For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
40
views
211
references
 Top references
cited by
24
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      165
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Safe Use of Epidural Corticosteroid Injections: Recommendations of the WIP Benelux Work Group

      review-article
      Author(s): , MD, FIPP, PhD 1 , , , MD, PhD 2 , , MD, PhD 3 , 4 , , MD 5 , , MD, FIPP 6 , , MD, FIPP, PhD 7 , , MD, FIPP, PhD 8 , , MD, FIPP 9 , 10 , , MD, FIPP, PhD 1 , 8
      Publication date (Electronic):
      Journal: Pain Practice
      Publisher: John Wiley and Sons Inc.
      Keywords: epidural, corticosteroid, complications, dexamethasone, safe use

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Epidural corticosteroid injections are used frequently worldwide in the treatment of radicular pain. Concerns have arisen involving rare major neurologic injuries after this treatment. Recommendations to prevent these complications have been published, but local implementation is not always feasible due to local circumstances, necessitating local recommendations based on literature review.

          Methods

          A work group of 4 stakeholder pain societies in Belgium, The Netherlands, and Luxembourg (Benelux) has reviewed the literature involving neurological complications after epidural corticosteroid injections and possible safety measures to prevent these major neurologic injuries.

          Results

          Twenty‐six considerations and recommendations were selected by the work group. These involve the use of imaging, injection equipment particulate and nonparticulate corticosteroids, epidural approach, and maximal volume to be injected.

          Conclusion

          Raising awareness about possible neurological complications and adoption of safety measures recommended by the work group aim at reducing the risks for these devastating events.

          Related collections

          Most cited references211

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Herniated Lumbar Intervertebral Disk

          Caren G. Solomon, Richard A Deyo, Sohail K Mirza (2016)
          Article 0 comments Cited 115 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Low back pain and sciatica: summary of NICE guidance.

            Ian Bernstein, Qudsia Malik, Serena Carville … (2017)
            Article 0 comments Cited 98 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Surgery versus conservative management of sciatica due to a lumbar herniated disc: a systematic review

              Wilco Jacobs, Maurits van Tulder, Mark Arts … (2010)
              The effectiveness of surgery in patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniations is not without dispute. The goal of this study was to assess the effects of surgery versus conservative therapy (including epidural injections) for patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation. A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro up to October 2009. Randomised controlled trials of adults with lumbar radicular pain, which evaluated at least one clinically relevant outcome measure (pain, functional status, perceived recovery, lost days of work) were included. Two authors assessed risk of bias according to Cochrane criteria and extracted the data. In total, five studies were identified, two of which with a low risk of bias. One study compared early surgery with prolonged conservative care followed by surgery if needed; three studies compared surgery with usual conservative care, and one study compared surgery with epidural injections. Data were not pooled because of clinical heterogeneity and poor reporting of data. One large low-risk-of-bias trial demonstrated that early surgery in patients with 6–12 weeks of radicular pain leads to faster pain relief when compared with prolonged conservative treatment, but there were no differences after 1 and 2 years. Another large low-risk-of-bias trial between surgery and usual conservative care found no statistically significant differences on any of the primary outcome measures after 1 and 2 years. Future studies should evaluate who benefits more from surgery and who from conservative care.
              Article 0 comments Cited 97 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Koen Van Boxem: koen.vb@telenet.be
                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Pain Pract
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Pain Pract
                Journal ID (doi): 10.1111/(ISSN)1533-2500
                Journal ID (publisher-id): PAPR
                Title: Pain Practice
                Publisher: John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                ISSN (Print): 1530-7085
                ISSN (Electronic): 1533-2500
                Publication date (Electronic): 02 July 2018
                Publication date (Print): January 2019
                Volume: 19
                Issue: 1 ( doiID: 10.1111/papr.2019.19.issue-1 )
                Pages: 61-92
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Anesthesiology Critical Care and Multidisciplinary Pain Center Ziekenhuis Oost‐Limburg Genk/Lanaken Belgium
                [ 2 ] Pain Clinic Department of Anesthesiology University Medical Center Utrecht Utrecht The Netherlands
                [ 3 ] Multidisciplinary Pain Center Antwerp University Hospital Edegem Belgium
                [ 4 ] Laboratory for Pain Research University of Antwerp Wilrijk Belgium
                [ 5 ] Department of Pain Management Westfriesgasthuis Hoorn The Netherlands
                [ 6 ] Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management Rijnstate Ziekenhuis Arnhem The Netherlands
                [ 7 ] Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center Nijmegen The Netherlands
                [ 8 ] Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management University Medical Centre Maastricht Maastricht The Netherlands
                [ 9 ] Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Massachusetts General Hospital Boston Massachusetts U.S.A.
                [ 10 ] Department of Anesthesiology Perioperative, and Pain Medicine Brigham and Women’s Hospital Boston Massachusetts U.S.A.
                Author notes
                [*] [* ]Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Koen Van Boxem, MD, FIPP, PhD, Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Multidisciplinary Pain Center, Ziekenhuis Oost‐Limburg, Bessemerstraat 478, 3620 Lanaken, Belgium. E‐mail: koen.vb@ 123456telenet.be .
                Article
                Publisher ID: PAPR12709
                DOI: 10.1111/papr.12709
                PMC ID: 7379698
                PubMed ID: 29756333
                SO-VID: 0ef6662a-bfa5-4daa-95c4-5b256033aa0d
                Copyright © © 2018 The Authors. Pain Practice published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of World Institute of Pain
                License:

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

                History
                Date received : 21 February 2018
                Date accepted : 03 May 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 4, Pages: 32, Words: 21772
                Categories
                Subject: Review Article
                Subject: Review Articles
                Custom metadata
                source-schema-version-number 2.0
                cover-date January 2019
                details-of-publishers-convertor Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.8.5 mode:remove_FC converted:24.07.2020

                Keywords: epidural,corticosteroid,complications,dexamethasone,safe use
                Data availability:
                Keywords: epidural, corticosteroid, complications, dexamethasone, safe use

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content165

                See all similar

                Cited by24

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors2,264

                See all reference authors