Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety between leucocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma (LR-PRP) and corticosteroid in fluoroscopically guided caudal epidural injection for patients with complex chronic lumbar spinal pain. Study Design: A prospective randomized controlled doubleblinded study. Methods: Fifty eligible patients with complex chronic degenerative spinal pain were randomly assigned with a 1:1 allocation ratio to receive caudal epidural injection of corticosteroid (triamcinolone acetonide, 60 mg) or LR-PRP (isolated from 60 mL autologous blood) under fluoroscopic guidance. Levels of low back pain, quality of life, and complications (or adverse effects) were evaluated at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment. Pain levels and quality of life were assessed using the VAS and Short Form 36-Item Health Survey (SF-36), respectively. Results: No significant difference was shown at baseline between the 2 groups. Compared with the pretreatment values, there were significant reductions in the VAS score in both groups. A significantly lower VAS score at 1-month follow-up was detected in patients who received corticosteroid injection. However, the scores were lower in the LR-PRP group at 3-and 6-month follow-up. SF-36 responses at 6 months showed significant improvement in all domains in the LR-PRP group. There were no complications or adverse effects related to treatment at 6-month follow-up in either group. Conclusions: Both autologous LR-PRP and corticosteroid for caudal epidural injections under fluoroscopic guidance are equally safe and therapeutically effective in patients with complex chronic lumbar spinal pain. However, LR-PRP is superior to corticosteroid for a longer pain-relieving effect and improvement in quality of life. &
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.