3D virtual reconstruction and quantitative assessment of the human intervertebral disc's annulus fibrosus: a DTI tractography study.

The intervertebral disc's (IVD) annulus fibrosus (AF) retains the hydrostatic pressure of the nucleus pulposus (NP), controls the range of motion, and maintains the integrity of the motion segment. The microstructure of the AF is not yet fully understood and quantitative characterization is lacking, leaving a caveat in modern medicine's ability to prevent and treat disc failure (e.g., disc herniation). In this study, we show a reconstruction of the 3D microstructure of the fibers that constitute the AF via MRI diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) followed by fiber tracking. A quantitative analysis presents an anisotropic structure with significant architectural differences among the annuli along the width of the fibrous belt. These findings indicate that the outer annuli's construction reinforces the IVD while providing a sufficient degree of motion. Our findings also suggest an increased role of the outer annuli in IVD nourishment.

Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy Versus Open Microdiscectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To give a systematic overview of effectiveness of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) compared with open microdiscectomy (OM) in the treatment of lumbar disk herniation (LDH). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The current standard procedure for the treatment of sciatica caused by LDH, is OM. PTED is an alternative surgical technique which is thought to be less invasive. It is unclear if PTED has comparable outcomes compared with OM. METHODS: Multiple online databases were systematically searched up to April 2020 for randomized controlled trials and prospective studies comparing PTED with OM for LDH. Primary outcomes were leg pain and functional status. Pooled effect estimates were calculated for the primary outcomes only and presented as standard mean differences (SMD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) at short (1-day postoperative), intermediate (3-6 months), and long-term (12 months). RESULTS: We identified 2276 citations, of which eventually 14 studies were included. There was substantial heterogeneity in effects on leg pain at short term. There is moderate quality evidence suggesting no difference in leg pain at intermediate (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.10-0.21) and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.11, 95% CI -0.30-0.53). Only one study measured functional status at short-term and reported no differences. There is moderate quality evidence suggesting no difference in functional status at intermediate (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.24-0.07) and long-term (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.45-0.24). CONCLUSION: There is moderate quality evidence suggesting no difference in leg pain or functional status at intermediate and long-term follow-up between PTED and OM in the treatment of LDH. High quality, robust studies reporting on clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness on the long term are lacking.Level of Evidence: 2.

Greater Socioeconomic Disadvantage Is Associated with Worse Symptom Severity at Initial Presentation in Patients Seeking Care for Lumbar Disc Herniation.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of patient socioeconomic disadvantage, insurance type, and other characteristics on presenting symptom severity in patients with isolated lumbar disc herniation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Little is known of the impact of socioeconomic disadvantage and other patient characteristics on the level of self-reported symptom severity when patients first seek care for lumbar disc herniation. METHODS: Between April 2015 and December 2018, 734 patients newly presenting for isolated lumbar disc herniation who completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression Computer Adaptive Tests (CATs) were identified. Socioeconomic disadvantage was determined using the Area Deprivation Index, a validated measure of socioeconomic disadvantage at the census block group level (0-100, 100 = highest socioeconomic disadvantage). Bivariate analyses were used. Multivariable linear regression was used to determine if there was an association between socioeconomic disadvantage, insurance type, and other patient factors and presenting patient-reported health status. RESULTS: Significant differences in age, insurance type, self-reported race, marital status, and county of residence were appreciated when comparing patient characteristics by socioeconomic disadvantage levels (all comparisons, P < 0.01). In addition, significant differences in age, insurance type, marital status, and county of residence were appreciated when comparing patient characteristics by self-reported race (all comparisons, P < 0.01). Being in the most socioeconomically disadvantaged cohort was associated with worse presenting Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores (Physical Function: ß = -3.27 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.89 to -1.45), P < 0.001; Pain Interference: ß = 3.20 (95% CI: 1.58-4.83), P < 0.001; Depression: ß = 3.31 (95% CI: 1.08-5.55), P = 0.004. CONCLUSION: The most socioeconomically disadvantaged patients with symptomatic lumbar disc herniations present with worse functional limitations, pain levels, and depressive symptoms as compared to patients from the least socioeconomically disadvantaged cohort when accounting for other key patient factors.Level of Evidence: 3.

