Assessment of efficacy of percutaneous epidural neuroplasty for lumbar stenosis and failed back surgery syndrome: effective and safe?

OBJECTIVE: Chronic, refractory low back and lower extremity pain is a common problem. There are many causes for persistent low back pain, including spinal stenosis (SS), disc herniation, facet disease, sacroiliac disease, adjacent segment disease, ligamentous disease, and failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). FBSS and SS are common and often result in chronic, persistent pain and disability. After the failure of conservative treatments, percutaneous epidural neuroplasty (PEN) is often used in managing low back pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 117 patients who received PEN for FBSS and SS between January 2018 and January 2019. Clinical outcomes were assessed with the visual analogue scale (VAS) score and the Oswestry disability index (ODI). The follow-up period was 6 months. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of percutaneous epidural neuroplasty in managing chronic refractory low back and lower extremity pain secondary to FBSS and SS and to compare the differences between outcomes of SS and FBSS groups, before and after PEN. RESULTS: Mean VAS scores were 6.15 ± 1.25 preoperatively, 2.97 ± 1.5 after 1 month, 3.18 ± 1.65 after 3 months, and 3.83 ± 1.64 after 6 months of follow-up. Mean ODI scores were 49.91 ± 13.87 preoperatively, 30.19 ± 12.01 after 1 month, 31.61 ± 12.46 after 3 months, 34.58 ± 12.52 after 6 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous epidural neuroplasty was shown to be a safe and effective treatment in managing refractory back/leg pain following FBSS and SS.

Effect of Previous Caudal Block to Predict Successful Outcome after Adhesiolysis using a Steerable Catheter in Lumbar Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Retrospective Study.

Adhesiolysis is minimally invasive and commonly used for pain associated with adhesion after lumbar spine surgery. Caudal epidural block may be used for radiating pain due to failed back surgery syndrome. We evaluated the predictive value of response to caudal block performed prior to adhesiolysis in failed back surgery syndrome. Between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2020, 150 patients with failed back surgery syndrome were treated with adhesiolysis using a steerable catheter at the pain clinic of a tertiary hospital after failed conservative treatment (including caudal block). Patient demographics, pain duration, and lumbar magnetic resonance imaging findings were examined. Response to previous caudal block was determined as a binary result (yes or no). Patients were followed up 3 months after adhesiolysis. Successful outcome was defined as a ≥2-point reduction in the numeric rating scale scores for radicular pain 3 months after adhesiolysis, evident in 81/150 (46%) patients. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that caudal block response was an independent predictor of successful adhesiolysis (odds ratio = 4.403; p = 0.015). Response to prior caudal block is a positive predictor of successful adhesiolysis.

Efficacy of Minimally Invasive Trans-Sacral Canal Plasty between Patients with and without Failed Back Surgery Syndrome.

Background and Objectives: Clinicians are required to manage a growing number of elderly patients with several medical comorbidities, and invasive surgical treatments are sometimes not advisable for these patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of minimally invasive intraspinal canal treatment, trans-sacral canal plasty (TSCP), for patients with and without failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). Materials and Methods: A multicenter analysis was conducted. TSCP was performed in patients with chronic low back pain and leg pain due to lumbar spinal disorders. An adhesiolysis by TSCP was carried out, then a mixture of steroid and local anesthesia was injected. Visual Analog Scales (VAS) for low back pain and leg pain, and complications were evaluated. Results: A total of 271 patients with a minimum 6-month follow-up were enrolled. There were 80 patients who had a history of previous lumbar spinal surgery (F group), and 191 patients without previous lumbar spinal surgery (N group). There were no significant differences in sex and age between the two groups. VAS scores for low back pain (N group/F group) preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and 1 month, 3 months and 6 months postoperatively, were 51/52 mm, 24/26 mm, 33/34 mm, 30/36 mm, and 30/36 mm, respectively. VAS scores for leg pain were 69/67 mm, 28/27 mm, 39/41 mm, 36/43 mm, and 32/40 mm, respectively. Both VAS scores for low back pain and leg pain were significantly decreased from baseline to final follow-up in both groups (p < 0.01). However, VAS scores for leg pain at 3 months and 6 months postoperatively were significantly higher in F group (p < 0.05). There were three catheter breakages (2/3 in F group), and one dural tear in F group. Conclusions: TSCP significantly reduced both VAS scores for low back and leg pain in patients with and without FBSS. However, co-existence of intractable epidural adhesion might be associated with less improvement in FBSS.

