Evaluation of persons with suspected lumbosacral and cervical radiculopathy: Electrodiagnostic assessment and implications for treatment and outcomes (Part II).

The electrodiagnostic (EDX) examination with needle electromyography (EMG) is the most important means of testing for radiculopathy. This test has modest sensitivity but high specificity and complements imaging of the spine. In this second of a two-part review, the implications of electrodiagnostic findings for diagnosis and clinical management of persons with radiculopathy are reviewed. An EMG confirmed lumbosacral radiculopathy is associated with better clinical outcomes for persons undergoing aggressive conservative management. A positive EMG test portends a better clinical response to epidural corticosteroid injections. If a person undergoes spine surgery, a positive pre-operative EMG for radiculopathy is also associated with better outcomes.

Evaluation of persons with suspected lumbosacral and cervical radiculopathy: Electrodiagnostic assessment and implications for treatment and outcomes (Part I).

Persons with back, neck, and limb symptoms constitute a major referral population to specialists in electrodiagnostic (EDX) medicine. The evaluation of these patients involves consideration of both the common and less common disorders. The EDX examination with needle electromyography (EMG) is the most important means of testing for radiculopathy. This test has modest sensitivity but high specificity and well complements imaging of the spine. Needle EMG in combination with nerve conduction testing is valuable in excluding entrapment neuropathies and polyneuropathy-conditions that frequently mimic radicular symptoms. In this first of a two-part review, the optimal EDX evaluation of persons with suspected radiculopathy is presented. In part two, the implications of EDX findings for diagnosis and clinical management of persons with radiculopathy are reviewed.

"Scout No Scan" Technique Reduces Patient Radiation Exposure During CT-Guided Spine Biopsy.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to report our experience with a technique for CT-guided spine biopsies that we refer to as the "scout no scan" technique. CONCLUSION: The scout no scan technique can significantly lower radiation exposure while maintaining high diagnostic yields for CT-guided spinal biopsies.

Adverse Event Rates Associated with Transforaminal and Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injections: A Multi-Institutional Study.

BACKGROUND: Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) have demonstrated efficacy and effectiveness in treatment of radicular pain. Despite little evidence of efficacy/effectiveness, interlaminar epidural steroid injections (ILESI) are advocated by some as primary therapy for radicular pain due to purported greater safety. OBJECTIVE: To assess immediate and delayed adverse event rates of TFESI and ILESI injections at three academic medical centers utilizing International Spine Intervention Society practice guidelines. METHODS: Quality assurance databases from a Radiology and two physical medicine and rehabilitation (PM&R) practices were interrogated. Medical records were reviewed, verifying immediate and delayed adverse events. RESULTS: There were no immediate major adverse events of neurologic injury or hemorrhage in 16,638 consecutive procedures in all spine segments (14,956 TFESI; 1,682 ILESI). Vasovagal reactions occurred in 1.2% of procedures, more frequently (P = 0.004) in TFESI (1.3%) than ILESI (0.5%). Dural punctures occurred in 0.06% of procedures, more commonly after ILESI (0.2% vs 0.04%, P = 0.006). Delayed follow up on PM&R patients (92.5% and 78.5, next business day) and radiology patients (63.1%, 2 weeks) identified no major adverse events of neurologic injury, hemorrhage, or infection. There were no significant differences in delayed minor adverse event rates. Central steroid response (sleeplessness, flushing, nonpositional headache) was seen in 2.6% of both TFESI and ILESI patients. 2.1% of TFESI and 1.8% of ILESI patients reported increased pain. No long-term sequelae were seen from any immediate or delayed minor adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Both transforaminal and ILESI are safely performed with low immediate and delayed adverse event rates when informed by evidence-based procedural guidelines. By demonstrating comparable safety, this study suggests that the choice between ILESI and TFESIs can be based on documented efficacy and effectiveness and not driven by safety concerns.

Immediate Adverse Events in Interventional Pain Procedures: A Multi-Institutional Study.

