Epidural Injection Research Articles

Clinical Application of an Augmented Reality Navigation System for Transforaminal Epidural Injection: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Objectives: Augmented reality (AR) navigation systems are emerging to simplify and enhance the precision of medical procedures. Lumbosacral transforaminal epidural injection is a commonly performed procedure for the treatment and diagnosis of radiculopathy. Accurate needle placement while avoiding critical structures remains a challenge. For this purpose, we conducted a randomized controlled trial for our augmented reality navigation system. Methods: This randomized controlled study involved 28 patients, split between a traditional C-arm guided group (control) and an AR navigation guided group (AR-NAVI), to compare procedure efficiency and radiation exposure. The AR-NAVI group used a real-time tracking system displaying spinal structure and needle position on an AR head-mounted display. The procedural time and C-arm usage (radiation exposure) were measured. Results: All patients underwent successful procedures without complications. The AR-NAVI group demonstrated significantly reduced times and C-arm usage for needle entry to the target point (58.57 ± 33.31 vs. 124.91 ± 41.14, p < 0.001 and 3.79 ± 1.97 vs. 8.86 ± 3.94, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The use of the AR navigation system significantly improved procedure efficiency and safety by reducing time and radiation exposure, suggesting a promising direction for future enhancements and validation.

Treatment Options for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: An Umbrella Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews on the Effectiveness of Therapeutic Interventions.

Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is a common and incapacitating condition affecting patients with previous spine surgery in whom treatment approach can be challenging. This study aimed to summarize existing secondary studies and up-to-date randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that assess the effectiveness of available treatment options for FBSS. Systematic searches were carried out in five databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Scielo, Epistemonikos, and Google scholar) for all systematic reviews on the effectiveness of treatment options for FBSS published after 2012. Outcomes of interest were pain levels measured through visual analog scale or numeric rating scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and quality of life. Methodological and risk of bias assessments were performed with the AMSTAR-2 tool for systematic reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for RCT. Prospective PROSPERO registration: CRD42022307609. Fifteen studies, seven systematic reviews, and eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria and fulfilled the methodological quality assessment. Of the 15 included studies, 8 were on neurostimulation, 4 on adhesiolysis, 4 on epidural or intrathecal injections, and 3 on other treatment modalities. The risk of bias was low in seven studies, moderate in five, and high in three. Based on this systematic overview and the considerable heterogeneity among studies, the FBSS therapeutic approach must be individualized. FBSS treatment should start with conservative management, considering the implementation of neurostimulation, a technique with the most robust evidence of effective results, in cases of refractory axial or neuropathic pain. As the last resource, in light of the evidence found, more invasive procedures or new surgical interventions are indicated.

ORAL OPIOID ANALGESICS VS SPINAL STEROID INJECTIONS IN THE TREATMENT OF LOW BACK PAIN: A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Introduction: Low back pain (LBP) affects a significant portion of the population worldwide, with distinct treatment needs for acute and chronic cases. Despite widespread opioid use, evidence for their efficacy in LBP remains uncertain, highlighting the need for alternative interventions. Minimally invasive procedures like epidural steroid injections offer potential relief for conditions like lumbar disc herniation, but their effectiveness is debated. To address these complexities, we conducted a comprehensive review encompassing various treatment modalities beyond medication, aiming to optimize outcomes and improve quality of life for individuals with LBP. Method: The researchers in this study followed the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines to ensure that their work met the required standards. This was done to ensure the precision and reliability of the conclusions derived from the research. Result: Our search produced 13 results. After looking at the titles and summaries, we found 8 papers that fit our criteria. At first, we excluded several articles because they were written in review style and case reports. But after reading the full papers carefully, we included four papers in our final analysis. These papers included retrospective analysis, a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled cross-over study, noninterventional, retrospective 12-week study using anonymized clinical practice data from the German Pain eRegistry, and a retrospective analysis of anonymized, propensity score–matched data. Conclusion: Favorable post-injection outcomes suggest the blind method for caudal epidural injections is safe and effective, suitable for patients not eligible for surgery or unresponsive to conservative treatments. Interlaminar epidural steroid injections effectively reduce VAS and ODI scores in patients with chronic low back pain and multi-level disc disease, but further research is needed to standardize administration protocols and optimize treatment outcomes, including addressing BMI's impact. The analgesic efficacy of periradicular meloxicam injections for acute/subacute low back pain, indicating a potential new treatment option, while real-world data suggest NBX oromucosal spray may be superior to typical oral LAO analgesics for severe peripheral NBP, pending confirmation in large RCTs.