Nerve root block versus surgery (NERVES) for the treatment of radicular pain secondary to a prolapsed intervertebral disc herniation: study protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Sciatica is a common condition reported to affect over 3% of the UK population at any time and is often caused by a prolapsed intervertebral disc (PID). Although the duration and severity of symptoms can vary, pain persisting beyond 6 weeks is unlikely to recover spontaneously and may require investigation and treatment. Currently, there is no specific care pathway for sciatica in the National Health Service (NHS), and no direct comparison exists between surgical microdiscectomy and transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI). The NERVES (NErve Root block VErsus Surgery) trial aims to address this by comparing clinical and cost-effectiveness of surgical microdiscectomy and TFESI to treat sciatica secondary to a PID. METHODS/DESIGN: A total of 163 patients were recruited from NHS out-patient clinics across the UK and randomised to either microdiscectomy or TFESI. Adult patients (aged 16-65 years) with sciatic pain endured for between 6 weeks and 12 months are eligible if their symptoms have not been improved by at least one form of conservative (non-operative) treatment and they are willing to provide consent. Patients will be excluded if they present with neurological deficit or have had previous surgery at the same level. The primary outcome is patient-reported disability measured using the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) score at 18 weeks post randomisation and secondary outcomes include disability and pain scales using numerical pain ratings, modified Roland-Morris and Core Outcome Measures Index at 12-weekly intervals, and patient satisfaction at 54 weeks. Cost-effectiveness and quality of life (QOL) will be assessed using the EQ-5D-5 L and self-report cost data at 12-weekly intervals and Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data. Adverse event data will be collected. Analysis will follow the principle of intention-to-treat. DISCUSSION: NERVES is the first trial to evaluate the comparative clinical and cost-effectiveness of microdiscectomy to local anaesthetic and steroid administered via TFESI. The results of this research may facilitate the development of an evidence-based treatment strategy for patients with sciatica. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ID: ISRCTN04820368 . Registered on 5 June 2014. EudraCT EudraCT2014-002751-25. Registered on 8 October 2014.

[Expert Assessment of Traumatic Disc Herniations]. / Gutachtliche Beurteilung des traumatischen Bandscheibenvorfalls.

In numerous legal areas, expert assessments are needed to clarify the causality of herniated discs: Was the damage caused by an accident? The literature mentions specific requirements regarding the trauma mechanism as well as temporal criteria, which prescribe the causality test. These are essentially high-energy traumas with immediate functional impairments. Accident-related MRI examinations are of paramount importance in the expert assessment process to confirm the primary body harm. In examining the causality constituting liability, competitive causes must be assessed. Since the legal requirements of the causality test differ in civil and social law, legal norms need to be taken into account. We present a test scheme that supports the assessment process through entry, implementation and decision-making levels.

Structural health monitoring (vibration) as a tool for identifying structural alterations of the lumbar spine: a twin control study.

Structural health monitoring (SHM) is an engineering technique used to identify mechanical abnormalities not readily apparent through other means. Recently, SHM has been adapted for use in biological systems, but its invasive nature limits its clinical application. As such, the purpose of this project was to determine if a non-invasive form of SHM could identify structural alterations in the spines of living human subjects. Lumbar spines of 10 twin pairs were visualized by magnetic resonance imaging then assessed by a blinded radiologist to determine whether twin pairs were structurally concordant or discordant. Vibration was then applied to each subject's spine and the resulting response recorded from sensors overlying lumbar spinous processes. The peak frequency, area under the curve and the root mean square were computed from the frequency response function of each sensor. Statistical analysis demonstrated that in twins whose structural appearance was discordant, peak frequency was significantly different between twin pairs while in concordant twins, no outcomes were significantly different. From these results, we conclude that structural changes within the spine can alter its vibration response. As such, further investigation of SHM to identify spinal abnormalities in larger human populations is warranted.

