Effectiveness of a new navigable percutaneous disc decompression device (L'DISQ) in patients with lumbar discogenic pain.

OBJECTIVE: This study is a pilot study to assess the clinical outcomes of percutaneous disc decompression using the L'DISQ in patients with lumbar discogenic pain. STUDY DESIGN: An institutional, prospective clinical data analysis. METHODS: We ablated the torn annulus using L'DISQ on 20 patients with axial low back pain for at least 3 months (average 29 months) unresponsive to conservative management. Before the therapeutic procedure, all the patients had been diagnosed with lumbar discogenic pain through provocation discography, which had confirmed the level of painful discs. The torn annulus was identified through lumbosacral magnetic resonance image and computed tomographic discogram. Baseline data were prospectively gathered before the procedure and at 1, 4, 12, 24, and 48 weeks post-procedure. Data included pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]), measure of disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] and Rolando-Morris Disability Questionnaire [RM]), and health-related quality of life (Bodily Pain Scale of Short Form-36 version 2 [SF-36 BP]). RESULTS: At 48 weeks, the VAS fell from 7.55 ± 1.28 to 3.60 ± 2.28 scores, the ODI and RM had decreased significantly, and the SF-36 BP showed significant improvement (P < 0.05). The success rates of procedure were 55.0% at 48 weeks. There were no complications with the exception of a minor venous bleeding at the site of needle puncture. CONCLUSIONS: The L'DISQ device is specifically designed to ablate adjacent disc tissue using a wand that can be navigated into a torn annulus. Following ablation, we measured clinically significant pain improvement and decreased disability for patients with axial low back pain.

Lumbar discogenic pain: state-of-the-art review.

OBJECTIVE: To test the null hypotheses that: lumbar intervertebral discs cannot be a source of pain; discs are not a source of pain; painful lumbar discs cannot be diagnosed; and there is no pathology that causes discogenic pain. METHODS: Philosophical essay and discourse with reference to the literature. RESULTS: Anatomic and physiologic evidence denies the proposition that disc cannot be a source of pain. In patients with back pain, discs can be source of pain. No studies have refuted the ability of disc stimulation to diagnose discogenic pain. Studies warn only that disc stimulation may have a false-positive rate of 10% or less. Internal disc disruption is the leading cause of discogenic pain. Discogenic pain correlates with altered morphology on computerized tomography scan, with changes on magnetic resonance imaging, and with internal biophysical features of the disc. The morphological and biophysical features of discogenic pain have been produced in biomechanics studies and in laboratory animals. CONCLUSIONS: All of the null hypotheses that have been raised against the concept of discogenic pain and its diagnosis have each been refuted by one or more studies. Although studies have raised concerns, none has sustained any null hypothesis. Discogenic pain can occur and can be diagnosed if strict operational criteria are used to reduce the likelihood of false-positive results.

Cost comparisons of various diagnostic medial branch block protocols and medial branch neurotomy in a private practice setting.

OBJECTIVE: We calculated the average total facility and professional cost of medial branch neurotomy (MBN) procedure and diagnostic medial branch blocks (MBBs), based on increments of MBB results (50-100% cutoff values), to determine the most cost-effective protocol that correlates with positive MBN outcome. DESIGN/METHODS: We evaluated both actual cost and the theoretical cost of procedures in three groups: 0, single and double MBB. We calculated costs assuming MBB success rates at incrementally higher levels by incrementally raising the cutoff values for a successful diagnostic MBB by 10% increments (from 50% to 100%). We analyzed each cutoff value using the preposition that all patients meeting the cutoff value would proceed to MBN. Those not meeting the cutoff value would not have the cost of MBN added to the cost calculations. A cost per successful procedure was also analyzed. RESULTS: Cost savings were noted when ≥70% cutoff MBB values were utilized and additionally when patients declined MBN for reasons other than their MBB outcome, although these dropouts lowered the cost-effectiveness of MBB when analyzed as cost per successful procedure. Costs over 5 years per successful procedure using 0, 1 and 2 diagnostic MBB protocol (x) and MBB protocol (o) were, however, similar at all MBB cutoff values. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic MBB using progressively stringent MBB cutoff values incrementally excluded patients without posterior element pain as evidenced by incremental increase in positive outcomes following MBN. The exclusion of patients from MBN due to failure to report 70% or greater pain relief following MBB resulted in cost savings in favor of performing diagnostic MBB.

