SciaticaPhase 4NCT01934868
Prolotherapy Versus Epidural Steroid Injections (ESI) for Lumbar Pain Radiating to the Leg
A Phase 4 study testing prolotherapy solution of 20% dextrose and Epidural Steroid Injection in people with Sciatica and Spinal Stenosis of Lumbar Region, run by Hadassah Medical Organization at 1 site in Israel.
Trial summary
The hypothesis is that in the treatment of low back pain (LBP) radiating to the leg, the long-term results of prolotherapy are more effective than those of the current conventional treatment: epidural steroid injections (ESI). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 90 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Sciatica, Spinal Stenosis of Lumbar Region, Degeneration of Lumbar or Lumbosacral Intervertebral Disc
- What is being tested?
- prolotherapy solution of 20% dextrose and Epidural Steroid Injection
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 110 participants
- Where
- 1 siteIsrael
- Study dates
- 1 Dec 2013to 10 Apr 2023
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 90 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Pain radiating down one or both legs or to the groin of at least 12 weeks' duration
- Patients with disc lesions with radiating pain to the leg(s)
- Mild spinal stenosis
Who cannot join
- History of back surgery
- Recent history (less than 2 years) of active malignancy
- Recent fracture in the lumbar spine or pelvis of less than 12 months
- Active locus of infection in the body
- Coagulation disorders, and current anticoagulation therapy, excluding aspirin
- Chronic medication with corticosteroids and NSAIDS (which are said to possibly neutralise the effect of prolotherapy) - the latter must be stopped 24 hours prior to the first treatment session
Show all 11Show fewer
- Recent injection of cortisone for back pain or any other pathology elsewhere in the body- patients must wait 2 weeks before commencement of the study
- Concurrent significant depressive illness or evidence of catastrophisation, fibromyalgia
- Concurrent history of active autoimmune disease or inflammatory joint disease evidence of a peripheral neuropathy
- NOTE:
- If any of the above illnesses appear during the time of the treatment in any patient, the patient will be withdrawn from the trial as treatment may be detrimental to his or her health. In addition, follow-up is not relevant to compare a diseased patient with any of the above with patients who are free of the above illnesses.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: A Comparison of the Long Term Outcomes of Prolotherapy Versus Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injections (ESI) for Lumbar Pain Radiating to the Leg
The hypothesis is that in the treatment of low back pain (LBP) radiating to the leg, the long-term results of prolotherapy are more effective than those of the current conventional treatment: epidural steroid injections (ESI). This research will examine the efficacy of prolotherapy injections versus epidural steroid injections for the treatment of low back pain radiating to the leg. This is a randomized, unblinded study, in which patients seen in the principle investigator's pain clinic will be randomly divided to receive treatments from either the experimental, prolotherapy group, or the active control, ESI group.
Read the detailed description
The primary goal of the study is to investigate the long-term efficacy of prolotherapy for patients with LBP referring to the leg. The secondary goal is to compare this efficacy with that of epidural steroids. The reason for exploring options other than ESI is that the latter have proved to be disappointing. Comprehensive reviews have been written on interlaminar and transforaminal epidurals which basically show poor long-term results of longer than 3 months. In addition, ESI carries risks of neurological damage, epidural hematoma and infection. However, ESI continues to be the most widely used treatment worldwide. Research also shows that with increasing age, there is an increased incidence of ligament laxity, spondylolisthesis and angulation which may in turn lead to nerve impingement and deterioration in function with time. Sprained and strained ligaments are themselves capable of referring pain down the leg even as far as the ankle. Research shows that much of the pain referred down the leg is not from impinged nerve roots but from other soft tissues, such as the above-mentioned ligaments; these must be addressed and treated not only to treat pain but in order to improve function.
The term prolotherapy is otherwise known as proliferative regeneration therapy and is aimed at doing just the opposite of cortisone, namely, to strengthen the structures injected, usually ligaments. Prolotherapy solutions are also used to treat partially torn tendons, as in the case of partial rotator cuff tears. Research on prolotherapy has shown that this treatment mode produces varying results in the treatment of low back pain and carries fewer risks than epidurals. One can infer from this that it may provide a safer and better long-term treatment method than ESI. Yelland's review shows that prolotherapy works for the treatment of LBP if this treatment method is combined with other measures such as exercises or manipulations. In this study, patients with low back pain radiating to the leg will be randomized to receive either epidural steroid injections or prolotherapy injections using a solution made up of 20% dextrose. In light of the results of the research quoted, it was decided to give exercise instructions tailored to every patient's condition. Both patients from the experimental and the control groups will receive this instruction in order to avoid the presence of another confounding variable.