The Effect of Workers' Compensation Status on Outcomes of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Prospective, Comparative, Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Receiving Workers' Compensation benefits has been associated with inferior outcomes after lumbar fusion. The purpose of our study was to compare the outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty between patients receiving and those not receiving Workers' Compensation. METHODS: Patient-reported outcomes, reoperations, complications, and return-to-work status were analyzed at one year after surgery in an observational cohort of consecutive patients who underwent single-level or multilevel cervical disc arthroplasty for symptomatic cervical disc conditions, including radiculopathy or discogenic pain with or without radiculopathy, exclusive of myelopathy. RESULTS: Of the 189 patients who underwent cervical disc arthroplasty, 144 received Workers' Compensation and forty-five did not. The mean scores on all patient-reported measures improved significantly from preoperative baseline to one year after surgery (p < 0.001), and the improvement in patient-reported outcomes did not differ significantly between the Workers' Compensation and the non-Workers' Compensation group (respectively, 22.7 compared with 25.0 for the Neck Disability Index; 8.3 compared with 9.6 for the Short Form (SF)-36 physical component summary; 7.9 compared with 9.6 for the SF-36 mental component summary; 3.5 compared with 3.7 for neck pain; and 2.6 compared with 2.8 for arm pain). The two groups also did not differ significantly in the rate of reoperations (7.6% for those receiving Workers' Compensation compared with 13.3% for those not receiving Workers' Compensation) and complications (2.8% compared with 4.4%, respectively). At one year after surgery, the proportion of patients who had returned to work was comparable (77.7% in the Workers' Compensation group and 79.4% in the non-Workers' Compensation group); however, the patients receiving Workers' Compensation had significantly more days off before returning to work (a mean of 145.2 compared with 61.9 days; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After cervical disc arthroplasty, patients receiving Workers' Compensation had outcomes that were similar to those of patients not receiving Workers' Compensation in terms of patient-reported outcomes, surgery-related complications, reoperations, and return-to-work status. Patients receiving Workers' Compensation remained off work for a longer interval than did patients not receiving Workers' Compensation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Preventive Analgesia with Pregabalin in Neuropathic Pain from "Failed Back Surgery Syndrome": Assessment of Sleep Quality and Disability.

OBJECTIVE: Pregabalin group (PGB) is an antiepileptic used to treat neuropathic pain. We evaluated analgesic efficacy and safety for postoperative/chronic pain, disability, and sleep quality in patients who underwent spine surgery administered with PGB, or not, during the presurgical and postsurgical periods. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of 60 patients (two groups with 30 patients) with full information on 50 (29 with PGB and 21 without PGB). Ten patients were dismissed as information was lacking. The PGB group (P) (29 patients) received 75 mg/12 hours before surgery, 150 mg 10 hours after surgery, and 150 mg/12 hours 3 days after surgery. The control group (C; 21 patients) took no PGB. METHODS: Neuropathic pain was assessed before surgery, and 2 and 6 months later using visual analog scales (VAS), DN4, disability (Oswestry), and sleep quality. No serious adverse events occurred with PGB. RESULTS: The median VAS pain score at rest was lower in the PGB group at 2 months postsurgery (1 vs 2, P = 0.032), as was the median DN4 score (0 vs 3, P = 0.032) and the median Oswestry disability index (ODI: 12 vs 18, P = 0.001). At 6 months postsurgery, pain scores were also lower in the PGB group for VAS (0 vs 4, P = 0.001), DN4 score (0 vs 4, P = 0.001) and the ODI (10 vs 24, P = 0.001). Improvement in the functionality and sleep quality of the PGB group was noteworthy (P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: PGB has analgesic/antihyperalgesic effects on postoperative neuropathic pain after surgery for lumbar disc hernia. Our findings show that this benefit increases with time.

Which Variables Are Associated With Patient-reported Outcomes After Discectomy? Review of SPORT Disc Herniation Studies.

