.16391 -
Europace : European Pacing,... Jul 2021Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is the most common type of syncope and is usually considered a benign disorder. The potential for injury is worrisome but the likelihood is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is the most common type of syncope and is usually considered a benign disorder. The potential for injury is worrisome but the likelihood is unknown. We aimed to determine the proportion of patients injured due to VVS.
METHODS AND RESULTS
A systematic search of studies published until August 2020 was performed in multiple medical and nursing databases. Included studies had data on the proportion of patients with injury due to VVS prior to study enrolment. Random effects methods were used. Twenty-three studies having 3593 patients met inclusion criteria. Patients were diagnosed clinically with VVS, and 82% had >2 syncopal episodes before enrolment. Tilt test was positive in 60% and 14 studies reported comorbidities (32.6% hypertensive). The weighted mean injury rate was 33.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 27.3-40.5%]. The likelihood of injury correlated with population age (r = 0.4, P = 0.05), but not with sex, positive tilt test, or hypertension. The injury rates were 25.7% (95% CI: 19.1-32.8%) in studies with younger patients (mean age ≤50 years, n = 1803) and 43.4% (95% CI: 34.9-52.3%) in studies with older patients (P = 0.002). Nine studies reported major injuries; with a weighted mean rate of major injuries of 13.9% (95% CI: 9.5-19.8%).
CONCLUSION
Injuries due to syncope are frequent, occurring in 33% of patients with VVS. The risk of major injuries is substantial. Older patients are at higher risk. Clinicians should be aware of the risk of injuries when providing care and advice to patients with VVS.
Topics: Humans; Hypertension; Middle Aged; Syncope; Syncope, Vasovagal; Tilt-Table Test
PubMed: 33693816
DOI: 10.1093/europace/euab041 -
American Journal of Blood Research 2020There are a lot of reports related to adverse reactions post blood donation. The present study is designed to investigate the incidence of adverse reactions in blood... (Review)
Review
There are a lot of reports related to adverse reactions post blood donation. The present study is designed to investigate the incidence of adverse reactions in blood donation around the world. This research was conducted through searching databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EmBase, Ovid, as well as the specialized journal of TRANSFUSION without any time limit by using the keywords including "Adverse Event", "Adverse Effect", "Adverse Reaction", "Complication", "Side Effect", "Vasovagal Reaction", "Local Reaction", "General Reaction", "Allergic Reaction", "Blood Donor", and "Blood Donation". In the initial search, 7054 documents were found, of which 2517 duplicates were excluded. After screening the remaining 4,537 documents, 97 one were reviewed for quality assessment, of which 30 with the appropriate quality were selected for the review process. The results of the study showed that the reactions caused by blood donation are very different. Most reactions were systemic, and ranged from 0.08 to 13 percent in different countries. The incidence of adverse reactions in blood donation differ across the countries which might be related to the donors' characteristics. The difference did even existed in studies conducted in the same country and the same year. This suggests that many factors can cause adverse reactions in blood donation, and that a wide range of them investigated in one study, most of which were systemic.
PubMed: 33224558
DOI: No ID Found -
European Journal of Obstetrics,... Sep 2020To investigate the effect of the vaginoscopic approach to office hysteroscopy on patients' experience of pain, when compared with the traditional approach where a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effect of the vaginoscopic approach to office hysteroscopy on patients' experience of pain, when compared with the traditional approach where a vaginal speculum is used.
METHODS
Medline, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane library were searched from inception until December 2019, in order to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomised controlled trials investigating vaginoscopy compared to traditional hysteroscopy on pain experienced by women undergoing diagnostic or operative hysteroscopy in an office setting. Data regarding procedural time, feasibility, incidence of vasovagal reactions and complications, acceptability and satisfaction were also recorded.
RESULTS
The literature search returned 363 results of which seven were selected for systematic review, and six for meta-analysis. The vaginoscopic approach was associated with a statistically significant reduction in pain (4 studies including 2214 patients; SMD -0.27, 95 % CI -0.48 to -0.06), procedural time (6 studies including 2443 patients; SMD -0.25, 95 % CI -0.43 to -0.08) and the incidence of vasovagal episodes (3 studies including 2127 patients; OR 0.35; 95 % CI 0.15 to 0.82). Failure rates between the two techniques were similar (p = .90). No study reported significant differences in complications or patient or clinician acceptability or satisfaction.