How I do it? Full endoscopic lumbar rhizotomy for chronic facet joint pain due to failed back surgery syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is a general term for persistent postoperative back pain with or without accompanying radicular pain. FBSS may present as chronic facet joint pain. METHODS: We introduced full endoscopic lumbar rhizotomy for patients suffering from facet joint pain due to FBSS. Facet joint block was introduced into the facet joint to determine whether pain improved after the injection. CONCLUSION: With full endoscopic lumbar rhizotomy, the surgeon can identify the regions involved more clearly and directly. Although it is an invasive procedure, it provides a more effective and safe treatment for patients with FBSS-related facet joint pain.

Placement of Surgical Spinal Cord Stimulation Leads Using Spinal Process Splitting Laminotomy: Technical Note.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord stimulation has become an established method within the therapy of chronic pain allowing for significant pain relief. Surgical leads usually must be implanted via a surgical procedure involving unilateral or bilateral muscle detachment and partial laminectomy. METHODS: We present the application of a novel minimal invasive microsurgical approach for lead placement, which combines the beneficial advantages of anatomic midline lead placement while preserving the midline structures, avoiding muscle detachments, and thus ensuring spinal stability: spinal process splitting laminotomy. CONCLUSIONS: The spinal process splitting laminotomy technique can be successfully applied to introduce the surgical leads for spinal cord stimulation.

Transforaminal Endoscopic Surgical Treatment for Postlaminectomy Lumbar Radiculopathy: Case Series.

OBJECTIVE: To describe outcomes of awake transforaminal endoscopic surgical treatment for patients presenting with lumbar radiculopathy after laminectomy. METHODS: Awake endoscopic decompression surgery was performed on 538 patients over a 5-year period (2014-2019). Transforaminal endoscopic discectomy and foraminotomy was performed in 128 patients who had previously undergone laminectomy surgery. RESULTS: At 2-year follow-up, preoperative visual analog scale score for leg pain improved from 7.0 ± 1.4 to 2.0 ± 1.3 and Oswestry Disability Index score improved from 41.4% ± 11.9% to 12.4% ± 11.9% in 118 patients. During the 2-year follow-up period, 10 patients (7.8%) required repeat surgery at the treated level. CONCLUSIONS: The results of a minimally invasive awake endoscopic procedure are presented for the treatment of lumbar radiculopathy after lumbar laminectomy in a series of patients.

Effects of Lumbar Fusion Instrumentation Removal in Patients Who Experienced Continued Pain After Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Degenerative Disease.

AIM: To investigate the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores after the removal of the instrumentation system in patients who underwent lumbar instrumentation for lumbar degenerative disease (LDD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study included 30 patients (19 female, 11 male) who had undergone posterior lumbar instrumentation for LDD in whom postoperative continuous or recurrent pain led to the removal of the implant system in our clinic between December 2013 and December 2019. The patients had continuous or recurrent low back pain that did not respond to medical treatment, physical therapy, or any type of lumbar block. Nine patients had continuous low back pain in the surgical area, while twenty-one had recurrent low back pain. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in the number of admissions to the hospital (p < 0.001), and the daily number of analgesics used (p < 0.001) in six months after surgery compared to six months before surgery. There were significant decreases in VAS scores, both at the one-month (p < 0.001) and six-month (p < 0.001) postoperative assessments compared to preoperative measurements. ODI scores were significantly lower than the preoperative scores at both one-month (p < 0.001) and six-month (p < 0.001) postoperative score. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that the instrumentation system removal after fusion for patients with LDD may be beneficial since it alleviates pain and analgesic usage.

First Report of Extraspinal Lead Migration Along a Thoracic Spinal Nerve After Spinal Cord Stimulation.