BACKGROUND: The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) evaluated the effects of surgery versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar intervertebral disc herniation (IDH), among other pathologies. Multiple subgroup analyses have been completed since the initial publications, which have further defined which patient factors lead to better or worse patient-reported outcomes; however, the degree to which these factors influence patient-reported outcomes has not been explored. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We reviewed the subgroup analyses of the SPORT IDH studies to answer the following questions: (1) What factors predicted improvement in patient-reported outcomes after operative or nonoperative treatment of lumbar IDH? (2) What factors predicted worse patient-reported outcomes compared to baseline after operative or nonoperative treatment of lumbar IDH? And (3) what factors influenced patient-reported outcomes of surgery in patients with lumbar IDH? METHODS: We conducted a MEDLINE(®) search to identify the subgroup analyses of the SPORT IDH data that were responsive to our study questions. Eleven articles were identified that met our search criteria. RESULTS: The patient factors associated with larger improvements in Oswestry Disability Index at 4 years with either surgical or nonoperative treatment included a higher baseline Oswestry Disability Index, BMI of less than 30, not being depressed, being insured, having no litigation pending, not having workers compensation, and having symptoms for less than 6 weeks, though there were others. Factors leading to improvement with surgical treatment were mostly related to anatomic characteristics of the disc herniation such as posterolateral and sequestered herniations. There were no patient or clinical factors identified that were associated with worse patient-reported outcomes compared to baseline after either operative or nonoperative treatment. At 2-year followup, the treatment effects were greater for those patients with upper-level herniations, patients not receiving workers compensation, and nondiabetic patients. In a 4-year multivariate analysis, being married, without joint problems, and having worse symptoms at baseline resulted in greater treatment effect with surgery. CONCLUSIONS: While most patients with IDH will likely see improvement with either surgical or nonoperative treatment, there are patient-related factors that can help predict which subgroups will demonstrate a greater improvement with surgery, such as not having joint problems, being married, having worsening symptoms at baseline, and not having diabetes. These results can help providers and patients when discussing treatment options. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Pre- and postoperative evaluation of patients with lumbosacral disc herniation by neurophysiological and clinical assessment.

STUDY DESIGN: The application of complex neurophysiological examination including motor evoked potentials (MEP) for pre- and postoperative evaluation of patients experiencing acute sciatica. OBJECTIVE: The assessment of sensitivity and specificity of needle electromyography, MEP, and H-reflex examinations. The comparative analysis of preoperative and postoperative neurophysiological examination. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In spite of the fact that complex neurophysiological diagnostic tools seem to be important for interpretation of incompatible results of neuroimaging and clinical examination, especially in the patients qualified for surgical treatment, their application has never been completely analyzed and documented. METHODS: Pre- and postoperative electromyography, electroneurography, F-waves, H-reflex, and MEP examination were performed in 23 patients with confirmed disc-root conflict at lumbosacral spine. Clinical evaluation included examination of sensory perception for L5-S1 dermatomes, muscles strength with Lovett's scale, deep tendon reflexes, pain intensity with visual analogue scale, and straight leg raising test. RESULTS: Sensitivity of electromyography at rest and MEP examination for evaluation of L5-S1 roots injury was 22% to 63% and 31% to 56% whereas specificity was 71% to 83% and 57% to 86%, respectively. H-reflex sensitivity and specificity for evaluation of S1 root injury were 56% and 67%, respectively. A significant improvement of root latency parameter in postoperative MEP studies as compared with preoperative was recorded for L5 (P = 0.039) and S1 root's levels (P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: The analysis of the results from neurophysiological tests together with neuroimaging and clinical examination allow for a precise preoperative indication of the lumbosacral roots injury and accurate postoperative evaluation of patients experiencing sciatica. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

The course and prognostic factors of symptomatic cervical disc herniation with radiculopathy: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Cervical spine disc herniation is a disabling source of cervical radiculopathy. However, little is known about its course and prognosis. Understanding the course and prognosis of symptomatic cervical disc herniation is necessary to guide patients' expectations and assist clinicians in managing patients. PURPOSE: To describe the natural history, clinical course, and prognostic factors of symptomatic cervical disc herniations with radiculopathy. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of the literature and best evidence synthesis. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SportsDiscus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to 2013 was conducted to retrieve eligible articles. Eligible articles were critically appraised using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. The results from articles with low risk of bias were analyzed using best evidence synthesis principles. RESULTS: We identified 1,221 articles. Of those, eight articles were eligible and three were accepted as having a low risk of bias. Two studies pertained to course and one study pertained to prognosis. Most patients with symptomatic cervical disc herniations with radiculopathy initially present with intense pain and moderate levels of disability. However, substantial improvements tend to occur within the first 4 to 6 months post-onset. Time to complete recovery ranged from 24 to 36 months in, approximately, 83% of patients. Patients with a workers' compensation claim appeared to have a poorer prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Our best evidence synthesis describes the best available evidence on the course and prognosis of cervical disc herniations with radiculopathy. Most patients with symptomatic cervical spine disc herniation with radiculopathy recover. Possible recurrences and time to complete recovery need to be further studied. More studies are also needed to understand the prognostic factors for this condition.