Correlation of lumbar medial branch neurotomy results with diagnostic medial branch block cutoff values to optimize therapeutic outcome.

OBJECTIVE: We sought an optimal medial branch block (MBB) cutoff value for both single and double MBB protocols that would best correlate with a positive outcome of medial branch neurotomy (MBN). OUTCOME MEASURES: We analyzed the percentage of subjective pain relief following MBB, confirmed by numerical rating scale (NRS) in aggravating positions before and 45 minutes after MBB. The percentage of overall pain relief following MBB was plotted against the following outcome variables: degree of subjective pain relief, duration of relief, patient satisfaction and activity level, no other doctor's visits, and reduction in medications use. RESULTS: Using the percent of pain relief post-MBB plotted in 10% increments in the double-MBB group, patients reporting 70% or greater pain relief following MBB showed statistically favorable outcome for the following four criteria: percentage of pain relief, duration of relief, patient satisfaction, and pain medications reduction. In the single MBB group, patients reporting 80% or greater pain relief following MBB had favorable outcomes for improvement in activity level and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The double MBB protocol better correlated with favorable MBN outcomes compared with a single MBB protocol. Using a double MBB protocol, a 70% cutoff value for reported subjective pain relief post-MBB best predicted overall outcome following MBN. Without a confirmatory MBB, an 80% cutoff value was the optimal value.

Comparison of four different analgesic discogram protocols comparing the incidence of reported pain relief following local anesthetic injection into concordantly painful lumbar intervertebral discs.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of pain relief following injection of local anesthetic (LA) into lumbar discs that caused concordant pain during provocation testing. DESIGN: Prospective collected data review from two centers and compare with published results. OUTCOME MEASURES: We compared subjective reported pain relief following provocative testing using the following protocols at three separate facilities: 23 patients undergoing routine provocative discography using contrast alone (PD); 47 patients undergoing provocative discography performed using an equal combination of LA and contrast (CPD); 120 patients injected with LA following routine PD (ADPD); 33 patients undergoing stand-alone analgesic discography (SAAD); and 28 patients injected with LA through a catheter (FAD) placed during provocative discogaphy testing. RESULTS: Pressure-controlled PD showed a positive response rate of 34% per disc in patients with a clinical diagnosis of discogenic pain. None of the PD group without LA had pain relief and less than 10% of the CPD group reported pain relief. Forty percent of the SAAD group with positive pain reproduction reported ≥50% relief and 20% reporting ≥80% relief. Forty-six percent of the ADPD group reported ≥50% relief and 30% reporting ≥80% relief. The FAD group had a greater 80% patients reporting ≥50% pain relief although fewer 26% reporting more convincing ≥80% relief. CONCLUSIONS: If the criterion standard to confirm painful annular tears is concordant pain provocation and 80% or greater pain relief following LA injected into lumbar discs, the SAAD, ADPD, and FAD protocols show statistically similar 20% to 30% prevelance.

An assessment of a new navigatable percutaneous disc decompression device (l'DISQ) through histologic evaluation and thermo-mapping in human cadaveric discs.

STUDY DESIGN: This is an in vitro experimental study of the technical capability and safety study of a navigable percutaneous disc decompression device named L'DISQ. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine if L'DISQ could adequately reach certain target zones in the disc and to measure the distribution of rises in temperature in the surrounding tissue when the device was used to ablate the disc. METHODS: Placement of the wand of L'DISQ was attempted into the posterior annulus of the discs of four fresh human cadavers. During disc ablation, thermocouple probes were used to measure the temperature within the nucleus pulposus and annulus fibrosus, on the surface of the annulus, and on the posterior longitudinal ligament. Tissues harvested from around the disc were examined histologically. RESULTS: The tip of the wand could be successfully navigated to the posterolateral or posterocentral annulus at all levels above L5-S1 using a lateral approach. Rises in temperature did not exceed 13.25 ± 0.84°C within the disc, and did not exceed 1°C on the surface of the disc. Histology demonstrated no thermal damage to the surrounding neural tissues. CONCLUSION: L'DISQ can be successfully navigated to the target zones, and disc tissue ablated without thermal or structural damage to the adjacent neural tissues.