A precondition to being included in the trial is having either a CT or MRI of the lumbar spine within the previous 18 months and not having any of the exclusion criteria cited below. Once included in the trial, patients will be randomized into the study and control groups. All epidural injections will be performed under fluoroscopy, and radiocontrast dye will be injected to verify that the injectate will be given in the correct place. Patients in this group will receive 3 interlaminar epidural steroid injections approximately 4 weeks apart. The solution injected will be made up of 80mg methylprednisolone acetate with bupivacaine. The level injected will depend on the clinical picture.
All of the prolotherapy dextrose injections will be performed under ultrasound guidance. Prolotherapy patients will receive 5 sessions approximately 4 weeks apart. In each session, 6 injections in different areas of the lumbosacral spine and sacroiliac ligaments will be injected with 20% dextrose solution using a 25 gauge spinal needle. The targeted structures include the following: the facet joint capsular ligaments, interspinous ligaments, and some of the sacroiliac ligaments, depending on the clinical assessment. The clinical picture will determine what levels will be injected in each session.
As described below, patients will be assessed prior to the study and after the study regarding their pain and function.
Because several patients fail to improve and continue to suffer from severe pain, it was considered unethical to keep patients in their original grouping and prevent crossover for a period of 12 months.
Crossover will be permitted if all of the following conditions apply:
- At least 1 month has passed since the last treatment in the original allocation group
- NRS pain levels are at least 6 out of 10
- Pain and function have not improved with the originally allocated treatment
- The patient requests the crossover. Participants will receive the same treatments in the crossover groups as patients who were originally allocated to those groups Therefore, patients who cross over to the epidural side will receive up to 3 epidural injections approximately 1 month apart. Participants who cross over to the prolotherapy grouping will receive up to 5 treatment sessions also approximately 1 month apart.
Follow-up of crossover participants will also be performed in the same manner and by the same independent investigator as for non-cross-over participants at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the last crossover treatment.
- Conditions
- Sciatica, Spinal Stenosis of Lumbar Region, Degeneration of Lumbar or Lumbosacral Intervertebral Disc
- Being tested
- prolotherapy solution of 20% dextrose, Epidural Steroid Injection
- Keywords
- low back pain, sciatica, spinal stenosis, epidural injections, prolotherapy, sacroiliac pain or dysfunction., Ligament laxity
- Medical subject headings
- Sciatica, Low Back Pain, Spinal Stenosis, Joint Instability
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
prolotherapy solution of 20% dextroseDrug
Also called Dextrose 20% solution
After verifying the anatomy of the lumbosacral spine under ultrasound, a 9cm 22 gauge needle will be used to inject the prolotherapy solution to each of the points specified. In order to view the needle under ultrasound, a needle at least as thick as 22G is required. In order for the prolotherapy injections to be safe, bone must be contacted in order to avoid nerve damage. At each point a total of 1cc prolotherapy solution will be injected.
Epidural Steroid InjectionDrug
Prior to the epidural injection a local anaesthetic solution of 1% lidocaine will be injected into the relevant subcutaneous and ligamentous interlaminar space. The injectant solution will be comprised of 80mg methylprednisolone combined with 10mg (2cc) 0.5% bupivicaine. The resulting 4cc will be diluted with another 4cc of normal saline giving a total volume of 8cc. A loss of resistance technique will be used and radiocontrast dye will be injected to verify the placement of the needle prior to injecting the steroid solution.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Prolotherapy Injections | Experimental | Each patient will be evaluated clinically and the spinal levels to be injected will be decided upon during each visit. The levels to be injected will largely depend on the pain referral patterns. All prolotherapy injections will be performed under ultrasound guidance.