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord stimulation for failed back surgery syndrome and chronic pain is a well-established treatment regimen today. Lead migration is the most common complication; mainly epidural caudal more than cranial electrode migration from the primary position is described repeatedly throughout the literature. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 60-year-old male patient with failed back surgery syndrome was eligible for spinal cord stimulation. Surgery had been performed 4 weeks before readmission with proper lead positioning of both electrodes in the midline of the epidural space. The electrode fixation mechanism at L2/3 had to be revised and was replaced with multiple ligature fixations due to the patient's slim build. He presented to our outpatient clinic with thoracic right-sided pain matching T5 with signs of overstimulation of the paravertebral muscles. X-ray imaging revealed cranial migration of 1 lead to T4 and a right-sided extraspinal migration of the other lead along a spinal nerve in T5 exiting the neuroforamen and following beneath the corresponding rib dorsally. Revision surgery was performed using a thoracic paddle electrode. CONCLUSIONS: Lead migration remains a challenge in spinal cord stimulation regardless of the fixation method. Rare unusual migration patterns in addition to simple caudal or cranial migration might pose a challenge for revision surgery and thus might reduce overall treatment efficacy.

Laser-assisted endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy for failed back surgery syndrome in elderly patients.

Elderly patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) or post-laminectomy foraminal stenosis have a higher risk of perioperative morbidity with extensive revision surgery. Thus, there is a need for safer and less invasive surgical options, such as laser-assisted endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (ELF). A pin-point laser beam can allow precise tissue ablation and dissection in fibrotic adhesion tissues while preventing normal tissue injury. The present study aimed to describe the surgical technique of laser-assisted ELF and to evaluate the clinical outcomes of elderly patients with FBSS. Two-year follow-up data were collected from 26 consecutive patients aged 65 years or older who were treated with laser-assisted ELF for FBSS. Full-endoscopic foraminal decompression was performed using a side-firing laser and mechanical instruments. The average age of the patients was 70.2 years (range, 65-83 years). The mean visual analog pain score for leg pain improved from 8.58 at baseline to 3.35 at 6 weeks, 2.19 at 1 year, and 2.35 at 2 years after ELF (P < 0.001). The mean Oswestry disability index improved from 65.93 at baseline to 31.41 at 6 weeks, 21.77 at 1 year, and 20.64 at 2 years after ELF (P < 0.001). Based on the modified Macnab criteria, excellent or good results were obtained in 84.6% patients and symptomatic improvements were obtained in 92.3%. Extensive revision surgery in elderly patients might cause significant surgical morbidities. Laser-assisted ELF under local anesthesia could be a safe and effective surgical alternative for such patients at risk.

Incidence, diagnosis and management of sacroiliitis after spinal surgery: a systematic review of the literature.

The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) is a possible source of persistent or new onset pain after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion. The aim of this paper is to systematically review and analyze the available literature related to the incidence, diagnosis and management of sacroiliitis after spinal arthrodesis. The authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of all articles identified concerning sacroiliac joint pain after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion, to assess their suitability to the research focus. The average incidence of sacroiliitis after lumbar or lumbosacral arthrodesis was found to be 37 ± 28.48 (range 6-75), increasing directly to the number of fused segments involved, especially when the sacrum is included. The most accurate evaluation is the image-guided injection of anesthetic solutions in the joint. Surgery treatment may be considered when conservative therapy fails, with open surgery or with minimally invasive SIJ fusion. Although the risk of developing SIJ degeneration is unclear, the results indicate that pain and degeneration of SIJ develop more often in patients undergoing lumbosacral fusion regardless of the number of melting segments. The treatment of sacroiliitis appears to be independent of his etiology, with or without previous instrumentation on several levels.