SETTING: Interventional procedures directed toward sources of pain in the axial and appendicular musculoskeletal system are performed with increasing frequency. Despite the presence of evidence-based guidelines for such procedures, there are wide variations in practice. Case reports of serious complications such as spinal cord infarction or infection from spine injections lack appropriate context and create a misleading view of the risks of appropriately performed interventional pain procedures. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate adverse event rate for interventional spine procedures performed at three academic interventional spine practices. METHODS: Quality assurance databases at three academic interventional pain management practices that utilize evidence-based guidelines [1] were interrogated for immediate complications from interventional pain procedures. Review of the electronic medical record verified or refuted the occurrence of a complication. Same-day emergency department transfers or visits were also identified by a records search. RESULTS: Immediate complication data were available for 26,061 consecutive procedures. A radiology practice performed 19,170 epidural steroid (primarily transforaminal), facet, sacroiliac, and trigger point injections (2006-2013). A physiatry practice performed 6,190 spine interventions (2004-2009). A second physiatry practice performed 701 spine procedures (2009-2010). There were no major complications (permanent neurologic deficit or clinically significant bleeding [e.g., epidural hematoma]) with any procedure. Overall complication rate was 1.9% (493/26,061). Vasovagal reactions were the most frequent event (1.1%). Nineteen patients (<0.1%) were transferred to emergency departments for: allergic reactions, chest pain, symptomatic hypertension, and a vasovagal reaction. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that interventional pain procedures are safely performed with extremely low immediate adverse event rates when evidence-based guidelines are observed.

Percutaneous Lumbar Disc Decompression Using the Dekompressor: A Prospective Long-Term Outcome Study.

BACKGROUND DATA: Few studies have investigated the long-term efficacy of percutaneous lumbar disc decompression (PLDD) with Dekompressor (Stryker, Kalamazoo, MI) for discogenic radicular pain that has failed conservative management. OBJECTIVE: Determine long-term outcomes of Dekompressor PLDD for discogenic radicular pain. METHODS: Prospective cohort study at a tertiary academic spine center of consecutive patients (12/2004-11/2005) with discogenic lumbosacral radicular pain who underwent PLDD with Dekompressor. Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) leg pain score and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score data were collected at 6 months and 1 year. These two measures, 5-point Likert scale patient satisfaction, and surgical rate data were collected at 8 years. RESULTS: Seventy patients underwent PLDD. Forty and 25 patients were successfully contacted at 1-year and 8-year follow-up, respectively. Using intention to treat analysis, at 1 year and 8 years, NRS leg pain scores were reduced >50% in 47% (95% confidence interval [CI] 35%, 59%) and 29% (95% confidence interval [CI] 18%, 40%) of patients, respectively; ODI score improved >30% in 43% (CI 32%, 55%) and 26% (CI 19%, 41%) of patients, respectively. Of the patients who followed up at 8 years, 36% (CI 17%, 55%) had undergone surgery and the median satisfaction was "4" (interquartile range 2,5). CONCLUSIONS: While limited by loss-to-follow-up, this study suggests that treatment of discogenic lumbosacral radicular pain with Dekompressor results in decreased leg pain and disability and favorable satisfaction at long-term follow-up. Further study with adequate follow-up retention is needed to confirm that Dekompressor spares open spinal surgery.

C-Arm Fluoroscope Angle Settings for Fluoroscopically Guided Lumbar Transforaminal Epidural Injections.

