Vice Chair for Research and Education, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, Clinical Associate Professor of Anesthesiology and Surgery at University of Illinois, Chicago, IL.
Pain Management Centers of America, Paducah, KY and Evansville, IN; LSU Health Science Center, New Orleans, LA.
Pain Physician. 2020 Aug;23(4S):S239-S270.
Multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews have been conducted to summarize the evidence for administration of local anesthetic (lidocaine) alone or with steroids, with discordant opinions, more in favor of equal effect with local anesthetic alone or with steroids.
To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of lidocaine alone and lidocaine with steroids in managing spinal pain to assess superiority or equivalency.
A systematic review of RCTs assessing the effectiveness of lidocaine alone compared with addition of steroids to lidocaine in managing spinal pain secondary to multiple causes (disc herniation, radiculitis, discogenic pain, spinal stenosis, and post-surgery syndrome).
This systematic review was performed utilizing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) for literature search, Cochrane review criteria, and Interventional Pain Management Techniques-Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM-QRB) to assess the methodologic quality assessment and qualitative analysis utilizing best evidence synthesis principles, and quantitative analysis utilizing conventional and single-arm meta-analysis. PubMed, Cochrane Library, US National Guideline Clearinghouse, Google Scholar, and prior systematic reviews and reference lists were utilized in the literature search from 1966 through December 2019. The evidence was summarized utilizing principles of best evidence synthesis on a scale of 1 to 5.
A hard endpoint for the primary outcome was defined as the proportion of patients with 50% pain relief and improvement in function. Secondary outcome measures, or soft endpoints, were pain relief and/or improvement in function. Effectiveness was determined as short-term if it was less than 6 months. Improvement that lasted longer than 6 months, was defined as long-term.
Based on search criteria, 15 manuscripts were identified and considered for inclusion for qualitative analysis, quantitative analysis with conventional meta-analysis, and single-arm meta-analysis. The results showed Level II, moderate evidence, for short-term and long-term improvement in pain and function with the application of epidural injections with local anesthetic with or without steroid in managing spinal pain of multiple origins.
Despite 15 RCTs, evidence may still be considered as less than optimal and further studies are recommended.
Overall, the present meta-analysis shows moderate (Level II) evidence for epidural injections with lidocaine with or without steroids in managing spinal pain secondary to disc herniation, spinal stenosis, discogenic pain, and post-surgery syndrome based on relevant, high-quality RCTs. Results were similar for lidocaine, with or without steroids.
已经进行了多项随机对照试验 (RCT) 和系统评价,以总结单独使用局部麻醉剂(利多卡因)或联合使用皮质类固醇治疗脊柱疼痛的证据,但结果存在分歧,更多的研究结果倾向于单独使用局部麻醉剂或联合使用皮质类固醇的效果相当。
评估单独使用利多卡因与利多卡因联合皮质类固醇治疗脊柱疼痛的效果,以评估其优越性或等效性。
这是一项系统评价 RCTs,评估单独使用利多卡因与在利多卡因中添加皮质类固醇治疗多种原因引起的脊柱疼痛(椎间盘突出、神经根炎、椎间盘源性疼痛、椎管狭窄和术后综合征)的效果。
该系统评价采用了系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目 (PRISMA) 进行文献检索、 Cochrane 评价标准和干预性疼痛管理技术-可靠性和偏倚风险评估质量评估 (IPM-QRB),以评估方法学质量评估和定性分析采用最佳证据综合原则,以及定量分析采用常规和单臂荟萃分析。从 1966 年到 2019 年 12 月,在文献检索中使用了 PubMed、Cochrane 图书馆、美国国家指南交换中心、Google Scholar 以及先前的系统评价和参考文献列表。利用最佳证据综合原则对证据进行了总结,分值为 1 到 5 分。
主要结局的硬性终点定义为 50%疼痛缓解和功能改善的患者比例。次要结局测量或软性结局测量为疼痛缓解和/或功能改善。如果时间短于 6 个月,则认为有效。如果持续时间超过 6 个月,则定义为长期改善。
根据搜索标准,确定了 15 份手稿进行定性分析、常规荟萃分析的定量分析和单臂荟萃分析。结果显示,对于多种病因引起的脊柱疼痛,硬膜外注射利多卡因联合或不联合皮质类固醇治疗,在短期和长期改善疼痛和功能方面具有 II 级、中等证据。
尽管有 15 项 RCT,但证据仍可能被认为不够理想,建议进行进一步的研究。
总的来说,基于相关的高质量 RCT,本荟萃分析显示中等(II 级)证据表明,硬膜外注射利多卡因联合或不联合皮质类固醇治疗椎间盘突出症、椎管狭窄症、椎间盘源性疼痛和术后综合征引起的脊柱疼痛是有效的。利多卡因联合或不联合皮质类固醇的结果相似。