Comparison of pressure-controlled provocation discography using automated versus manual syringe pump manometry in patients with chronic low back pain.

PURPOSE: The study compares the rate of positive discograms using an automated versus a manual pressure-controlled injection devise and compares the pressure and volume values at various pressures and initial evoked pain and 6/10 or greater evoked pain. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study prospectively collected patient study data used in a prior prospective study and with prospectively collected data which is routinely collected per our institutional standardized audit protocol. Two custom-built disc manometers (automated injection speed control; manual injection speed control) were sequentially employed during provocation discography in 510 discs of 151 consecutive patients. Two hundred thirty-seven discs of 67 patients with chronic low back pain were evaluated using the automated manometer (automated group) and 273 discs of 84 patients were evaluated with a manual manometer (manual group). RESULT: No significant differences in positive discogram rates were found between the automated and manual groups (32.1% vs 32.6% per disc, respectively, P>0.05). No significant differences in low-pressure positive discogram rates were found (16.0% vs 15.0% per disc, automated group versus manual group, respectively, P>0.05). However, there were significantly increased volumes and lower pressures at initial and "bad" pain provocation. CONCLUSION: The study results found equivalent positive discogram rates following a series of pressure-controlled discography using either an automated or manual pressure devise. There were, however significant increases in volume at both initial onset of evoked pain and at 6/10 pain when using the automated injection devise that may have caused the observed lower opening pressure and lower pressure values at initial evoked pain. Assuming increased volumes are innocuous, automated injection is inherently more controlled and may better reduce unintended and often unrecorded spurious high dynamic pressure peaks thereby reducing conscious and unconscious operator bias.

Toward more useful pressure-controlled discography: in vitro evaluation of injection speed, sensor location, and tube length.

OBJECTIVE: Pressure-controlled manometric discography is used by clinicians to evaluate discogenic pain. However, some would improve diagnostic accuracy. The goal of this study was to investigate potential confounding factors that might affect discographic results. Pressure differences depending on different speed of injection, lengths of connecting tubing and locations of sensors were evaluated using an in vitro model system. METHODS: Two sets of automated discography devices were arranged to record post-syringeal pressure pressures (PSPs) and intradiscal pressures (IDPs) in an "air chamber disk model" representing intradiscal pressure. PSPs and IDPs were measured simultaneously while varying injection speeds, and using intrasyringeal and extrasyringeal pressure sensors and contrast medium-filled tubing of different lengths. All pressure/volume curves were collected and viewed dynamically, and stored for further analysis. RESULTS: At injection speed of 0.1 cc/second, the mean pressure difference (mean ΔP) between PSP and IDP was 38.1 psi. As injection speed was reduced, mean ΔP was proportionally decreased. Mean ΔP was 5.3 psi at injection speed of 0.01 cc/second and 0.7 psi at 0.005 cc/second. Mean ΔP values were significantly higher when pressures were recorded using intrasyringeal sensor: at injection speed of 0.1 cc/second, PSP and IDP values were 82.9 and 30.1 psi, respectively, compared with 50.6 and 12.5 psi measured by extrasyringeal sensor. Mean ΔP due to increased length of tubing was not significant. CONCLUSION: Discography can be better performed with low speed injection (≤0.01 cc/second), using an extrasyringeal sensor. Difference of length of connecting tubings did not cause significant pressure differences. These data suggest that automated discography is a helpful adjunct to improve diagnostic accuracy, due to extrasyringeal location of pressure sensor and greater control of injection speed.

Efficacy of a new navigable percutaneous disc decompression device (L'DISQ) in patients with herniated nucleus pulposus related to radicular pain.