BACKGROUND DATA: Minimizing fluoroscopy time in spine interventions is critical for time of procedure as well as radiation safety of the patient and medical personnel. Specific fluoroscopy angle settings for fluoroscopically guided L4-S1 transforaminal epidural injections (TFEIs) have not been described. OBJECTIVES: To describe the most common encountered settings for the C-arm fluoroscope angles for fluoroscopically guided L4-S1 (TFEI). METHODS: Each subject was placed in prone position on a flat fluoroscopy table without utilizing any device to alter innate lumbar spine curvature. The data from 246 consecutive patients at their first encounter in the fluoroscopy suite for a single level subpedicular lumbosacral TFEI was retrospectively analyzed. Most procedures occurred at the L4-5, L5-S1, and S1 levels (227 subjects). The C-arm angles including the oblique, cephalad/caudal were recorded for each subject upon observing final needle positioning for successful completion of the procedure according to ISIS Guidelines. RESULTS: For the L4-5 level, 71% of cases had oblique angle of 30°±5° and 94% of cases had neutral cephalad/caudal tilt (0°±5°) observed. For the L5-S1, 72% of cases had oblique angle of 30°±5° and 62% of cases had cephalad tilt angle of 15°±5° observed. For the S1 level, 73% of cases had oblique angle of 5°±5° and 69% of cases had cephalad tilt angle of 15°±5° observed. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: This retrospective descriptive study suggests fluoroscope angles for L4-S1 TFEI as a starting point before fine tuning views accounting for individual anatomy. Angles suggested for each level (oblique/cephalad tilt angles) are as follows: L4-5 (30/0°), L5-S1 (30/15°), and S1 (5/15°). Prospective studies using these guidelines would need to be undertaken to prove reproducibility between interventionalists, time efficiency, and radiation exposure reduction.

The use of moderate sedation for the secondary prevention of adverse vasovagal reactions.

BACKGROUND: Vasovagal reactions can occur with spine procedures and may result in premature procedure termination or other adverse events. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if moderate sedation is an effective means of secondary prevention for vasovagal reactions. METHODS: Prospectively collected data on 6,364 consecutive spine injections. RESULTS: Of the 6,364 spine injections, 6,150 spine injections were done without moderate sedation and resulted in 205 vasovagal reactions (3.3% [95% confidence interval {CI} 2.9-3.8%]). One hundred thirty-four spine procedures were performed on patients that had a history of prior vasovagal reaction during a spine procedure. Of these, 90 procedures were performed without moderate sedation, and 21/90 (23.3% [95% CI 15.2-32.1%]) were complicated by a repeat vasovagal reaction. None of 44 repeat injections that utilized moderate sedation experienced a repeat vasovagal reaction (0% [95% CI 0-9.6%]) (χ(2) = 12.17, P < 0.00048). The rate of vasovagal reaction in patients with a history of prior reaction undergoing repeat injection without conscious sedation was significantly higher (23.3% [95% CI 15.2-32.1%]) than the rate in patients with no such history (3.0% [95% CI 2.6-3.5%] [χ(2) = 113.4, P < 1.78E-26]). CONCLUSIONS: A history of vasovagal reaction is a strong predictor of experiencing a vasovagal reaction on subsequent procedures. No vasovagal reactions occurred with the use of moderate sedation, including in the 44 injections in patients that had a history of vasovagal reaction during spine procedures. The overall low rate of vasovagal reactions is low, and greater benefits of moderate sedation were observed when utilized as secondary prevention of repeat vasovagal reactions.

Discrepancies in describing pain: is there agreement between numeric rating scale scores and pain reduction percentage reported by patients with musculoskeletal pain after corticosteroid injection?

OBJECTIVE: Pain intensity is commonly rated on an 11-point Numerical Pain Rating Scale which can be expressed as a calculated percentage pain reduction (CPPR), or by patient-reported percentage pain reduction (PRPPR). We aimed to determine the agreement between CPPR and PRPPR in quantifying musculoskeletal pain improvement at short-term follow-up after a corticosteroid injection. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Urban, academic, physical medicine, and rehabilitation outpatient interventional musculoskeletal and spine center. METHODS: The agreement between CPPR and PRPPR was determined by concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) in subjects who had experienced improvement in musculoskeletal or radicular pain 3 weeks after a first-time injection at our clinic. Subjects who experienced unchanged pain (PRPPR = 0) were compared to CPPR with paired t-test. RESULTS: We examined 197 subjects with greater than 3/10 pain who underwent first-time fluoroscopic-guided corticosteroid injections. Ninety-three subjects reported higher PRPPR than CPPR values, and 41 subjects reported higher CPPR values. The CCC between CPPR and PRPPR was 0.44 (95% CI 0.35-0.54), with a precision of 0.54 and an accuracy of 0.81, and 95% limits of agreement ranging between -41% and +73%. Values for CCC, precision, and accuracy were higher for males compared to females and were highest in the youngest age group (18-40) and lowest in the middle age group (41-60). CONCLUSIONS: PRPPR may not agree with CPPR at 3 week follow-up, as these individuals tend to report a higher estimated percentage improvement compared to the value calculated from their pain scores.

