Table 1.

Analysis of publications on spinal mesotherapy

Authors	References	Type of study	Number of patients (n)	Part of the spine	Preparations used	Number of treatments	Follow-up	Effectiveness	Safety
Koszela et al. (2025)	[17]	Retrospective	130	Thoracic	Collagen type I (n = 65) vs. lignocaine 1% (n = 65)	5	3-months	Effective	No side effects
Mouhli et al. (2025)	[11]	Randomized	60	Lumbar	Lidocaine 1% + magnesium + piroxicam + thiocholchicoside (n = 32) vs. TENS (n = 38)	3	1-month	Effective	–
Ranieri et al. (2024)	[10]	Prospective	10	Cervical	Diclofenac + lidocaine + saline	8	1-month	Effective	No side effects
Murat (2024)	[21]	Retrospective	42	Cervical	Lidocaine 2% + tenoxicam the point-by-point technique (n = 21) vs. lidocaine 2% + tenoxicam the napaj technique (n = 22)	4	3-months	Effective	No side effects
Koszela et al. (2024)	[12]	Retrospective	130	Lumbar	Collagen type I (n = 65) vs. lignocaine 1% (n = 65)	5	3-months	Effective	No side effects
Brauneis et al. (2023)	[22]	Randomized	141	Cervical, thoracic, lumbar	Ketorolac (n = 76) vs. ketorolac + thiocochicoside (n = 65) vs. saline solution (n = 61)	9	-	Effective	No side effects
Scaturro et al. (2023)	[20]	Observational	78	Cervical	Diclofenac + thiococolchicoside + mepivacaina (n = 39) vs. sodium chloride solution (n = 39)	7	-	Effective	No side effects
Ronconi et al. (2023)	[18]	Retrospective	101	Lumbar	Diclofenac vs. aspirin-lysine acetylsalicylate	5	3-months	Effective	No side effects
Ferrara et al. (2017)	[23]	Retrospective	220	Cervical, thoracic, lumbar	Lidocaine 2% + lysine acetylsalicylate + saline solution (n = 110) vs. saline solution (n = 110)	5	3-months	Effective	–
Paolucci et al. (2016)	[19]	Retrospective	42	Cervical	Lidocaine 2% (n = 22) vs. dry mesotherapy (n = 20)	3	3-months	Effective	No side effects