STUDY DESIGN: An institutional, prospective clinical data analysis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new navigable percutaneous disc decompression device (L'DISQ) in patients with lumbar disc herniation with radicular pain. METHODS AND OUTCOME MEASURES: We performed disc decompressions using L'DISQ on 27 patients with persistent disabling back and leg pain for 1 month or longer (average 6.48 months) due to a herniated lumbar intervertebral disc. Baseline data were prospectively gathered before the index procedure and at 1, 4, 12, and 24 weeks post-procedure. Data included pain intensity (visual analog scale [VAS]), measure of disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] and Rolando-Morris Questionnaire [RM]), health-related quality of life (Bodily Pain Scale of Short Form-36 version 2 [SF-36 BP]), and passive straight leg raising test (SLR). RESULTS: The VAS fell from 7.08±1.22 to 1.84±0.99 scores at 24 weeks post-procedure. At 24 weeks, the ODI had fallen from 41.88±10.61 to 16.66±8.55% and the RM from 11.52±3.91 to 2.68±1.97 points. The SF-36 BP dropped significant improvement from 32.89±5.83 to 49.57±4.96 scales. In the SLR test, the angular change of 24 weeks showed considerable improvement from 60.20±20.02 to 83.00±14.29 degrees. No major complication occurred, although two cases developed a disc reherniation 1 month post-procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The L'DISQ device is specifically designed to remove herniated disc using a wand that can be navigated into a disc protrusion or extrusion. Following decompression, we measured clinically significant pain improvement and decreased disability for patients with both radicular and axial pain caused by protruded and extruded discs.

Analgesic discography: effect of adding a local anesthetic to routine lumbar provocation discography.

INTRODUCTION: There is a renewed interest in analgesic testing, influenced by several studies reporting robust surgical results when the diagnosis of discogenic pain is confirmed by relief of pain post-provocative discography after injecting local anesthetic into painful discs. OBJECTIVE: We anticipated and sought to confirm that injecting local anesthetic in intervertebral discs would provide convincing pain relief and that the degree of pain relief would help confirm or refute the findings of provocative discography. METHODS: There were 23 patients in the nonanalgesic group, and 47 patients in the analgesic group. The analgesic patient discs were injected with an equal volume of local anesthetic and nonionic contrast media. Lumbar discography was performed using an automated pressure-controlled provocative discographic (APCPD) technique. Subjects reported global subjective relief at 15 and 45 minutes after APCPD. Pre- and post-procedure pain was rated using a numerical rating scale (NRS) using standardized pain provoking positions. In addition, we further compared the numbers of patients reporting a decrease in NRS scores (≥2) in standardized pain provoking positions. RESULTS: The addition of local anesthetic to APCPD did not affect the number of positive APCPD results that averaged ∼30% positive discs in both groups. The addition of local anesthetic to contrast significantly reduced pain NRS scores by 2/10 or greater during forward flexion and sitting compared with patients whose discs were injected with contrast without local anesthetic. The average pain improvement using standardized pain provocation positions and average subjective relief were not, however, significantly different in the two groups. Only two patients reported overall pain relief equal or greater to 50%. CONCLUSIONS: Using an equal mixtures of injected local anesthetic and contrast during provocative discography in a cohort of patients did not provide significant overall subjective pain relief compared to using contrast alone in a comparative separate cohort.

Common tongue conditions in primary care.

Although easily examined, abnormalities of the tongue can present a diagnostic and therapeutic dilemma for physicians. Recognition and diagnosis require a thorough history, including onset and duration, antecedent symptoms, and tobacco and alcohol use. Examination of tongue morphology and a careful assessment for lymphadenopathy are also important. Geographic tongue, fissured tongue, and hairy tongue are the most common tongue problems and do not require treatment. Median rhomboid glossitis is usually associated with a candidal infection and responds to topical antifungals. Atrophic glossitis is often linked to an underlying nutritional deficiency of iron, folic acid, vitamin B12, riboflavin, or niacin and resolves with correction of the underlying condition. Oral hairy leukoplakia, which can be a marker for underlying immunodeficiency, is caused by the Epstein-Barr virus and is treated with oral antivirals. Tongue growths usually require biopsy to differentiate benign lesions (e.g., granular cell tumors, fibromas, lymphoepithelial cysts) from premalignant leukoplakia or squamous cell carcinoma. Burning mouth syndrome often involves the tongue and has responded to treatment with alpha-lipoic acid, clonazepam, and cognitive behavior therapy in controlled trials. Several trials have also confirmed the effectiveness of surgical division of tongue-tie (ankyloglossia), in the context of optimizing the success of breastfeeding compared with education alone. Tongue lesions of unclear etiology may require biopsy or referral to an oral and maxillofacial surgeon, head and neck surgeon, or a dentist experienced in oral pathology.