A prolotherapy solution of 20% dextrose combined with 1% lidocaine will be injected to facet capsular ligaments and interspinous ligaments of the lumbar spine and the posterior sacroiliac ligaments. Six points will be injected in each treatment session. These sessions will be 4 weeks apart. Receives: Drug: prolotherapy solution of 20% dextrose |
| Epidural Steroid Injections (ESI) | Active comparator | Those patients assigned to the ESI group will receive epidural steroid injections with 80mg methylprednisolone and 10mg buvicaine to the interlaminar space. These will be performed 4 weeks apart and under fluoroscopy. The level that will be injected will depend both on the clinical presentation as well as the size of the interlaminar space seen under fluoroscopy. Receives: Drug: Epidural Steroid Injection |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Numerical Rating Scale
Prior to the first treatment session, patients from both groups will fill out a questionnaire (described later) which will begin with an added item at the beginning: the NRS (numerical rating scale) score. This is to ascertain the intensity of pain he or she suffers in the lower back and or leg. This is a score given between 0 and 10 to estimate the subjective level of pain felt. 10 is a score given to the worst possible imaginable pain, and 0 is no pain at all. At 4 points in time: 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the last treatment session, patients will be telephoned by a nurse trained in pain to assess pain level according to NRS score. The nurse will be an independent and unbiased investigator. Because patients often suffer from several sorts of pain, it must be stressed to the patients that what is being measured is the very same pain that the patient came to be treated for initially, and not another area which may have developed pain at some later point in time.
Measured: 17 months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Oswestry Back Disability Questionnaire Score
At the same times as being asked about the NRS score, patients will be interviewed and the Oswestry Back Disability Questionnaire will be filled out by an independent investigator who is a nurse trained in the field of pain. She will give a score at each of the above time allotments. The maximal score is 50, and assesses general function and activity of daily living. The higher the score, the worse is the function. Questions asked relate to pain level, ability to wash oneself, lift things, walk, sit, stand, interact socially, travel, and have sexual relations. Patients with a score above 20 or more out of 50 are considered to have a significant disability.
Measured: 17 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Sep 2013 (estimated)
- Study start1 Dec 2013
- Primary completion1 Apr 2023
- Study completion10 Apr 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for SciaticaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Hadassah Medical OrganizationThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This is a study comparing prolotherapy treatments with an active control, which happens to be the gold standard treatment for radicular pain.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 110 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hadassah Medical Organization
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Reuth Rehabilitation Hospital
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Osnat Wende, MD, Principal investigator, Hadassah Medical Organization
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01934868
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 0309-13-HMO-CTIL
- Status last verified
- Jan 2022
- First submitted
- 30 Aug 2013
- Last updated
- 29 Jun 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes
Publications
Benyamin RM, Manchikanti L, Parr AT, Diwan S, Singh V, Falco FJ, Datta S, Abdi S, Hirsch JA. The effectiveness of lumbar interlaminar epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain. Pain Physician. 2012 Jul-Aug;15(4):E363-404.
PubMed 22828691Manchikanti L, Buenaventura RM, Manchikanti KN, Ruan X, Gupta S, Smith HS, Christo PJ, Ward SP. Effectiveness of therapeutic lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections in managing lumbar spinal pain. Pain Physician. 2012 May-Jun;15(3):E199-245.
PubMed 22622912Iguchi T, Kanemura A, Kasahara K, Kurihara A, Doita M, Yoshiya S. Age distribution of three radiologic factors for lumbar instability: probable aging process of the instability with disc degeneration. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Dec 1;28(23):2628-33. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000097162.80495.66.
PubMed 14652480Bogduk N. On the definitions and physiology of back pain, referred pain, and radicular pain. Pain. 2009 Dec 15;147(1-3):17-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2009.08.020. Epub 2009 Sep 16. No abstract available.
PubMed 19762151Cohen SP, Chen Y, Neufeld NJ. Sacroiliac joint pain: a comprehensive review of epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment. Expert Rev Neurother. 2013 Jan;13(1):99-116. doi: 10.1586/ern.12.148.
PubMed 23253394Yelland MJ, Del Mar C, Pirozzo S, Schoene ML. Prolotherapy injections for chronic low back pain: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004 Oct 1;29(19):2126-33. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000141188.83178.b3.