CONCLUSION
Clinicians performing office hysteroscopy should use the vaginoscopic technique because it makes office hysteroscopy quicker, less painful and reduces the likelihood of inducing a vasovagal reaction. The traditional approach should only be used when vaginoscopy fails or when the need for cervical dilatation is anticipated.
Topics: Female; Humans; Hysteroscopy; Laparoscopy; Pain; Pain Measurement; Pregnancy; Vagina
PubMed: 32645643
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.06.045 -
Pediatric Emergency Care Sep 2020The aims of the study were to perform the first systematic review of pediatric syncope etiologies and to determine the most common diagnoses with credible intervals...
OBJECTIVES
The aims of the study were to perform the first systematic review of pediatric syncope etiologies and to determine the most common diagnoses with credible intervals (CredIs).
METHODS
Review was performed within Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines and used Embase, Scopus, PubMed, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial databases. The following inclusion criteria for the articles were used: minimum of 10 patients, standard definition of syncope used, subjects who were 21 years or younger, and subjects who were either a consecutive retrospective group or a prospective group. No restrictions were made regarding language of the studies, but an English abstract was required. The following information was collected: purpose of the study, definition of syncope, number of patients, patient age range, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and etiologies of syncope.
RESULTS
Of the 500 articles initially identified, 11 studies met the inclusion criteria and were the basis for this review. Three thousand seven hundred patients were included, ranging in age from 3 months to 21 years. The most common etiologies identified were vasovagal (52.2%; 95% CredI, 50.6-53.9), postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (13.1%; 95% CredI, 12.1-14.2), and cardiac causes (4.0%; 95% CredI, 3.39-4.65). A total of 18.3% (95% CredI, 17.0-19.5) of patients were found to have syncope of unknown cause.
CONCLUSIONS
Syncope is a common pediatric complaint. Most cases seen are a result of benign causes, with only a small percentage because of serious medical conditions. In addition, most syncopal episodes in the pediatric population are diagnosed clinically or with minimally invasive testing, emphasizing the importance of a detailed history and physical examination.
Topics: Child; Diagnosis, Differential; Humans; Medical History Taking; Physical Examination; Syncope
PubMed: 32530839
DOI: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000002149 -
The Canadian Journal of Cardiology Jan 2021Drivers at risk of sudden incapacitation from syncope pose a potential threat to themselves and to society. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the...
BACKGROUND
Drivers at risk of sudden incapacitation from syncope pose a potential threat to themselves and to society. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the risk of motor vehicle collisions (MVCs) for patients with a history of syncope.
METHODS
We systematically searched Medline (1946-2019) as well as Cinahl, Embase, Psychinfo, and the Transportation Research Information Documentation (1806-2017) for articles on MVCs and drivers with vasovagal syncope (VVS), arrhythmic syncope, or syncope not yet diagnosed (NYD). Quality ratings were assigned by team consensus.
RESULTS
Eleven studies of moderate quality were included (n = 42,972). Compared with the general populations of Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom (0.49%-2.29% per driver-year), the prospective MVC risk was lower for VVS (0.0%-0.31% per driver-year; 3 studies; n = 782) and higher for arrhythmic syncope (1.9%-3.4% per driver-year; 2 studies; n = 730). The results were more variable for syncope NYD (0.0%-6.9% per driver-year prospectively; 6 studies; n = 41,460). Patients with syncope NYD had an almost 2-fold increased MVC risk in the largest study, although the smaller studies showed contradictory findings.
CONCLUSIONS
VVS patients appear to be at very low risk for MVCs, supporting current guidelines which do not recommend driving suspension for these patients in most cases. Although the data for other forms of syncope are too limited for definitive conclusions and must be improved, arrhythmic syncope appears to be associated with nontrivial risk.
Topics: Accidents, Traffic; Humans; Risk Assessment; Syncope
PubMed: 32504546
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2020.02.070 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2020Lumbosacral radicular pain (commonly called sciatica) is a syndrome involving patients who report radiating leg pain. Epidural corticosteroid injections deliver a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Lumbosacral radicular pain (commonly called sciatica) is a syndrome involving patients who report radiating leg pain. Epidural corticosteroid injections deliver a corticosteroid dose into the epidural space, with the aim of reducing the local inflammatory process and, consequently, relieving the symptoms of lumbosacral radicular pain. This Cochrane Review is an update of a review published in Annals of Internal Medicine in 2012. Some placebo-controlled trials have been published recently, which highlights the importance of updating the previous review.