The athlete and high altitude.

Expanding athlete participation in high-altitude environments highlights the importance for a sports physician to have a good understanding of the high-altitude illness (HAI) syndromes: acute mountain sickness (AMS), high-altitude cerebral edema (HACE), and high-altitude pulmonary edema (HAPE). All may occur in the setting of acute altitude exposure higher than 2500 m; incidence and severity increases as altitudes or ascent rates increase. Once HAI is recognized, proven therapies should be instituted to alleviate symptoms and avert the possibility of critical illness. Allowing for acclimatization is the best strategy for preventing HAI. Acetazolamide and dexamethasone are additional preventive measures for AMS/HACE; nifedipine, salmeterol, and phosphodiesterase inhibitors are useful in preventing HAPE. Along with the immediate hazards of HAI with altitude exposure, the sport physician also should be familiar with altitude/hypoxic training practices used by athletes to enhance fitness and performance.

15. Discogenic low back pain.

An estimated 40% of chronic lumbosacral spinal pain is attributed to the discus intervertebralis. Degenerative changes following loss of hydration of the nucleus pulposus lead to circumferential or radial tears within the annulus fibrosus. Annular tears within the outer annulus stimulate the ingrowth of blood vessels and accompanying nociceptors into the outer and occasionally inner annulus. Sensitization of these nociceptors by various inflammatory repair mechanisms may lead to chronic discogenic pain. The current criterion standard for diagnosing discogenic pain is pressure-controlled provocative discography using strict criteria and at least one negative control level. The strictness of criteria and the adherence to technical detail will allow an acceptable low false positive response rate. The most important determinants are the standardization of pressure stimulus by using a validated pressure monitoring device and avoiding overly high dynamic pressures by the slow injection rate of 0.05 mL/s. A positive discogram requires the reproduction of the patient's typical pain at an intensity of > 6/10 at a pressure of < 15 psi above opening pressure and at a volume less than 3.0 mL. Perhaps the most important and defendable response is the failure to confirm the discus is symptomatic by not meeting this strict criteria. Various interventional treatment strategies for chronic discogenic low back pain unresponsive to conservative care include reduction of inflammation, ablation of intradiscal nociceptors, lowering intranuclear pressure, removal of herniated nucleus, and radiofrequency ablation of the nociceptors. Unfortunately, most of these strategies do not meet the minimal criteria for a positive treatment advice. In particular, single-needle radiofrequency thermocoagulation of the discus is not recommended for patients with discogenic pain (2 B-). Interestingly, a little used procedure, radiofrequency ablation of the ramus communicans, does meet the (2 B+) level for endorsement. There is currently insufficient proof to recommend intradiscal electrothermal therapy (2 B±) and intradiscal biacuplasty (0). It is advised that ozone discolysis, nucleoplasty, and targeted disc decompression should only be performed as part of a study protocol. Future studies should include more strict inclusion criteria.