The carbon footprint of epidural steroid injections: A pilot study.

Epidural steroid injections are common procedures in physical medicine and rehabilitation practice. However, their environmental impact has not been characterized. The primary aim is to estimate and compare the carbon footprint of two standard injection kits used to perform epidural steroid injections at a single academic institution. Secondary objectives were (1) to create a step-by-step guide for estimating the carbon footprint of materials and (2) to survey physicians on practice patterns and identify areas for improvement. Pilot study. Academic medical center. N/A. N/A. Carbon emissions measured in CO2 equivalents (CO2 eq). Using guidance from the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, the carbon footprint of the two kits was estimated by taking the sum of carbon emissions resulting from the production of the kit materials and the carbon emissions resulting from the waste disposal of the kit materials. The carbon footprint of the transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) kit was estimated at 1.328 kg CO2 eq. The carbon footprint of the interlaminar epidural steroid injection (ILESI) kit was estimated at 2.534 kg CO2 eq. For both kits, the carbon emissions resulting from the production of the kits were greater than the emissions resulting from disposal. The survey of interventionalists performing TFESI revealed all respondents required materials in addition to those provided in the standard epidural kit. Despite this, kit materials were typically wasted in 62% of respondents. Creating a methodology for quantifying carbon emissions is the first step to reducing carbon emissions. Once emissions are measured, the health care industry can determine the most effective strategies for reducing its impact. Our analysis has shown that it is feasible to perform emissions calculations and delineates a clear method with publicly available resources. Solutions to reduce epidural injection carbon footprint waste may include improved kit customization.

Comparative-effectiveness study evaluating outcomes for transforaminal epidural steroid injections performed with 3% hypertonic saline or normal saline in lumbosacral radicular pain.

Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are commonly employed to treat lumbosacral radiculopathy. Despite anti-inflammatory properties, the addition of 3% hypertonic saline has not been studied. Compare the effectiveness of adding 0.9% NaCl (N-group) vs. 3% NaCl (H-group) in TFESI performed for lumbosacral radiculopathy. This retrospective study compared TFESI performed with lidocaine, triamcinolone and 0.9% NaCl vs. lidocaine, triamcinolone and 3% NaCl. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who experienced a ≥ 30% reduction in pain on a verbal rating scale (VRS; 0-100) at 3 months. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients who improved by at least 30% for pain at 1 and 6 months, and who experienced ≥15% from baseline on the Oswestry disability index (ODI) at follow-up. The H-group experienced more successful pain outcomes than the N-group at 3 months (59.09% vs. 41.51%; P = .002) but not at 1 month (67.53% vs. 64.78%; P = .61) or 6 months (27.13% vs 21.55%: P = .31). For functional outcome, there was a higher proportion of responders in the H-group than the N-group at 3 months (70.31% vs. 53.46%; P = .002). Female, age ≤ 60 years, and duration of pain ≤ 6 months were associated with superior outcomes at the 3-month endpoint. Although those with a herniated disc experienced better outcomes in general with TFESI, the only difference favoring the H-group was for spondylolisthesis patients. 3% hypertonic saline is a viable alternative to normal saline as an adjunct for TFESI, with randomized studies needed to compare its effectiveness to steroids as a possible alternative. Thai Clinical Trials Registry ID TCTR 20231110006.