Iatrogenic Ureteral Injury as a Complication of Posterior or Lateral Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

OBJECTIVE: Iatrogenic ureteral injury associated with lumbar spine surgery is an uncommon but devastating complication with associated medicolegal implications. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the English language literature published between 1954 and 2019, accessed through 4 popular databases. We found 44 articles (28 case reports, 9 case-based reviews, 4 case series, 1 original article, 1 case illustration, and 1 pictorial) containing 46 cases of ureteral injuries after posterior or lateral lumbar spine surgery. RESULTS: Except for 5 cases with insufficient data, 24 of the remaining 41 patients were female and 17 were male, with ages ranging from 16 years to 83 years. Excluding 4 cases without enough information, initial diagnoses of lumbar disc herniation (n = 33) or lumbar spinal stenosis (n = 4), spondylolisthesis (n = 3), degenerative disc disease (n = 1), and failed back surgery syndrome (n = 1) were reported from 18 countries; 54% of patients were from the United States, Japan, or Turkey. The interval from spinal surgery to restorative surgery ranged from <24 hours to 1 month to 1 year; in 48% of patients, it was >1 week, and 90% of patients recovered completely. Initial surgery was combined with vascular injury in 15% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Ureteral injury associated with lumbar spine surgery is overreported in developed or developing countries. It should be considered in the differential diagnosis of any patient who presents with symptoms of acute abdomen after lumbar spine surgery, and patients who underwent restorative surgery had a good prognosis.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Foraminotomy for Foraminal Stenosis with Postlaminectomy Syndrome in Geriatric Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Postlaminectomy syndrome (PLS) or failed back surgery syndrome is a condition characterized by persistent pain following a back surgery. Degenerative processes may result in foraminal stenosis development over time, even after a successful surgery. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (PELF) offers a minimally invasive means of treating foraminal stenosis after a back surgery. The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of PELF for foraminal stenosis with PLS in geriatric patients. METHODS: Two-year follow-up data were collected from 21 consecutive patients aged 65 years or older (mean age, 72.4 years) who underwent PELF for foraminal stenosis with PLS. Transforaminal endoscopic foraminal decompression was performed under local anesthesia. Outcomes were assessed using visual analog scale pain score, Oswestry Disability Index, and modified Macnab criteria. RESULTS: Mean visual analog scale for leg pain improved from 8.48 at baseline to 3.33 at 6 weeks, 2.10 at 1 year, and 2.19 at 2 years after PELF (P < 0.01). Mean Oswestry Disability Index improved from 67.29 at baseline to 30.69 at 6 weeks, 22.50 at 1 year, and 20.81 at 2 years after PELF (P < 0.01). Based on the modified Macnab criteria, excellent or good results were obtained in 81.0% of patients and symptomatic improvements were obtained in 95.2% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The transforaminal endoscopic approach can provide a better access angle to achieve a sophisticated foraminal decompression with less facet and dural injury. Therefore, PELF under local anesthesia can be useful for PLS or postoperative foraminal stenosis in elderly patients.

Transforaminal Epiduroscopy in Patients with Failed Back Surgery Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Epiduroscopy is a useful diagnostic and therapeutic tool for managing failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). The conventional approach is via either the sacral hiatus or the interlaminar. Major causes of FBSS include epidural fibrosis, disc herniation, and stenosis. When these problems are located at the intervertebral foramen level, it can be difficult to reach the lateral recess and the foramen with the epiduroscope. Transforaminal epiduroscopy could be a useful alternative approach in patients with FBSS located at the foraminal level. OBJECTIVE: We present a new procedure for lumbar epiduroscopy via a transforaminal approach and its application in patients with FBSS. The technique is described and long-term results are reported. STUDY DESIGN: This study used a single-arm prospective observational design. SETTING: The research took place at the University Hospital in Spain. METHODS: Patients with FBSS suffering severe chronic radicular pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS-11] > 7) who had not responded to other treatments were included. Selective root stimulation during a pulsed radiofrequency procedure confirmed the origin of pain by means of an exact reproduction of typical pain. Transforaminal epiduroscopy was performed at the affected level. The severity of fibrosis observed was recorded. The NRS-11 score was reevaluated at 1, 6, and 12 months after the procedure. Any complications related to the treatment were recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were included. The mean number of back surgeries was 1.66 (range, 1-5). The basal NRS-11 score was 7.83 (0.14); at 1 month, 3.66 (0.38) (P < 0.001); at 6 months, 4.46 (0.48) (P < 0.01); and at 1 year after treatment, 4.17 (0.51) (P < 0.01). Most patients (54%; 95% CI, 34%-74%) obtained > 50% pain reduction on the NRS-11, maintained during a 1-year follow-up period. No major complications were registered. LIMITATIONS: The research was limited by the lack of a control group. CONCLUSIONS: We have described a new procedure for epiduroscopy via the transforaminal approach. It is a useful and safe approach to managing FBSS at the foraminal level and shows better long-term results than other endoscopic procedures. KEY WORDS: Epidural, epiduroscopy, chronic pain, spinal cord, back surgery.