Are outer annular fissures stimulated during diskography the source of diskogenic low-back pain? An analysis of analgesic diskography data.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to clarify whether painful annular fissures stimulated during provocation diskography are the likely source of diskogenic pain. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis was conducted of prospectively collected data. SETTING: Multidisciplinary, academic spine center. PATIENTS: The study was completed in a cohort of 28 consecutive patients were enrolled presenting with 6 months duration of axial low-back pain recalcitrant to physical therapy, oral analgesics, and epidural steroid injections and who have diskogenic pain based on history, exam, magnetic resonance imaging, and diskography. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects underwent provocation diskography and analgesic diskography utilizing a balloon-tipped intradiskal catheter allowing intradiskal injection of anesthetic. OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual analog scale, finger-to-floor distance were utilized as outcome measures. RESULTS: 80% of painful intervertebral disks as detected by provocation diskography were sufficiently anesthetized resulting in >50% reduction in low-back pain during analgesic diskography. CONCLUSION: Diskogenic pain is in varying degrees caused by the sensitized nociocepters within annular tears.

Can magnetic resonance imaging accurately predict concordant pain provocation during provocative disc injection?

OBJECTIVE: To correlate magnetic resonance (MR) image findings with pain response by provocation discography in patients with discogenic low back pain, with an emphasis on the combination analysis of a high intensity zone (HIZ) and disc contour abnormalities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients (aged 17-68 years) with axial low back pain that was likely to be disc related underwent lumbar discography (178 discs tested). The MR images were evaluated for disc degeneration, disc contour abnormalities, HIZ, and endplate abnormalities. Based on the combination of an HIZ and disc contour abnormalities, four classes were determined: (1) normal or bulging disc without HIZ; (2) normal or bulging disc with HIZ; (3) disc protrusion without HIZ; (4) disc protrusion with HIZ. These MR image findings and a new combined MR classification were analyzed in the base of concordant pain determined by discography. RESULTS: Disc protrusion with HIZ [sensitivity 45.5%; specificity 97.8%; positive predictive value (PPV), 87.0%] correlated significantly with concordant pain provocation (P < 0.01). A normal or bulging disc with HIZ was not associated with reproduction of pain. Disc degeneration (sensitivity 95.4%; specificity 38.8%; PPV 33.9%), disc protrusion (sensitivity 68.2%; specificity 80.6%; PPV 53.6%), and HIZ (sensitivity 56.8%; specificity 83.6%; PPV 53.2%) were not helpful in the identification of a disc with concordant pain. CONCLUSION: The proposed MR classification is useful to predict a disc with concordant pain. Disc protrusion with HIZ on MR imaging predicted positive discography in patients with discogenic low back pain.

Systematic review of cervical discography as a diagnostic test for chronic spinal pain.

BACKGROUND: Chronic neck pain represents a significant public health problem. Despite high prevalence rates, there is a lack of consensus regarding the causes or treatments for this condition. Based on controlled evaluations, the cervical intervertebral discs, facet joints, and atlantoaxial joints have all been implicated as pain generators. Cervical provocation discography, which includes disc stimulation and morphological evaluation, is often used to distinguish a painful disc from other potential sources of pain. Yet in the absence of validation and controlled outcome studies, the procedure remains mired in controversy. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of the cervical discography literature. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity and usefulness of cervical provocation discography in managing and diagnosing discogenic pain by means of a systematic review. METHODS: Following a comprehensive search of the literature, selected studies were subjected to a modified Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) diagnostic accuracy evaluation. Qualitative analysis was conducted using 5 levels of evidence, ranging from Level I to III with 3 subcategories in Level II. The rating scheme was modified to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: A systematic review of the literature demonstrated that cervical discography plays a significant role in selecting surgical candidates and improving outcomes, despite concerns regarding the false-positive rate, lack of standardization, and assorted potential confounding factors. Based on the studies utilizing the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) criteria, the data show a prevalence rate ranging between 16% and 20%. Based on the 3 studies that utilized IASP criteria during the performance of cervical discography, the evidence derived from studies evaluating the diagnostic validity of the procedure, the indicated level of evidence is Level II-2 based on modified U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include a paucity of literature, poor methodologic quality, and very few studies performed utilizing IASP criteria. CONCLUSION: Cervical discography performed according to the IASP criteria may be a useful tool for evaluating chronic cervical pain, without disc herniation or radiculitis. Based on a modified AHRQ accuracy evaluation and USPSTF level of evidence criteria, this systematic review indicates the strength of evidence as Level II-2 for diagnostic accuracy of cervical discography.

