Effectiveness of a mucolythic agent as a local adjuvant in revision lumbar spine surgery. (1/33)

 (+info)

Preliminary results of a randomized, equivalence trial of fluoroscopic caudal epidural injections in managing chronic low back pain: Part 3--Post surgery syndrome. (2/33)

BACKGROUND: Post surgery syndrome resulting in persistent pain following lumbar spine surgery is common. Speculated causes of post lumbar surgery syndrome include stenosis, degeneration of adjacent segments, internal disc disruption, recurrent disc herniation, retained disc fragment, epidural or intraneural fibrosis, radiculopathy, and various other causes. Epidural injections are most commonly used in post surgery syndrome. There is lack of evidence for the effectiveness of epidural injections in managing chronic low back pain with or without lower extremity pain secondary to post surgery syndrome. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, equivalence trial. SETTING: An interventional pain management practice, a specialty referral center, a private practice setting in the United States. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of caudal epidural injections in patients with chronic low back and lower extremity pain after surgical intervention with post lumbar surgery syndrome. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to one of 2 groups; Group I patients received caudal epidural injections with local anesthetic (lidocaine 0.5%), whereas Group II patients received caudal epidural injections with 0.5% lidocaine 9 mL mixed with 1 mL of 6 mg non-particulate Celestone. Randomization was performed by computer-generated random allocation sequence by simple randomization. OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT: Multiple outcome measures were utilized which included the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), the Oswestry Disability Index 2.0 (ODI), employment status, and opioid intake with assessment at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months post-treatment. Significant pain relief was described as 50% or more, whereas significant improvement in the disability score was defined as a reduction of 40% or more. RESULTS: Significant pain relief (> or =50%) was recorded in 60% to 70% of the patients with no significant differences noted with or without steroid over a period of one-year. In addition, functional assessment measured by the ODI also showed significant improvement with at least 40% reduction in Oswestry scores in 40% to 55% of the patients. The average procedures per year were 3.4 with an average total relief per year of 31.7 +/- 19.10 weeks in Group I and 26.2 +/- 18.34 weeks in Group II over a period of 52 weeks. LIMITATIONS: The results of this study are limited by the lack of a placebo group and the preliminary report size of only 20 patients in each group. CONCLUSION: Caudal epidural injections in chronic function-limiting low back pain in post surgery syndrome without facet joint pain demonstrated effectiveness with over 55% of the patients showing improvement in functional status with significant pain relief in 60% to 70%.  (+info)

Systematic review of percutaneous adhesiolysis and management of chronic low back pain in post lumbar surgery syndrome. (3/33)

BACKGROUND: Post lumbar surgery syndrome or failed back surgery syndrome with persistent pain continues to increase over the years. The speculated causes of post lumbar laminectomy syndrome include acquired stenosis, epidural fibrosis, arachnoiditis, radiculopathy, and recurrent disc herniation. Epidural fibrosis may account for as much as 20% to 36% of all cases of failed back surgery syndrome. Percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis has been employed in interventional pain management in the treatment of chronic, refractory low back and lower extremity pain after back surgery. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized trials and observational studies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain due to post lumbar surgery syndrome. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted utilizing electronic databases, as well as systematic reviews and cross references from 1966 through December 2008. The quality of individual articles used in this analysis was assessed by modified Cochrane review criteria for randomized trials and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria for assessment of observational studies. Clinical relevance was evaluated using 5 questions according to the criteria recommended by the Cochrane Review Back Group. Analysis was conducted using 5 levels of evidence, ranging from Level I to III, with 3 subcategories in Level II. OUTCOME PARAMETERS: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief of at least 6 months and long-term relief of more than 6 months). Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and change in opioid intake. RESULTS: Of the 13 studies considered for inclusion, 3 randomized trials and 4 observational studies met the inclusion criteria for methodologic quality assessment and evidence synthesis based on methodologic quality scores of 50 or more. Evidence of percutaneous adhesiolysis in the management of chronic low back pain in post-lumbar surgery syndrome is Level I to Level II-1, with evidence derived from 3 randomized trials. LIMITATIONS: There is a paucity of efficacy and pragmatic trials. No trials have been published after 2006. CONCLUSION: The indicated level of evidence for percutaneous adhesiolysis is Level I or II-1 based on the US Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria.  (+info)

Spinal cord stimulation for patients with failed back surgery syndrome: a systematic review. (4/33)

