Low-volume versus high-volume caudal epidural steroid injection for lumbar radiculopathy: A randomised superiority trial

The optimal injectate volume for caudal epidural steroid injections (CESI) in lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD) remains debated. This randomised superiority trial compared low-volume (5 mL) versus high-volume (12 mL) CESI for LDDD-related radiculopathy. A single-centre, open-label trial with blinded outcome assessment was conducted. Eligible adults (n=154, aged 25–50) with MRI-confirmed L4–S1 radiculopathy were randomised 1:1 to receive 80 mg triamcinolone in either 5 mL or 12 mL saline. Primary outcome was pain reduction (Visual Analogue Scale, VAS); secondary outcomes included functional improvement (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI) and complication rates. Assessments occurred at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. The low-volume group demonstrated superior pain relief at all follow-ups (mean VAS at 6 months: 1.49 vs. 2.07, *p*<0.001) and greater functional improvement (mean ODI: 15.8 vs. 20.9, *p*<0.001). Adverse events were significantly lower with low-volume CESI (5.2% vs. 15.6% post-injection discomfort, *p*=0.03). Effect sizes were large (VAS η 2 =0.47; ODI η 2 =0.43), confirming clinical superiority. Low-volume CESI (5 mL) provides sustained, superior analgesia and functional recovery with fewer complications compared to high-volume (12 mL) injections. These findings support adopting low-volume protocols as a safer, more effective standard for LDDD-related radiculopathy. CTRI/REF/2023/01/062213 • Low-volume (5 mL) CESI provides superior and sustained pain relief compared to high-volume (12 mL) injection, with a significantly lower mean VAS score at 6 months (1.49 vs. 2.07, p<0.001). • Functional improvement is significantly greater with the low-volume protocol , demonstrated by a lower mean Oswestry Disability Index at 6 months (15.8 vs. 20.9, p<0.001) and a greater increase in claudication distance. • The safety profile of low-volume CESI is markedly better , with a significantly lower incidence of post-injection discomfort (5.2% vs. 15.6%, p=0.03) and fewer vasovagal reactions. • Large effect sizes (VAS η 2 =0.47; ODI η 2 =0.43) confirm that injectate volume is a major determinant of clinical outcomes, not just a minor factor. • This evidence challenges the conventional practice of using high volumes , supporting a shift towards low-volume CESI as a safer, more effective, and resource-efficient standard of care for single-level radiculopathy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Orthopaedic Reports
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jorep.2025.100871
Primary Topic
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Low-volume versus high-volume caudal epidural steroid injection for lumbar radiculopathy: A randomised superiority trial

Raju Karuppal, Shajit Sadanand, Jacob Mathew, Karthik Raj et al.
Journal of Orthopaedic Reports
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
article

Low-volume versus high-volume caudal epidural steroid injection for lumbar radiculopathy: A randomised superiority trial

Raju Karuppal, Shajit Sadanand, Jacob Mathew, Karthik Raj, K.M. Pradeep Kumar
article en

Abstract

The optimal injectate volume for caudal epidural steroid injections (CESI) in lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD) remains debated. This randomised superiority trial compared low-volume (5 mL) versus high-volume (12 mL) CESI for LDDD-related radiculopathy. A single-centre, open-label trial with blinded outcome assessment was conducted. Eligible adults (n=154, aged 25–50) with MRI-confirmed L4–S1 radiculopathy were randomised 1:1 to receive 80 mg triamcinolone in either 5 mL or 12 mL saline. Primary outcome was pain reduction (Visual Analogue Scale, VAS); secondary outcomes included functional improvement (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI) and complication rates. Assessments occurred at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. The low-volume group demonstrated superior pain relief at all follow-ups (mean VAS at 6 months: 1.49 vs. 2.07, *p*<0.001) and greater functional improvement (mean ODI: 15.8 vs. 20.9, *p*<0.001). Adverse events were significantly lower with low-volume CESI (5.2% vs. 15.6% post-injection discomfort, *p*=0.03). Effect sizes were large (VAS η 2 =0.47; ODI η 2 =0.43), confirming clinical superiority. Low-volume CESI (5 mL) provides sustained, superior analgesia and functional recovery with fewer complications compared to high-volume (12 mL) injections. These findings support adopting low-volume protocols as a safer, more effective standard for LDDD-related radiculopathy. CTRI/REF/2023/01/062213 • Low-volume (5 mL) CESI provides superior and sustained pain relief compared to high-volume (12 mL) injection, with a significantly lower mean VAS score at 6 months (1.49 vs. 2.07, p<0.001). • Functional improvement is significantly greater with the low-volume protocol , demonstrated by a lower mean Oswestry Disability Index at 6 months (15.8 vs. 20.9, p<0.001) and a greater increase in claudication distance. • The safety profile of low-volume CESI is markedly better , with a significantly lower incidence of post-injection discomfort (5.2% vs. 15.6%, p=0.03) and fewer vasovagal reactions. • Large effect sizes (VAS η 2 =0.47; ODI η 2 =0.43) confirm that injectate volume is a major determinant of clinical outcomes, not just a minor factor. • This evidence challenges the conventional practice of using high volumes , supporting a shift towards low-volume CESI as a safer, more effective, and resource-efficient standard of care for single-level radiculopathy.

Journal of Orthopaedic Reports
Malabar Institute of Medical Sciences (IN), Government Medical College (IN), Malabar Medical College Hospital and Research Centre (IN), Armed Forces Medical College (IN)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.