Outcome of physiotherapy after surgery for cervical disc disease: a prospective randomised multi-centre trial.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with cervical disc disease require leave from work, due to long-lasting, complex symptoms, including chronic pain and reduced levels of physical and psychological function. Surgery on a few segmental levels might be expected to resolve disc-specific pain and reduce neurological deficits, but not the non-specific neck pain and the frequent illness. No study has investigated whether post-surgery physiotherapy might improve the outcome of surgery. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a well-structured rehabilitation programme might add benefit to the customary post-surgical treatment for cervical disc disease, with respect to function, disability, work capability, and cost effectiveness. METHODS/DESIGN: This study was designed as a prospective, randomised, controlled, multi-centre study. An independent, blinded investigator will compare two alternatives of rehabilitation. We will include 200 patients of working age, with cervical disc disease confirmed by clinical findings and symptoms of cervical nerve root compression. After providing informed consent, study participants will be randomised to one of two alternative physiotherapy regimes; (A) customary treatment (information and advice on a specialist clinic); or (B) customary treatment plus active physiotherapy. Physiotherapy will follow a standardised, structured programme of neck-specific exercises combined with a behavioural approach. All patients will be evaluated both clinically and subjectively (with questionnaires) before surgery and at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months after surgery. The main outcome variable will be neck-specific disability. Cost-effectiveness will also be calculated. DISCUSSION: We anticipate that the results of this study will provide evidence to support physiotherapeutic rehabilitation applied after surgery for cervical radiculopathy due to cervical disc disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01547611.

How does accounting for worker productivity affect the measured cost-effectiveness of lumbar discectomy?

BACKGROUND: Back pain attributable to lumbar disc herniation is a substantial cause of reduced workplace productivity. Disc herniation surgery is effective in reducing pain and improving function. However, few studies have examined the effects of surgery on worker productivity. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We wished to determine the effect of disc herniation surgery on workers' earnings and missed workdays and how accounting for this effect influences the cost-effectiveness of surgery? METHODS: Regression models were estimated using data from the National Health Interview Survey to assess the effects of lower back pain caused by disc herniation on earnings and missed workdays. The results were incorporated into Markov models to compare societal costs associated with surgical and nonsurgical treatments for privately insured, working patients. Clinical outcomes and utilities were based on results from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial and additional clinical literature. RESULTS: We estimate average annual earnings of $47,619 with surgery and $45,694 with nonsurgical treatment. The increased earnings for patients receiving surgery as compared with nonsurgical treatment is equal to $1925 (95% CI, $1121-$2728). After surgery, we also estimate that workers receiving surgery miss, on average, 3 fewer days per year than if workers had received nonsurgical treatment (95% CI, 2.4-3.7 days). However, these fewer missed work days only partially offset the assumed 20 workdays missed to recover from surgery. More fully accounting for the effects of disc herniation surgery on productivity reduced the cost of surgery per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) from $52,416 to $35,146 using a 4-year time horizon and from $27,359 to $4186 using an 8-year time horizon. According to a sensitivity analysis, the 4-year cost per QALY varies between $27,921 and $49,787 depending on model assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: Increased worker earnings resulting from disc herniation surgery may offset the increased direct medical costs associated with surgery. After accounting for the effects on productivity, disc herniation surgery was found to be a highly cost-effective surgery and may yield net societal savings if the benefits of outpatient and inpatient surgery persist beyond 6 and 12 years, respectively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, economic and decision analysis. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

[Overdiagnosis and defensive medicine in occupational medicine]. / Overdiagnosis e medicina difensiva in Medicina del Lavoro.