BACKGROUND: Failed back surgery syndrome is common in the United States. Management of post lumbar surgery syndrome with multiple modalities includes interventional techniques, resulting in moderate improvement, leaving a proportion of patients in intractable pain. The systematic reviews of long-term benefits and risks of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for patients with failed back surgery syndrome showed limited to moderate evidence and cost effectiveness. However, with the exponential increase in surgery in the United States, spinal cord implants are also increasing. Thus, the discussion continues with claims of lack of evidence on one hand and escalating increases in utilization on the other hand. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of SCS in patients with failed back surgery syndrome. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review is undertaken to examine the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of SCS in post lumbar surgery syndrome and to demonstrate clinical and cost effectiveness. METHODS: Review of the literature was performed according to the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group Criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria for observational studies. The 5 levels of evidence were classified as Level I, II, or III with 3 subcategories in Level II based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Data sources included relevant literature of the English language identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to December 2008, and manual searches of bibliographies of known primary and review articles. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief < or = one-year and long-term > one-year). Secondary outcome measures of improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake were utilized. RESULTS: The indicated evidence is Level II-1 or II-2 for long-term relief in managing patients with failed back surgery syndrome. LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this review included the paucity and heterogeneity of the literature. CONCLUSION: This systematic review evaluating the effectiveness of SCS in relieving chronic intractable pain of failed back surgery syndrome indicated the evidence to be Level II-1 or II-2 for clinical use on a long-term basis.  (+info)

Effectiveness of spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis in post lumbar surgery syndrome: a systematic review. (5/33)

BACKGROUND: Post lumbar surgery syndrome with persistent chronic low back and lower extremity pain is common in the United States. Epidural fibrosis may account for as much as 20% to 36% of all cases of failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). Percutaneous adhesiolysis with a catheter or direct visualization of the spinal canal and the contents with an endoscope are techniques employed in resistant cases when patients fail to respond to conservative modalities of treatment, including fluoroscopically directed epidural injections. Some patients failing to respond to percutaneous adhesiolysis are candidates for spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis. However, literature evaluating the effectiveness of spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis is sparse and discussions continue about its effectiveness, utility, and complications. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of the available literature. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis in the management of chronic low back and lower extremity pain in post surgical patients with chronic recalcitrant pain, non-responsive to conservative modalities of management and fluoroscopically directed epidural injections. METHODS: A search of relevant resources (PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane database) was accomplished and the resulting publications were examined based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria set forth. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies were included in the search. Two reviewers assessed the studies' methodologies and outcomes. Randomized clinical trials were assessed and scored based on the criteria established by the Cochrane methodological assessment criteria of randomized clinical trials and the observational studies were assessed and scored based on the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria. Clinical relevance was evaluated utilizing Cochrane review criteria. Analysis was conducted using 5 levels of evidence, ranging from Level I to III, with 3 subcategories in Level II. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (> or = 50%) in follow-up for at least 6 months. Pain relief for longer than 6 months was considered long-term and 6 months or less was considered short-term. The secondary outcome measures were functional and psychological status, return to work, patient satisfaction, and opioid intake. RESULTS: Of the 13 studies considered for inclusion, one randomized trial and 5 observational studies met inclusion criteria for evidence synthesis based on the inclusion criteria and methodologic quality scores of 50 or more. The indicated level of evidence for endoscopic adhesiolysis is Level II-1 or II-2 evidence for short- and long-term relief based on the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria. LIMITATIONS: There was a paucity of literature for randomized trials. CONCLUSION: Spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis may be used as an effective treatment modality for chronic refractory low back pain and radiculopathy that is related to epidural adhesions.  (+info)

Spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain of neuropathic or ischaemic origin: systematic review and economic evaluation. (6/33)

 (+info)

Evaluation of sympathetic response in cases with failed back surgery syndrome. (7/33)

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate whether sympathetic skin response (SSR) was affected in cases with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). METHODS: Twenty-nine cases admitted to our department and diagnosed as FBSS were recruited for the study. All the cases had back, leg or back and leg pain in the months or in one year following spinal surgery. The control group consisted of 13 healthy hospital personnel. Electrophysiologic nerve conduction studies and SSR recordings were applied on the symptomatic side (29 legs) in study cases and both sides (26 legs) in the control group. SSRs of the study group were compared with those of the sex-, body mass index- and age-matched control group of 13 people. Patients having peripheral nerve entrapment syndromes, peripheral vascular disease, neurologic or psychiatric disease, alcoholism, or drug abuse were excluded from the study. Pain intensity was recorded by visual analog scale (VAS) and depression was recorded by Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). RESULTS: Latency duration in SSR in the study group was significantly higher (p=0.006) when compared with the healthy controls. There was no SSR in 4 patients and there was a positive correlation between BDI and SSR (r=0.46). CONCLUSION: It was concluded that the sympathetic nervous system is affected in FBSS patients with changes in SSR, and that the dysfunction of the sympathetic nervous system may contribute to the intensity and chronicity of pain states in this group of patients.  (+info)

Monoradiculopathy and secondary segmental instability caused by postoperative pars interarticularis fracture: a case report. (8/33)

Instability can develop after lumbar spinal surgery. What is also known as secondary segmental instability is one of the important causes of failed back syndrome. In this paper, we described a 45-year-old female patient who was diagnosed with secondary segmental instability caused by left L3 pars interarticularis fracture after a high lumbar disc surgery and was subsequently treated with re-operation. We evaluated the clinical course, diagnosis, and treatment methods for secondary segmental instability caused by postoperative pars interarticularis fracture. Furthermore, we emphasized the importance of preserving the pars interarticularis during upper lumbar disc surgeries in order to avoid a potential stress fracture.  (+info)