Evaluation of the efficacy of epiduroscopic adhesiolysis in failed back surgery syndrome

Background/aim: We aimed to compare the results of the treatment of the patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) by mechanical lysis and steroid hylase injection via epiduroscopy due to their stabilization status and to detect the effect of pathological diagnostic markers on prognosis and ongoing treatment protocol. Materials and methods: Eighty-two patients with FBSS symptoms were included. Two groups were composed as group I (stabilized) and group II (nonstabilized). All patients were evaluated using the oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores before and after treatment at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months and using the patient satisfaction scale at 12 months following treatment. Epidural scar tissue visual and mechanical signs were also recorded. Results: Mean VAS scores were 7.8 and 3.28 points in group I (P < 0.001) and 7.51 and 2.74 points in group II (P < 0.001) at the beginning and at 12 months, respectively. Mean ODI scores were 34.05 and 22.16 points in group I (P < 0.001) and 30.74 and 19.46 points in group II (P < 0.001) at the beginning and at 12 months. VAS and ODI scores decreased significantly in both groups, but were more significant in the nonstabilized group (P < 0.001). Moderate or severe fibrous tissue was observed in 86.58% of the patients and patient satisfaction scores were very good or good in 78.06% of the patients. During the procedure, a dura rupture developed in four patients in the stabilization group and in two patients in the nonstabilization group; however, none of these patients developed a spinal headache and no significant permanent complication arose. Conclusion: We suggest that epidural adhesiolysis, hyaluronidase, and steroid injection in patients with FBSS chronic low back pain and/or radicular symptoms may give reliable information about the quality of life, accuracy of diagnosis, and the possible course of the present findings and may be more effective in nonstabilized patients

The Role of Additional Spine Surgery in the Management of Failed Back Surgery Syndrome, Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, and Intractable Pain in the Setting of Previous or Concurrent Spinal Cord Stimulation: Indications and Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is both relatively safe and reversible. Although SCS is generally regarded as a last resort, some of these patients will undergo additional spinal surgery after the device has been implanted or after its removal. We present a descriptive study of subsequent spinal surgery after SCS implantation. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who had undergone percutaneous or paddle SCS lead placement at our institution from 2009 to 2016 was performed. Patients who had only undergone trials or who had not undergone spine surgery after SCS implantation were excluded. RESULTS: We identified 22 patients (5.7%) who had undergone spine surgery during the course of SCS treatment or after SCS removal, or both, of a total 383 patients who had undergone paddle and/or percutaneous SCS implantation. The most common additional spine interventions included lumbosacral decompression and fusion (n = 15; 42%). Of 36 surgeries, the most frequent indications for subsequent intervention were stenosis or restenosis (n = 16; 73%) and spine deformity (n = 6; 27%). The median EuroQol-5D index was 0.397 preoperatively and 0.678 postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first to describe spine surgery in the setting of SCS implantation. Our results have indicated that spine surgery subsequent to, or concurrent with, SCS implantation appears to occur in few patients. Our study results suggest a modest improvement in quality of life outcomes. Therefore, clinicians should remember that patients might require further spine surgery despite the use of SCS implantation and, thus, might require reevaluation by the spine team.

Two Surgeries Do Not Always Make a Right: Spinal Cord Stimulation for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome.

Failed back surgery syndrome (FBBS) is characterized by chronic pain that persists following spine surgery. In this review, we discuss the use of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for FBBS treatment and how the clinical use of SCS may be influenced by private manufacturers. While SCS therapy can be promising for the appropriate patient, there remain knowledge gaps in understanding the full potential of SCS technology for delivering optimal therapeutic benefit. We caution that the use of SCS without a complete understanding of the technology may create exploitative situations that private manufacturers can capitalize on while subjecting patients to potentially unnecessary health and financial burdens.