In clinical medicine since some years overdiagnosis is giving rise to growing attention and concern. Overdiagnosis is the diagnosis of a "disease" that will never cause symptoms or death during a patient's lifetime. It is a side effect of testing for early forms of disease which may turn people into patients unnecessarily and may lead to treatments that do no good and perhaps do harm. Overdiagnosis occurs when a disease is diagnosed correctly, but the diagnosis is irrelevant. A correct diagnosis may be irrelevant because treatment for the disease is not available, not needed, or not wanted. Four drivers engender overdiagnosis: 1) screening in non symptomatic subjects; 2) raised sensitivity of diagnostic tests; 3) incidental overdiagnosis; 4) broadening of diagnostic criteria for diseases. "Defensive medicine" can play a role. It begs the question of whether even in the context of Occupational Medicine overdiagnosis is possible. In relation to the double diagnostic evaluation peculiar to Occupational Medicine, the clinical and the causal, a dual phenomenon is possible: that of overdiagnosis properly said and what we could define the overattribution, in relation to the assessment of a causal relationship with work. Examples of occupational "diseases" that can represent cases of overdiagnosis, with the possible consequences of overtreatment, consisting of unnecessary and socially harmful limitations to fitness for work, are taken into consideration: pleural plaques, alterations of the intervertebral discs, "small airways disease", sub-clinical hearing impairment. In Italy the National Insurance for occupational diseases (INAIL) regularly recognizes less than 50% of the notified diseases; this might suggest overdiagnosis and possibly overattribution in reporting. Physicians dealing with the diagnosis of occupational diseases are obviously requested to perform a careful, up-to-date and active investigation. When applying to the diagnosis of occupational diseases, proper logical criteria should be even antecedent to a good diagnostic technique, due to social outcome for the worker.

Assessment of cauda equina syndrome progression pattern to improve diagnosis.

STUDY DESIGN: Meta-analysis of individual patient data. OBJECTIVE: To date, the progression pattern of cauda equina syndrome (CES) has not been summarized. This study assessed individual patient data from CES cases, investigated the CES progression pattern to help clinicians provide timely diagnoses. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Because there were few randomized controlled trials about CES, our research was based on case reports of CES with detailed medical history. METHODS: We searched English literature regarding CES in the PubMed database. We included a total of 198 publications involving 264 cases that met the inclusion criteria. The occurrence order of symptoms was determined by reviewing patients' medical histories, and the progression pattern of CES was analyzed using sequential pattern mining. Finally, we summarized and reassessed the current timing of CES diagnosis. RESULTS: Result of sequential pattern mining demonstrated that the progression process of CES could be divided into 3 stages: early stage of CES (CESE), with bilateral peripheral nerve dysfunction characterized by progressive sensory-motor defects from unilateral to bilateral in lower extremities; incomplete CES, with reduction of sphincter functions; and CES in retention, with sphincter dysfunction. Among all the cases, 81.08% (180 cases) were diagnosed at the stage of incomplete CES or CES in retention, in which 99.4% (179 cases) had experienced CESE without being diagnosed. CONCLUSION: The characteristic progressive sensory-motor CESE defects in lower extremities marked CES onset. Instead of waiting for the onset of sphincter function abnormalities, CES should be diagnosed when the CESE symptoms manifest.

Symptomatic magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed lumbar disk herniation patients: a comparative effectiveness prospective observational study of 2 age- and sex-matched cohorts treated with either high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulative therapy or imaging-guided lumbar nerve root injections.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare self-reported pain and "improvement" of patients with symptomatic, magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed, lumbar disk herniations treated with either high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) or nerve root injections (NRI). METHODS: This prospective cohort comparative effectiveness study included 102 age- and sex-matched patients treated with either NRI or SMT. Numerical rating scale (NRS) pain data were collected before treatment. One month after treatment, current NRS pain levels and overall improvement assessed using the Patient Global Impression of Change scale were recorded. The proportion of patients, "improved" or "worse," was calculated for each treatment. Comparison of pretreatment and 1-month NRS scores used the paired t test. Numerical rating scale and NRS change scores for the 2 groups were compared using the unpaired t test. The groups were also compared for "improvement" using the χ(2) test. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Average direct procedure costs for each treatment were calculated. RESULTS: No significant differences for self-reported pain or improvement were found between the 2 groups. "Improvement" was reported in 76.5% of SMT patients and in 62.7% of the NRI group. Both groups reported significantly reduced NRS scores at 1 month (P = .0001). Average cost for treatment with SMT was Swiss Francs 533.77 (US $558.75) and Swiss Francs 697 (US $729.61) for NRI. CONCLUSIONS: Most SMT and NRI patients with radicular low back pain and magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed disk herniation matching symptomatic presentation reported significant and clinically relevant reduction in self-reported pain level and increased global perception of improvement. There were no significant differences in outcomes between NRI and SMT. When considering direct procedure costs, the average cost of SMT was slightly less expensive.