PubMed 15454703Wilkinson HA. Injection therapy for enthesopathies causing axial spine pain and the "failed back syndrome": a single blinded, randomized and cross-over study. Pain Physician. 2005 Apr;8(2):167-73.
PubMed 16850071Wende O, Reeves KD, Vishnevsky G, Cheng AL, Rabago D. Prolotherapy versus epidural steroid injections for lumbar pain with associated leg pain: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial. PM R. 2026 Apr 29. doi: 10.1002/pmrj.70136. Online ahead of print.
PubMed 42053118
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 Jun 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Comparison of the Long Term Outcomes of Prolotherapy Versus Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injections (ESI) for Lumbar Pain Radiating to the Leg
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01934868
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 0309-13-HMO-CTIL
- Conditions
- Sciatica, Spinal Stenosis of Lumbar Region, Degeneration of Lumbar or Lumbosacral Intervertebral Disc
- Keywords
- low back pain, sciatica, spinal stenosis, epidural injections, prolotherapy, sacroiliac pain or dysfunction., Ligament laxity
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 110 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hadassah Medical OrganizationUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Reuth Rehabilitation Hospital
- Study start
- 1 Dec 2013 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Apr 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 10 Apr 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 Sep 2013 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The hypothesis is that in the treatment of low back pain (LBP) radiating to the leg, the long-term results of prolotherapy are more effective than those of the current conventional treatment: epidural steroid injections (ESI). This research will examine the efficacy of prolotherapy injections versus epidural steroid injections for the treatment of low back pain radiating to the leg. This is a randomized, unblinded study, in which patients seen in the principle investigator's pain clinic will be randomly divided to receive treatments from either the experimental, prolotherapy group, or the active control, ESI group.
Detailed description
The primary goal of the study is to investigate the long-term efficacy of prolotherapy for patients with LBP referring to the leg. The secondary goal is to compare this efficacy with that of epidural steroids. The reason for exploring options other than ESI is that the latter have proved to be disappointing. Comprehensive reviews have been written on interlaminar and transforaminal epidurals which basically show poor long-term results of longer than 3 months. In addition, ESI carries risks of neurological damage, epidural hematoma and infection. However, ESI continues to be the most widely used treatment worldwide. Research also shows that with increasing age, there is an increased incidence of ligament laxity, spondylolisthesis and angulation which may in turn lead to nerve impingement and deterioration in function with time. Sprained and strained ligaments are themselves capable of referring pain down the leg even as far as the ankle. Research shows that much of the pain referred down the leg is not from impinged nerve roots but from other soft tissues, such as the above-mentioned ligaments; these must be addressed and treated not only to treat pain but in order to improve function.
The term prolotherapy is otherwise known as proliferative regeneration therapy and is aimed at doing just the opposite of cortisone, namely, to strengthen the structures injected, usually ligaments. Prolotherapy solutions are also used to treat partially torn tendons, as in the case of partial rotator cuff tears. Research on prolotherapy has shown that this treatment mode produces varying results in the treatment of low back pain and carries fewer risks than epidurals. One can infer from this that it may provide a safer and better long-term treatment method than ESI. Yelland's review shows that prolotherapy works for the treatment of LBP if this treatment method is combined with other measures such as exercises or manipulations. In this study, patients with low back pain radiating to the leg will be randomized to receive either epidural steroid injections or prolotherapy injections using a solution made up of 20% dextrose. In light of the results of the research quoted, it was decided to give exercise instructions tailored to every patient's condition. Both patients from the experimental and the control groups will receive this instruction in order to avoid the presence of another confounding variable.
A precondition to being included in the trial is having either a CT or MRI of the lumbar spine within the previous 18 months and not having any of the exclusion criteria cited below. Once included in the trial, patients will be randomized into the study and control groups. All epidural injections will be performed under fluoroscopy, and radiocontrast dye will be injected to verify that the injectate will be given in the correct place. Patients in this group will receive 3 interlaminar epidural steroid injections approximately 4 weeks apart. The solution injected will be made up of 80mg methylprednisolone acetate with bupivacaine. The level injected will depend on the clinical picture.