Comparing Quality of Life: Discectomy Surgery versus Epidural Corticosteroid Injection for Lumbar Disc Herniation

BackgroundSelecting an efficient treatment for patients with radiculopathy caused by lumbar disc herniation (LDH) unresponsive to conservative management remains a challenging task under investigation, yielding varying results. This study aims to compare the outcomes of the two most prevalent invasive treatments. MethodsIn this retrospective longitudinal study, we enrolled patients with confirmed refractory symptomatic LDH who sought treatment at Valiasr Hospital and underwent either discectomy surgery or epidural steroid injection (ESI) between 2019 and 2022. The outcome measures included pain intensity using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and quality of life (QoL) using the SF-36 questionnaire. ResultsA total of 202 individuals (112 in the discectomy group and 90 in the ESI group) consisting of 90 males and 112 females, with a mean age of 50.9 ± 13.5 years, underwent analysis. In the univariate analysis, QoL scores were significantly higher in the discectomy group (57.4 ± 2.4) compared to the ESI group (44.2 ± 2.4) (p <0.01). Furthermore, the surgery group exhibited a significantly greater reduction in the Leg VAS score after treatment compared to the ESI group (mean difference: -2.59, 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.45 to -1.70, p <0.01). After adjusting for the most important confounding variables using multiple linear regression analysis, the association between surgery and higher QoL scores remained statistically significant (Unstandardized Coefficients B= 7.65, 95% CI: 0.55, 14.76, p = 0.03). ConclusionsOur findings indicate that discectomy surgery has a more pronounced effect on patient outcomes and is a preferable treatment option for LDH patients.

Relationships between the Spinal Dural Pulsations and the Short-Term Efficacy of Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injection.

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) causes low back pain, leg pain, numbness in the leg, and neurogenic intermittent claudication. Epidural steroid injection (ESI) has been used for treating spinal stenosis symptoms. We hypothesized that dural pulsation was variable for lumbar spinal stenosis. In cases of the presence of dural pulsation, the pain relief after the ESI was better than in the absence of dural pulsation. This study aimed at investigating the relationships between the presence or absence of spinal dural pulsations and the efficacy of ESI. A total of 71 patients were enrolled in this prospective study. Prior to the ESI, the dural pulsation was measured using a 5-1 MHz array ultrasound transducer. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score was measured pre-ESI and 2 weeks post-ESI and 4 weeks post-ESI. At 4 weeks post-ESI, dural pulsation was rechecked. The VAS scores improved after the ESI procedure regardless of the presence or absence of dural pulsation. There was a correlation between the pulsation of the dura and post-ESI VAS scores. However, VAS was not significantly different for different grades of stenosis. The ESI was effective in patients with spinal stenosis in short-term follow-up. Dural pulsation of the spinal cord was a positive predictive factor for the ESI effect, but the grade of spinal stenosis severity had no effect on the effectiveness of ESI.

Predictors of successful treatment after transforaminal epidural steroid injections in patients with lumbar disc herniation.

Epidural steroid injections are common procedures used to treat lumbosacral radicular pain due to lumbar disc herniation (LDH). It is crucial for the clinician to anticipate which patients can benefit from interventional treatment options. This study aimed to examine the effect of radiological and clinical parameters on lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI)/local anesthetic injection outcomes in patients with LDH. This study included 286 patients with LDH (146 males and 140 females). All patients received a fluoroscopically guided TFESI (triamcinolone acetonide 40 mg, lidocaine 2%, and 2.5 ml of physiological saline). Patients were evaluated according to radicular pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at baseline and 3 months after the injections. Demographic, clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings were recorded to assess the predictive factors for TFESI outcomes. Pfirrmann Grades 1 and 2 were classified as low-grade nerve root compression and Grade 3 was classified as highgrade nerve root compression. Compared to baseline measurements there were significant improvements in radicular pain, ODI score, Laseque angle, and Schober test scores 3 months after injection. Improvements of at least 50% in radicular pain relief and the ODI functionality index were (n= 214) 82%, (n= 182) 70% respectively at 3 months. Correlation analyses revealed that a shorter duration of symptoms, lowgrade nerve root compression and foraminal/extraforaminal location on MRI findings were associated with a favorable response. Lowgrade nerve root compression was a predictor of a favorable response to TFESI.