OBJECTIVES
To investigate the efficacy and safety of epidural corticosteroid injections compared with placebo injection on pain and disability in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases without language limitations up to 25 September 2019: Cochrane Back and Neck group trial register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and two trial registers. We also performed citation tracking of included studies and relevant systematic reviews in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included studies that compared epidural corticosteroid injections of any corticosteroid drug to placebo injections in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain. We accepted all three anatomical approaches (caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal) to delivering corticosteroids into the epidural space. We considered trials that included a placebo treatment as delivery of an inert substance (i.e. one with no pharmacologic activity), an innocuous substance (e.g. normal saline solution), or a pharmacologically active substance but not one considered to provide sustained benefit (e.g. local anaesthetic), either into the epidural space (i.e. to mimic epidural corticosteroid injection) or adjacent spinal tissue (i.e. subcutaneous, intramuscular, or interspinous tissue). We also included trials in which a local anaesthetic with a short duration of action was used as a placebo and injected together with corticosteroid in the intervention group.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently performed the screening, data extraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessments. In case of insufficient information, we contacted the authors of the original studies or estimated the data. We grouped the outcome data into four time points of assessment: immediate (≤ 2 weeks), short term (> 2 weeks but ≤ 3 months), intermediate term (> 3 months but < 12 months), and long term (≥ 12 months). We assessed the overall quality of evidence for each outcome and time point using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 25 clinical trials (from 29 publications) investigating the effects of epidural corticosteroid injections compared to placebo in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain. The included studies provided data for a total of 2470 participants with a mean age ranging from 37.3 to 52.8 years. Seventeen studies included participants with lumbosacral radicular pain with a diagnosis based on clinical assessment and 15 studies included participants with mixed duration of symptoms. The included studies were conducted mainly in North America and Europe. Fifteen studies did not report funding sources, five studies reported not receiving funding, and five reported receiving funding from a non-profit or government source. Eight trials reported data on pain intensity, 12 reported data on disability, and eight studies reported data on adverse events. The duration of the follow-up assessments ranged from 12 hours to 1 year. We considered eight trials to be of high quality because we judged them as having low risk of bias in four out of the five bias domains. We identified one ongoing trial in a trial registry. Epidural corticosteroid injections were probably slightly more effective compared to placebo in reducing leg pain at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) -4.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.77 to -1.09 on a 0 to 100 scale; 8 trials, n = 949; moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias)). For disability, epidural corticosteroid injections were probably slightly more effective compared to placebo in reducing disability at short-term follow-up (MD -4.18, 95% CI -6.04 to -2.17, on a 0 to 100 scale; 12 trials, n = 1367; moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias)). The treatment effects are small, however, and may not be considered clinically important by patients and clinicians (i.e. MD lower than 10%). Most trials provided insufficient information on how or when adverse events were assessed (immediate or short-term follow-up) and only reported adverse drug reactions - that is, adverse events that the trialists attributed to the study treatment. We are very uncertain that epidural corticosteroid injections make no difference compared to placebo injection in the frequency of minor adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 1.14, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.42; 8 trials, n = 877; very low quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision)). Minor adverse events included increased pain during or after the injection, non-specific headache, post-dural puncture headache, irregular periods, accidental dural puncture, thoracic pain, non-local rash, sinusitis, vasovagal response, hypotension, nausea, and tinnitus. One study reported a major drug reaction for one patient on anticoagulant therapy who had a retroperitoneal haematoma as a complication of the corticosteroid injection.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This study found that epidural corticosteroid injections probably slightly reduced leg pain and disability at short-term follow-up in people with lumbosacral radicular pain. In addition, no minor or major adverse events were reported at short-term follow-up after epidural corticosteroid injections or placebo injection. Although the current review identified additional clinical trials, the available evidence still provides only limited support for the use of epidural corticosteroid injections in people with lumbosacral radicular pain as the treatment effects are small, mainly evident at short-term follow-up and may not be considered clinically important by patients and clinicians (i.e. mean difference lower than 10%). According to GRADE, the quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate, suggesting that further studies are likely to play an important role in clarifying the efficacy and tolerability of this treatment. We recommend that further trials should attend to methodological features such as appropriate allocation concealment and blinding of care providers to minimise the potential for biased estimates of treatment and harmful effects.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Anesthetics, Local; Humans; Injections, Epidural; Lumbosacral Region; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sciatica
PubMed: 32271952
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013577