All of the prolotherapy dextrose injections will be performed under ultrasound guidance. Prolotherapy patients will receive 5 sessions approximately 4 weeks apart. In each session, 6 injections in different areas of the lumbosacral spine and sacroiliac ligaments will be injected with 20% dextrose solution using a 25 gauge spinal needle. The targeted structures include the following: the facet joint capsular ligaments, interspinous ligaments, and some of the sacroiliac ligaments, depending on the clinical assessment. The clinical picture will determine what levels will be injected in each session.
As described below, patients will be assessed prior to the study and after the study regarding their pain and function.
Because several patients fail to improve and continue to suffer from severe pain, it was considered unethical to keep patients in their original grouping and prevent crossover for a period of 12 months.
Crossover will be permitted if all of the following conditions apply:
- At least 1 month has passed since the last treatment in the original allocation group
- NRS pain levels are at least 6 out of 10
- Pain and function have not improved with the originally allocated treatment
- The patient requests the crossover. Participants will receive the same treatments in the crossover groups as patients who were originally allocated to those groups Therefore, patients who cross over to the epidural side will receive up to 3 epidural injections approximately 1 month apart. Participants who cross over to the prolotherapy grouping will receive up to 5 treatment sessions also approximately 1 month apart.
Follow-up of crossover participants will also be performed in the same manner and by the same independent investigator as for non-cross-over participants at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the last crossover treatment.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This is a study comparing prolotherapy treatments with an active control, which happens to be the gold standard treatment for radicular pain.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Prolotherapy Injections | Experimental | Drug: prolotherapy solution of 20% dextroseEach patient will be evaluated clinically and the spinal levels to be injected will be decided upon during each visit. The levels to be injected will largely depend on the pain referral patterns. All prolotherapy injections will be performed under ultrasound guidance. A prolotherapy solution of 20% dextrose combined with 1% lidocaine will be injected to facet capsular ligaments and interspinous ligaments of the lumbar spine and the posterior sacroiliac ligaments. Six points will be injected in each treatment session. These sessions will be 4 weeks apart. |
| Epidural Steroid Injections (ESI) | Active comparator | Drug: Epidural Steroid InjectionThose patients assigned to the ESI group will receive epidural steroid injections with 80mg methylprednisolone and 10mg buvicaine to the interlaminar space. These will be performed 4 weeks apart and under fluoroscopy. The level that will be injected will depend both on the clinical presentation as well as the size of the interlaminar space seen under fluoroscopy. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 90 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Pain radiating down one or both legs or to the groin of at least 12 weeks' duration
- Patients with disc lesions with radiating pain to the leg(s)
- Mild spinal stenosis
Key exclusion criteria (11 listed)
- History of back surgery
- Recent history (less than 2 years) of active malignancy
- Recent fracture in the lumbar spine or pelvis of less than 12 months
- Active locus of infection in the body
- Coagulation disorders, and current anticoagulation therapy, excluding aspirin
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| prolotherapy solution of 20% dextroseAlso: Dextrose 20% solutionAfter verifying the anatomy of the lumbosacral spine under ultrasound, a 9cm 22 gauge needle will be used to inject the prolotherapy solution to each of the points specified. In order to view the needle under ultrasound, a needle at least as thick as 22G is required. In order for the prolotherapy injections to be safe, bone must be contacted in order to avoid nerve damage. At each point a total of 1cc prolotherapy solution will be injected. | Drug | Prolotherapy Injections |
| Epidural Steroid InjectionPrior to the epidural injection a local anaesthetic solution of 1% lidocaine will be injected into the relevant subcutaneous and ligamentous interlaminar space. The injectant solution will be comprised of 80mg methylprednisolone combined with 10mg (2cc) 0.5% bupivicaine. The resulting 4cc will be diluted with another 4cc of normal saline giving a total volume of 8cc. A loss of resistance technique will be used and radiocontrast dye will be injected to verify the placement of the needle prior to injecting the steroid solution. | Drug | Epidural Steroid Injections (ESI) |
Primary outcome
Numerical Rating Scale
Time frame: 17 months
Prior to the first treatment session, patients from both groups will fill out a questionnaire (described later) which will begin with an added item at the beginning: the NRS (numerical rating scale) score. This is to ascertain the intensity of pain he or she suffers in the lower back and or leg. This is a score given between 0 and 10 to estimate the subjective level of pain felt. 10 is a score given to the worst possible imaginable pain, and 0 is no pain at all. At 4 points in time: 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the last treatment session, patients will be telephoned by a nurse trained in pain to assess pain level according to NRS score. The nurse will be an independent and unbiased investigator. Because patients often suffer from several sorts of pain, it must be stressed to the patients that what is being measured is the very same pain that the patient came to be treated for initially, and not another area which may have developed pain at some later point in time.