Interventional Management of Low Back Pain: A Comprehensive Review of Epidural Steroid Injections and Related Techniques

Lower back pain (LBP) represents a significant global health burden, impacting individuals’ quality of life, productivity, and financial stability. While acute episodes may resolve spontaneously, chronic LBP persists beyond 12 weeks, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach to management. This comprehensive review examines the interventional management of LBP, with a focus on Epidural Steroid Injections (ESIs) and related techniques. ESIs, administered into the epidural space surrounding spinal nerves, aim to alleviate inflammation and nerve compressioninduced pain. However, they carry inherent risks, including infection, nerve damage, and allergic reactions. Comparative effectiveness studies highlight varying outcomes associated with different interventions, emphasizing the need for individualized treatment plans. Guidelines from professional organizations advocate for a patient-centered approach, prioritizing non-pharmacologic therapies as first-line treatments. Integrating evidence-based practices and considering patient preferences and clinical circumstances are crucial in optimizing outcomes. This review also discusses patient selection criteria, safety considerations, and long-term outcomes associated with interventional management techniques. By adhering to established guidelines and integrating a range of therapeutic options, clinicians can effectively address the multifaceted challenges posed by LBP, ultimately enhancing patient well-being, and improving treatment outcomes. A holistic approach, encompassing both conservative and interventional modalities, is essential in the comprehensive management of LBP

Transforaminal Epidural Block and Erector Spinae Plane Block to Manage Acute Zoster-Associated Pain: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.

Background and Objectives: Achieving adequate pain reduction in the acute phase of herpes zoster is essential for preventing postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). For this purpose, appropriate antiviral medications, oral analgesic medications, and various nerve block methods could be applied. Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a simple, novel ultrasound-guided block technique, and its use has increased because the procedure is convenient and relatively safe. Although several cases have reported the zoster-associated pain (ZAP) control effect of ESPB, the efficacy of ESPB has not been compared with that of other types of nerve blocks for managing ZAP. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of ESPB with that of other types of nerve blocks for managing ZAP. Study Design: Retrospective case-control study. Materials and Methods: Medical records of 53 patients with acute thoracic herpes zoster were reviewed. We divided the participants into two groups: patients who received transforaminal epidural injection (TFEI) (n = 32) and those who received ESPB (n = 21). The efficacy of the procedure was assessed by a numerical rating scale (NRS) and by recording patient medication doses before the procedure and at 1 week, 1 month, 2 months, and 3 months after the procedure. Results: The time required for pain intensity to decrease to NRS ≤ 2 was not significantly different between the groups. The rate of medication discontinuation also was not different between the groups. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the proportion of clinically significant PHN (NRS ≥ 3) at any time point. Limitations: The relatively small sample size from a single center and the retrospective nature of the study served as limitations. Conclusions: The clinical effects of ESPB and TFEI were similar in patients with acute thoracic herpes zoster. ESPB could be considered an interventional option for ZAP management.

Cervical Epidural Steroid Injections Improves Cervicalgia Greater than Radiculopathy: Efficacy and Safety of Epidural Steroids in a Single-Center Retrospective Study

Cervical Epidural Steroid Injections Improves Cervicalgia Greater than Radiculopathy: Efficacy and Safety of Epidural Steroids in a Single-Center Retrospective Study

Transforaminal epidural steroid injection for radiculopathy and the evolution to surgical treatment: a pragmatic prospective observational multicenter study.

Aim: The aim of this study is to analyze the real-world outcomes of transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs) in all patients with radiculopathy and their long-term outcomes. Methods: Patients with radiculopathy and failure of conservative treatment were included in a prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study. Results: In total, 117 patients were treated with one or two TFESIs. The mean duration of follow-up was 116 (±14) weeks. In total 19,6% (95% CI: 12.9-28.0%) patients were treated with surgery after insufficient symptom improvement. The evolution to surgery was not associated with etiology, symptom duration or previous spine surgery. Conclusion: Real-world data confirms that TFESIs is an effective treatment with satisfactory results in about 80% of patients for a period of 2 years.

Revolutionizing Back Pain Management: Is Epidural Platelet-Rich Plasma the Superior Choice Over Steroids?