Comparative effectiveness of lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections with particulate versus nonparticulate corticosteroids for lumbar radicular pain due to intervertebral disc herniation: a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar transforaminal epidural injections are commonly utilized to treat radicular pain due to intervertebral disc herniation. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine if there was a major difference in effectiveness between particulate and nonparticulate corticosteroids for acute radicular pain due to lumbar disc herniation. DESIGN: A multicenter, double blind, prospective, randomized trial on 78 consecutive subjects with acute uni-level disc herniation resulting in unilateral radicular pain. All subjects received a single level transforaminal epidural steroid injection with either dexamethasone or triamcinolone. Repeat injections were allowed as determined by the blinded physician and subjects. Primary outcomes included: number of injections received, surgical rates, and categorical pain scores at 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Secondary outcomes included mean Oswestry Disability Index. RESULTS: Both triamcinolone and dexamethasone resulted in statically significant improvements in pain and function at 2 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months, without clear differences between groups. The surgical rates were comparable with 14.6% of the dexamethasone group and 18.9% of the triamcinolone group receiving surgery. There was a statistically significant difference in the number of injections received, with 17.1% of the dexamethasone group receiving three injections vs only 2.7% of the triamcinolone group. CONCLUSIONS: Transforaminal epidural corticosteroid injections are an effective treatment for acute radicular pain due to disc herniation, and frequently only require 1 or 2 injections for symptomatic relief. Dexamethasone appears to possess reasonably similar effectiveness when compared with triamcinolone. However, the dexamethasone group received slightly more injections than the triamcinolone group to achieve the same outcomes.

Factors associated with pain reduction after transforaminal epidural steroid injection for lumbosacral radicular pain.

OBJECTIVE: To identify demographic and clinical factors associated with pain improvement after a lumbosacral transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) for the treatment of radicular pain. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Outpatient center. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (N=188) who underwent a fluoroscopically guided TFESI for lumbosacral radicular pain. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain reduction from preinjection to 2-week follow-up was measured by visual analog scale (VAS). Patients were grouped by those who experienced no pain relief or worsened pain (≤0%), pain relief but <50% relief (>0%-<50%), or significant pain relief (≥50%) on the VAS. RESULTS: The mean duration of pain prior to injection was 45.8±81 weeks. The mean time to follow-up after TFESI was 20±14.2 days. Significantly more patients who experienced ≥50% pain relief at follow-up reported higher preinjection pain on the VAS (P=.0001) and McGill Pain Inventory Questionnaire (P=.0358), reported no worsening of their pain with walking (P=.0161), or had a positive femoral stretch test (P=.0477). No significant differences were found between VAS pain reduction and all other demographic and clinical factors, including a radiologic diagnosis of disk herniation versus stenosis or other neural tension signs on physical examination. CONCLUSIONS: Greater baseline pain on the VAS and McGill Pain Inventory, a history of a lack of worsening pain with walking, and a positive femoral stretch test predict a greater likelihood of pain reduction after TFESI for lumbosacral radicular pain at short-term follow-up. Greater baseline pain on the McGill Pain Inventory and a lack of worsening pain with walking predict a magnitude of >50% pain reduction.

Manipulative therapy (Feldenkrais, massage, chiropractic manipulation) for neck pain.

Neck pain is an extremely common symptom with many possible etiologies. A substantial number of patients are turning to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Low-quality evidence supports the beneficial effects of CAM. Feldenkrais, massage therapy, and spinal manipulation are discussed in detail. Complications are generally benign and self-limited, although occasional catastrophic consequences have been documented. Despite the favorable opinion many rheumatologists have of some CAM therapy, many patients are not disclosing CAM use to their medical providers. By expressing interest, asking questions, and taking a shared-decision-making approach, providers can encourage disclosure and provide valuable input.