1 secondary outcome
Oswestry Back Disability Questionnaire Score
Time frame: 17 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 29 Jun 2023.
- Background: PubMed 22828691Benyamin RM, Manchikanti L, Parr AT, Diwan S, Singh V, Falco FJ, Datta S, Abdi S, Hirsch JA. The effectiveness of lumbar interlaminar epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain. Pain Physician. 2012 Jul-Aug;15(4):E363-404.
- Background: PubMed 22622912Manchikanti L, Buenaventura RM, Manchikanti KN, Ruan X, Gupta S, Smith HS, Christo PJ, Ward SP. Effectiveness of therapeutic lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections in managing lumbar spinal pain. Pain Physician. 2012 May-Jun;15(3):E199-245.
- Background: PubMed 14652480Iguchi T, Kanemura A, Kasahara K, Kurihara A, Doita M, Yoshiya S. Age distribution of three radiologic factors for lumbar instability: probable aging process of the instability with disc degeneration. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Dec 1;28(23):2628-33. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000097162.80495.66.
- Background: PubMed 19762151Bogduk N. On the definitions and physiology of back pain, referred pain, and radicular pain. Pain. 2009 Dec 15;147(1-3):17-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2009.08.020. Epub 2009 Sep 16. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 23253394Cohen SP, Chen Y, Neufeld NJ. Sacroiliac joint pain: a comprehensive review of epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment. Expert Rev Neurother. 2013 Jan;13(1):99-116. doi: 10.1586/ern.12.148.
- Background: PubMed 15454703Yelland MJ, Del Mar C, Pirozzo S, Schoene ML. Prolotherapy injections for chronic low back pain: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004 Oct 1;29(19):2126-33. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000141188.83178.b3.
- Background: PubMed 16850071Wilkinson HA. Injection therapy for enthesopathies causing axial spine pain and the "failed back syndrome": a single blinded, randomized and cross-over study. Pain Physician. 2005 Apr;8(2):167-73.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42053118Wende O, Reeves KD, Vishnevsky G, Cheng AL, Rabago D. Prolotherapy versus epidural steroid injections for lumbar pain with associated leg pain: A pragmatic randomized controlled trial. PM R. 2026 Apr 29. doi: 10.1002/pmrj.70136. Online ahead of print.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes
Related trials for Sciatica
Recruiting
Effect of Transfer of Energy Capacitive and Resistive on Chronic Discogenic Sciatica
Lumbar Radiculopathy
Not yet recruiting
Selective Nerve Root Block Versus Sham to Reduce Surgery for Lumbar Disc Herniation
Lumbar Disc Herniation, Lumbar Radiculopathy
RecruitingPhase 1
Study to Evaluate Safety of C-1101 Versus Sterile Saline in Adults With Chronic Painful Lumbosacral Radiculopathy
Lumbosacral Radicular Pain, Sciatic Radiculopathy
Recruiting
Effect of Sensorimotor Training on Pain and Gait Performance in Patients With Discogenic Sciatica
Sciatica Due to Intervertebral Disc Disorder
Not yet recruiting
Randomized Evaluation of Lumbar Injection Effectiveness and Function
Lumbar Radiculopathy, Lumbar Disc Herniation
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Osnat Wende, MD principal investigator
Hadassah Medical Organization
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing prolotherapy solution of 20% dextrose and Epidural Steroid Injection in people with Sciatica and Spinal Stenosis of Lumbar Region, run by Hadassah Medical Organization at 1 site in Israel.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 11 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Jun 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Israel. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Numerical Rating Scale (time frame: 17 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01934868, which also lists 8 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Jun 2023; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.