Background and objective Low back discomfort is one of the main factors that restrict physical activity, and it is becoming more and more common. Surgery is the best option when all other conservative treatment methods have failed, but it is not a panacea. While local anesthetic-free and combined epidural steroid injections have been used for many years, their usefulness is limited to shorter periods. In the field of orthopedics, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has gained widespread recognition as an adjuvant component. PRPhas been applied to improve tissue repair, both soft and hard.This comparative study aimed to evaluate the potential of PRP as atherapy for low back pain (LBP). Methods We included 64 adult individuals with complaints ofLBP. They were classified into two groups: group A underwent a single injection in the afflicted lumbar intervertebral disc (IVD) level with 1.5 ml of methylprednisolone, 1.5 ml 2% lidocaine, and 0.5 ml of saline under rigorous aseptic precautions; in contrast, group B was administered a single injection of 3 milliliters of autologous PRP. Patients' scores on the visual analog scale (VAS), the Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ), and the Straight Leg Raising Test (SLRT) were assessed before and during therapy. Results The datagathered were subjected to statistical analysis. Statistically significant differences were found in the VAS scores between group A (methylprednisolone group) and group B (PRP group) post-one hour (6.0 ±0.74 vs. 6.92 ±0.57) and after three months (5.2 ±0.65 vs. 3.26 ±0.79). Conclusions Our study revealed gradual progressive improvement in the symptoms of patients in the PRP group as indicated by scores onSLRT, VAS, and MODQ. The results were comparable to those who received methylprednisolone injections. There was a statistically significant difference in VAS scores between the two groups, with the PRP group reporting a higher degree of pain reduction, showing that PRP is an effective alternative to epidural steroid infiltration in managing chronic LBP.

Risk of SARS-CoV-2 following joint and epidural corticosteroid injections: A retrospective study.

The immunosuppressive effects of corticosteroid (CS) injections have come under more scrutiny during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The aim of the study was to explore any relationship between joint/epidural CS injection and SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positivity. A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients 18 years or over who received at least one joint or epidural CS injection by physiatrists in a tertiary care center between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021. This cohort of patients was then compared to a control group who did not receive any CS injection during this time period. A total of 766 patients were identified in the CS injection group and 1546 patients in the control group. Overall, 12.27% of patients turned SARS-CoV-2 PCR positive in the CS injection group, which was similar to 11.90% in the control group (p = 0.797). But 3-month SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate showed a statistically significant higher rate among the CS injection group (3.30% in the CS injection group vs. 2.10% in the control group; p = 0.027). In multivariate regression analysis, after adjusting both groups for Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), there was statistically significant higher SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate in the CS injection group (p = 0.024). However, after adjusting both groups for age and total number of comorbidities, there was no difference between the groups in regard to SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate (p = 0.081). In the subgroup analysis of only COVID-19 vaccinated patients, there was an increased 3-month SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate among patients with severe comorbidities in the CS injection group (p = 0.036). The study was not conclusive on the effect of joint or epidural CS injection on SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate, although adjusted analysis suggests higher 3-month SARS-CoV-2 PCR positivity rate after CS injection in patients with severe comorbidities with significant disease burden when compared to controls.

The effectiveness of cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injections for the treatment of cervical radicular pain: A prospective cohort study reporting 12-month outcomes

Image 1.

Author's Reply to the Letter of Van Boxem, Van Gaag, Van Zundert, and Kallewaard, Entitled 'Response to Ter Meulen et al. Effect of Transforaminal Epidural Corticosteroid Injections in Acute Sciatica'.

Author's Reply to the Letter of Van Boxem, Van Gaag, Van Zundert, and Kallewaard, Entitled 'Response to Ter Meulen et al. Effect of Transforaminal Epidural Corticosteroid Injections in Acute Sciatica'.

Is Less Surgical Treatment Possible in the Treatment of Degenerative Spine Diseases? Four-Year Follow-up Results of Foraminal Epidural and Facet Joint Injection Treatments

In this article, I would like to share my opinions about the article named 'Is Less Surgical Treatment Possible in the Treatment of Degenerative Spine Diseases? Four-Year Follow-up Results of Foraminal Epidural and Facet Joint Injection Treatments' (1). First of all, I would like to thank the authors. I will especially try to contribute to this article from the perspective of a physical medicine and rehabilitation physician.