Size and aggregation of corticosteroids used for epidural injections.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to document particulate size in commonly used corticosteroid preparations. Inadvertent injection of particulate corticosteroids into a vertebral or foraminal artery can cause brain and spinal cord embolic infarcts and the size of the particles could be directly related to the chance that a clinically significant infarct would occur. One might assume that corticosteroids with particles significantly smaller than red blood cells might be safer. DESIGN: The following four types of corticosteroid preparations were used in various solutions and evaluated under light microscopy: dexamethasone sodium phosphate injection, triamcinolone acetonide injectable suspension, betamethasone sodium phosphate and betamethasone acetate injectable suspension, and methylprednisolone acetate injectable suspension. RESULTS: Dexamethasone sodium phosphate particle size was approximately 10 times smaller than red blood cells and the particles did not appear to aggregate; even mixed with 1% lidocaine HCl solution and with contrast dye, the size of the particles were unchanged. Triamcinolone acetonide and betamethasone sodium phosphate showed variable sizes; some particles were larger than red blood cells, and aggregation of particles was evident. Methylprednisolone acetate showed uniformity in size and the majority were smaller than red blood cells which were not aggregated, but the particles were densely packed. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the particulate steroid solutions, dexamethasone sodium phosphate had particles that were significantly smaller than red blood cells, had the least tendency to aggregation, and had the lowest density. These characteristics should significantly reduce the risk of embolic infarcts or prevent them from occurring after intra-arterial injection. Until shown otherwise in clinical studies, interventionalists might consider using dexamethasone or another corticosteroid preparation with similar high solubility and negligible particle size when performing epidural injections.

The influence of psychologic factors on diskography in patients with chronic axial low back pain.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a patient's presenting psychometric scores affect the findings of a pressure and injection speed-controlled manometric lumbar diskography in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). DESIGN: A prospective, correlation-based, investigative study. SETTING: Free-standing ambulatory spine surgery center. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred sixty-three disks from 81 patients (54 men, 27 women). INTERVENTION: Diskography was performed using pressure and injection speed-controlled techniques. The patients were divided into psychometric subgroups (normal, at risk, abnormal) according to the Distress and Risk Assessment Method (DRAM). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The diskography findings on each psychometric DRAM subgroup were evaluated. RESULTS: Across the individual psychometric categories, the positive rates of diskography in the normal, at-risk, and abnormal subgroups were 75.0% (9/12), 59.5% (25/42), and 70.4% (19/27), respectively (P>.05). The mean numeric rating scores of pain at 15 and 50 psi above the opening pressure were similar in the 3 psychometric subgroups. There was no correlation between the diskography results and the psychometric subgroupings. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CLBP, there is no correlation between the presenting psychometric DRAM score and the findings from pressure and injection speed-controlled manometric lumbar diskography.

Evidence-informed management of chronic low back pain with minimally invasive nuclear decompression.

The management of chronic low back pain (CLBP) has proven very challenging in North America, as evidenced by its mounting socioeconomic burden. Choosing among available nonsurgical therapies can be overwhelming for many stakeholders, including patients, health providers, policy makers, and third-party payers. Although all parties share a common goal and wish to use limited health-care resources to support interventions most likely to result in clinically meaningful improvements, there is often uncertainty about the most appropriate intervention for a particular patient. To help understand and evaluate the various commonly used nonsurgical approaches to CLBP, the North American Spine Society has sponsored this special focus issue of The Spine Journal, titled Evidence Informed Management of Chronic Low Back Pain Without Surgery. Articles in this special focus issue were contributed by leading spine practitioners and researchers, who were invited to summarize the best available evidence for a particular intervention and encouraged to make this information accessible to nonexperts. Each of the articles contains five sections (description, theory, evidence of efficacy, harms, and summary) with common subheadings to facilitate comparison across the 24 different interventions profiled in this special focus issue, blending narrative and systematic review methodology as deemed appropriate by the authors. It is hoped that articles in this special focus issue will be informative and aid in decision making for the many stakeholders evaluating nonsurgical interventions for CLBP.