Vasovagal rates in flouroscopically guided interventional procedures: a study of over 8,000 injections.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate of vasovagal (vv) complications in fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures. DESIGN: Retrospective case series analysis of prospectively collected data from March 8, 2004 to January 30, 2009. SETTING: A single academic medical center. SUBJECTS: Four thousand one hundred eighty-three subjects undergoing 8,010 consecutive injections. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pearson's chi-square test was used to determine the relationship between categorical variables. RESULTS: A total of 8,010 injections, including epidural steroid injections, radiofrequency nerve ablations, medial branch blocks, hip injections, knee injections, and glenohumeral injections were performed. Overall vv reaction rate was 2.6%, with 0.8% of procedures resulting in early terminated due to vv reaction. Peripheral joint injections had a vv rate of 0.2%, all occurring in hip injections. Transforaminal epidural steroid injections had a vv rate of 3.5%. Diagnostic blocks of the medial branches had the highest rate of vv (5.1%). Other predictors of vv reactions were identified including preprocedure pain score visual analog scale <5 (P = 0.004), male gender (P < 0.001), and age less than 65 years old (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: vv reactions have an overall low occurrence rate (2.6%) in interventional procedures ranging from 0% in peripheral knee and shoulder injections to 5.1% in medial branch blocks. Conservative treatment of vv reaction and willingness to terminate procedures resulted in no serious adverse events related to vv reaction in 8,010 procedures.

High-resolution median nerve sonographic measurements: correlations with median nerve conduction studies in healthy adults.

OBJECTIVES: To study relationships between median wrist and forearm sonographic measurements and median nerve conduction studies. METHODS: The study population consisted of a prospective convenience sample of healthy adults. Interventions included high-resolution median nerve sonography and median motor and sensory nerve conduction studies. Main outcome measures included median motor nerve compound muscle action potential amplitude, distal latency, and conduction velocity; sensory nerve action potential amplitude and distal latency; and sonographic median nerve cross-sectional area. Median motor nerve and sensory nerve conduction studies of the index finger were performed using standard published techniques. A second examiner blinded to nerve conduction study results used a high-frequency linear array transducer to measure the cross-sectional area of the median nerve at the distal volar wrist crease (carpal tunnel inlet) and forearm (4 cm proximally), measured in the transverse plane on static sonograms. The outer margin of the median nerve was traced at the junction of the hypoechoic fascicles and adjacent outer connective tissue layer. RESULTS: Fifty median nerves were evaluated in 25 participants. The compound muscle action potential amplitude with wrist stimulation was positively related to the cross-sectional area, with the area increasing by 0.195 mm(2) for every millivolt increase in amplitude in the dominant hand (95% confidence interval, 0.020, 0.370 mm(2); P < .05) and 0.247 mm(2) in the nondominant hand (95% confidence interval, 0.035, 0.459 mm(2); P < .05). There was no significant linear association between the wrist median cross-sectional area and median motor and sensory distal latencies. Conduction velocity through the forearm was not significantly linearly associated with the forearm area or forearm-to-wrist area ratio (tapering ratio). The wrist area was inversely related to the sensory nerve action potential amplitude. CONCLUSIONS: Although associations were found between median nerve conduction study amplitudes and sonographic nerve measurements, they were not found for other parameters. Studying these relationships may increase our understanding of when to best use these procedures.

A retrospective study on the efficacy of pubic symphysis corticosteroid injections in the treatment of pubic symphysis pain.

OBJECTIVE: To report immediate and follow-up pain intensity outcomes of fluoroscopically guided contrast- enhanced pubic symphysis corticosteroid injections for patients with pubic symphysis pain (PSP). DESIGN: Retrospective medical record review. SETTING: Outpatient rehabilitation clinic. SUBJECTS: Patients with PSP who underwent pubic symphysis corticosteroid injection (PSI). INTERVENTION: Pubic symphysis corticosteroid injection. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain intensity as measured by numeric rating scale (NRS). RESULTS: Fourteen patients (4 men and 10 women) underwent PSI. Five patients had PSP for less than 6 months, nine had chronic pain (>than 6 months). In 7 of the 10 women the pain was pregnancy related. All patients received other treatments prior to injection. Pubic symphysis tenderness was the most common physical examination finding (13/14 patients). Follow-up pain intensity (PI)-NRS improvement of greater than 2 points was considered clinically significant. At follow-up, improvement was not statistically significant (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, z=1.62 P=0.10). Patients with pain <6 months did not have a greater likelihood of benefit at follow-up compared with those with pain for >6 months (Fisher's exact test, P=0.775). CONCLUSIONS: PSIs do not provide clinically or statistically significant relief at follow-up in patients with PSP.