Comparing the clinical outcomes of lumbar transforaminal vs interlaminar epidural steroid injections in a registry cohort

BackgroundTransforaminal and interlaminar approaches are both common means of performing epidural steroid injection. Comparative effectiveness data on outcomes of these approaches is available but has yielded mixed results. ObjectiveCompare the effect of transforaminal vs interlaminar delivery of epidural steroids on patient-reported pain severity. DesignRetrospective Cohort Study. MethodsA retrospective review of prospectively collected interventional spine procedure registry data between December 2011 and July 2017 from a single academic medical center. Those who received epidural steroid injections and had prospectively collected index pain data (11-point Numeric Rating Scale [NRS]) recorded in the patient's chart prior to the procedure and at a 3 month follow up appointment were included. The outcome of interest was ≥50% reduction in pain as measured using a NRS for back and/or leg pain. To evaluate true predictive odds of success, multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to determine the odds of achieving improved pain. ResultsOf the 73 patients included in the study, 61 (84%) reported radicular pain, 49 (67%) reported back pain, and eleven (15%) had symptoms consistent with claudication, pain characteristics were not mutually exclusive. Fifty-one (70%) underwent transforaminal epidural steroid injection, while 22 (30%) underwent interlaminar injection. When claudication and radicular pain groups were combined into a single “leg pain” category (n = 66), 26/46 (57% 95% CI 41–71%) patients undergoing transforaminal and 6/20 (30% 95% CI 12–54%) patients undergoing interlaminar injections achieved ≥50% leg pain reduction on NRS (p = 0.048). Transforaminal epidural steroid injections were associated with higher odds of ≥50% reduction in leg pain in both the unadjusted model (OR 3.2, p = 00.034) and after adjustment for presence of radicular pain on presentation and the type of steroid used (OR 3.6, p = 0.042). ConclusionIn this clinical practice registry, patients treated with transforaminal epidural steroid injection were more likely to achieve ≥50% reduction in radicular or neurogenic/claudicatory leg pain compared to those treated with interlaminar epidural steroid injection.

Techniques in medicine: ipsilateral transforaminal epidural steroid injection in Bertolotti's syndrome.

Bertolotti's syndrome, also known as lumbosacral transitional vertebrae, is a relatively rare spinal condition characterized by an anatomical variation in the lower spine. Conservative approaches such as physical therapy, anti-inflammatory medications and lifestyle modifications may be recommended for mild cases. In more severe cases or when conservative measures fail to provide relief, injections such as may be considered to alleviate pain. This case is unique in that we document a challenging technique of ipsilateral transforaminal epidural steroid injection in a patient with Bertolotti's syndrome.

The Impact of Preoperative Spinal Injection Timing on Postoperative Complications of Lumbar Decompression Surgery.

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are commonly used for lower back pain management. The effect of these injections on lumbar decompression surgery outcomes is hitherto underexplored. The study objective was to determine the impact of ESIs on postoperative rates of medical and surgical complications and to define the appropriate interval before lumbar decompression surgery. This retrospective all-payer database analysis identified 587 651 adult patients undergoing one- to three-level laminectomies from January 2010 to October 2021. A 2:1 propensity score match accounting for comorbidities, levels of surgery, and demographics was performed to create two cohorts: (1) 43 674 patients who had received an ESI in the 90 days before laminectomy and (2) 87 348 patients who had not received an ESI. The primary outcome was the rates of medical and surgical complications between groups at 30 days postoperatively. Patients were divided into five cohorts based on injection time before surgery: 1 to 30 days, 31 to 45 days, 46 to 60 days, 61 to 75 days, and 76 to 90 days. Logistic regression was performed between groups to identify temporal associations of complication rates. Confidence intervals of 95% are provided when appropriate. P values < .01 were considered significant. Rates of medical complications within 30 days of surgery were significantly higher in those with ESI compared with control (4.83% vs 3.9%, P < .001). Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak rates were increased in the ESI group at 0.28% vs 0.1% (P < .001), but surgical site infection rates were not significantly different between groups (1.31% vs 1.42% P = .11). ESI performed within 30 days was associated with increased odds of CSF leak (OR: 5.32, 95% CI: 3.96-7.15). Preoperative ESI increases the risk of CSF leak and medical complications after lumbar decompression. Because these complications were significantly associated with ESIs given 1 to 30 days before surgery, avoiding ESIs at least 30 days before surgery may be advisable.