Inadvertent intradiscal contrast flow during lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections: a case series examining the prevalence of intradiscal injection as well as potential associated factors and adverse events.

OBJECTIVES: The primary aim was to evaluate the prevalence of inadvertent intradiscal injection during fluoroscopically guided contrast-enhanced lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections. The secondary aim was to determine if there are any risk factors for or adverse events as a result of inadvertent intradiscal contrast injection. DESIGN: The study was a retrospective case series. SETTING: The study was set in three outpatient spine care centers. PATIENTS: A search was conducted in a database of spinal injection procedures from July 2000-May 2008. Fifteen cases of inadvertent intradiscal contrast flow were identified. These cases were matched with one control case with the same age, gender, level, and side of injection. INTERVENTIONS: The prevalence of intradiscal contrast flow with lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injection was calculated. Chart review of the cases and controls was performed. An independent, blinded examiner evaluated needle tip placement. OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency of intradiscal contrast flow during lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections and the relationship between the occurrence of intradiscal contrast flow with potential risk factors. RESULTS: The prevalence of inadvertent intradiscal injection during lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections was 0.17%. All of the patients received prophylactic antibiotics after inadvertent disk injection, and there were no infectious or other complications identified. CONCLUSIONS: Intradiscal contrast injection is an infrequently reported event during lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections. Our data support that the prevalence is very low and there might be an association with ipsilateral foraminal stenosis. Although there is potential for significant adverse complications with intradiscal injection, our data set did not show serious sequelae.

Pain Outcomes with an Elliptical Regimen (POWER) Study: Identifying the Proper Dosage of Exercise for Therapeutic Effect in Persons with Chronic Back Pain.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Exercise therapy for low back pain has long been prescribed as one of the initial remedies for back pain. Traditional therapy is completed under a therapist's supervision and consists of lumbar stabilization, aerobic exercise and stretching exercises. Recent studies have explored treating back pain with aerobic exercise such as walking which can be done anywhere and without supervision which is lower cost and easily administered. PURPOSE: To assess a therapeutic dosage of aerobic exercise that is associated with pain reduction in persons experiencing low back pain. STUDY DESIGN: Case series. PARTICIPANT DESCRIPTION: Sixteen patients entered the study and twelve patients completed the study (mean ± SD: age 51 ± 11 years; weight 89.2 ± 16 kg). Subjects were included if they were ages 18-65, had chronic back pain lasting for more than 3 months and a score of greater than 30% on the Oswestry Low Back Disability Questionnaire. METHODS: Subjects underwent a six-week exercise program using the elliptical trainer three times each week. Exercise duration was steadily increased each week for the length of the study. The total cumulative amount of work that coincided with significant reductions in chronic low back pain was then identified. RESULTS: At 4 weeks, pain scores were significantly reduced from baseline (3.2 vs 4.7, p<0.0001). This significant pain reduction corresponded to an average of 30.8 Kcal/kg of body mass in cumulative work performed. Pain was significantly reduced by 21% and 32% on the Oswestry Questionnaire and the PROMIS 29 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These pilot findings suggest that approximately 30.8 kcal/Kg of accumulated physiological work is a therapeutic "dosage" of exercise needed for significant reduction in chronic back pain. Clinicians can begin to use this benchmark for their oversight of rehabilitation programs to determine if an exercise program has been sufficiently intense and long enough in duration for managing their patients with chronic low back pain.

Low-Pressure Lumbar Provocation Discography According to Spine Intervention Society/International Association for the Study of Pain Standards Does Not Cause Acceleration of Disc Degeneration in Patients With Symptomatic Low Back Pain: A 7-Year Matched Cohort Study.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective matched cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To determine if low-pressure lumbar provocation discography (PD) results in long-term accelerated disc degeneration, internal disc disruption, or disc herniation in patients with symptomatic low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Study of subjects without clinically-significant LBP suggests that high-pressure PD may accelerate disc degeneration. METHODS: Consecutive patients with symptomatic LBP who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), PD, and repeat MRI more than 7 years later, but did not undergo subsequent spinal fusion surgery, were included. Punctured discs were matched (1:2 to 1:4) to corresponding discs in a control cohort by age, BMI, Pfirrmann score (±2), and presence of disc herniation; control cohort inclusion required MRIs for symptomatic LBP, separated by more than 7 years. The primary outcome of the study was a progression in Pfirrmann score category (I-II, III-IV, V). MRI disc-to-CSF T2 signal-intensity ratio, disc height, disc herniations, high intensity zones (HIZs), and Modic changes were assessed. RESULTS: Baseline and follow-up MRIs were available for 77 discs exposed to PD, and for 260 discs in the matched control cohort. There was no difference in the proportion of punctured discs that advanced in Pfirrmann score category in the PD group (17%, 95% CI 9-27%) compared with corresponding discs in the Control group (21%, 95% CI 17-27%), P = 0.3578, or in non-punctured discs in the PD group (35%, 95% CI 21-51%) compared with corresponding discs in the Control group (34%, 95% CI 27-42%), P = 0.1169. There were no differences in disc-to-CSF T2 signal-intensity ratio, presence of disc herniations, HIZs, or Modic changes following puncture in the PD versus matched cohort discs or in the non-punctured PD cohort discs versus corresponding control cohort discs (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients with symptomatic LBP who underwent low-pressure PD, but who did not undergo a subsequent spinal fusion surgery, developed disc degeneration and new disc herniations at a similar rate to corresponding discs in matched control patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Clinical Course of Motor Deficits from Lumbosacral Radiculopathy Due to Disk Herniation.

BACKGROUND: The clinical course of motor deficits from lumbosacral radiculopathy appears to improve with or without surgery. Strength measurements have been confined to manual muscle testing (MMT) and have not been extensively followed and quantified in prior studies. OBJECTIVE: To determine if motor weakness and patient-reported outcomes related to lumbosacral radiculopathy improve without surgical intervention over the course of 12 months. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort. SETTING: Outpatient academic spine practice. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with acute radicular weakness due to disk herniation. METHODS: Forty patients with radiculopathy and strength deficit were followed over a 12-month period. Objective strength and performance tests as well as survey-based measurements were collected at baseline and then every 3 months. Patients underwent comprehensive pain management and rehabilitation and/or surgical approaches as determined in coordination with the treating specialist. This study was approved by the institutional review board of Colorado. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Testing of strength was through MMT, handheld dynamometer, and performance-based testing. Furthermore, visual analog scale, modified Oswestry Disability Index, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were used to measure pain and disability outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 40 patients, 33 (82.5%) did not have surgery; 7 (17.5%) had surgery. Twenty-four of the 33 patients (60%) did not undergo surgery and were followed for 12 months (Comprehensive Pain Management and Rehabilitation, Complete [CPM&R-C]), and 9 (22%) did not have surgery and lacked at least one follow-up evaluation (Comprehensive Pain Management and Rehabilitation, Incomplete [CPM&R-I]). No statistically significant differences were found on baseline measures of strength deficits and SF-36 domains between the CPM&R-C, Surgery, and CPM&R-I groups. Pain and disability scores in the Surgery group were significantly higher than in the CPM&R-C at baseline. There were statistically significant improvements in all areas of strength, pain, and function when comparing measurements at the 12-month follow-up to baseline in the CPM&R-C group. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with motor deficits due to lumbosacral radiculopathy improve over time regardless of treatment choice. Most did not choose surgery, and almost all of these patients regained full strength at 1 year. Strength recovery typically occurred in the first 3 months, but there was ongoing recovery over the course of a year. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.