Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse

Prognostic Value of Michigan State University (MSU) Classification for Lumbar Disc Herniation: Is It Suitable for Surgical Selection?

BACKGROUND

Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is the most common cause of radiculopathy; patients with severe pain refractory to conservative management or neurological deficits are candidates to surgical procedures. Michigan State University (MSU) classification is a radiological codification considering both the size of the LDH and its medial to lateral location on the axial plane. The purpose of this retrospective study is to identify which kind of LDH, according to the MSU scheme, is more likely to cause a motor deficit.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis on data obtained from 114 patients treated with 117 lumbar microdiscectomies after failure of non-operative care. All patients underwent neurological and functional evaluation before and after surgery according to the following: Oswestry Disability Index, visual analog scale, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association back pain evaluation questionnaire. Magnetic resonance imaging proved that disc herniation was classified according to the MSU scheme and was correlated with motor disturbances expressed according to Medical Research Council grade.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis showed a significant correlation between the lateral location of disc herniation (preforaminal and extraforaminal LDH, respectively MSU B and MSU C) and the grade of muscle weakness, given that the LDH in these locations poorly responded to medical therapy and was at higher risk for motor deficit onset; no significant correlation with the size was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Beyond standardization of radiologic description, MSU classification proved to be useful in definition of prognosis and possibly in selection of surgical candidates. However, these data should be confirmed by prospective studies on a larger sample of patients, also including those under way for conservative treatment.

Nonsurgical treatment outcomes for surgical candidates with lumbar disc herniation: a comprehensive cohort study

Physicians often encounter surgical candidates with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) who request non-surgical management even though surgery is recommended. However, second opinions may differ among doctors. Therefore, a prospective comprehensive cohort study (CCS) was designed to assess outcomes of nonsurgical treatment for surgical candidates who were recommended to undergo surgery for LDH but requested a second opinion. The CCS includes both randomized and observational cohorts, comprising a nonsurgery cohort and surgery cohort, in a parallel fashion. Crossover between the nonsurgery and surgery cohorts was allowed at any time. The present study was an as-treated interim analysis of 128 cases (nonsurgery cohort, n = 71; surgery cohort, n = 57). Patient-reported outcomes included visual analogue scores for the back (VAS-B) and leg (VAS-L), the Oswestry Disability Index, the EuroQol 5-Dimension instrument, and the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), which were evaluated at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. At baseline, age and SF-36 physical function were significantly lower in the surgery cohort than in the nonsurgery cohort (p < 0.05). All adjusted outcomes significantly improved after both nonsurgical and surgical treatment (p < 0.05). The nonsurgery cohort showed less improvement of VAS-B and VAS-L scores at 1 month (p < 0.01), but no difference between cohorts was observed thereafter for 24 months (p > 0.01). Nonsurgical management may be a negotiable option even for surgical candidates in the shared decision-making process.

Association of quantitative sensory testing parameters with clinical outcome in patients with lumbar radiculopathy undergoing microdiscectomy

Background/Aim

This study aimed to establish the somatosensory profile of patients with lumbar radiculopathy at pre‐and post‐microdiscectomy and to explore any association between pre‐surgical quantitative sensory test (QST) parameters and post‐surgical clinical outcomes.

Methods

A standardized QST protocol was performed in 53 patients (mean age 38 ± 11 years, 26 females) with unilateral L5/S1 radiculopathy in the main pain area (MPA), affected dermatome and contralateral mirror sites and in age‐ and gender‐,and body site‐matched healthy controls. Repeat measures at 3 months included QST, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and numerous other clinical measures; at 12 months, only clinical measures were repeated. A change <30% on the ODI was defined as ‘no clinically meaningful improvement’.

Results

Patients showed a significant loss of function in their symptomatic leg both in the dermatome (thermal, mechanical, vibration detection p < .002), and MPA (thermal, mechanical, vibration detection, mechanical pain threshold, mechanical pain sensitivity p < .041) and increased cold sensitivity in the MPA (p < .001). Pre‐surgical altered QST parameters improved significantly post‐surgery in the dermatome (p < .018) in the symptomatic leg and in the MPA (p < .010), except for thermal detection thresholds and cold sensitivity. Clinical outcomes improved at 3 and 12 months (p < .001). Seven patients demonstrated <30% change on the ODI at 12 months. Baseline loss of function in mechanical detection in the MPA was associated with <30% change on the ODI at 12 months (OR 2.63, 95% CI 1.09–6.37, p = .032).

Conclusion

Microdiscectomy resulted in improvements in affected somatosensory parameters and clinical outcomes. Pre‐surgical mechanical detection thresholds may be predictive of clinical outcome.

Significance

This study documented quantitative sensory testing (QST) profiles in patients with lumbar radiculopathy in their main pain area (MPA) and dermatome pre‐ and post‐microdiscectomy and explored associations between QST parameters and clinical outcome. Lumbar radiculopathy was associated with loss of function in modalities mediated by large and small sensory fibres. Microdiscectomy resulted in significant improvements in loss of function and clinical outcomes in 85% of our cohort. Pre‐surgical mechanical detection thresholds in the MPA may be predictive of clinical outcome.

Abandoned techniques in spine surgery

In spine surgery, certain surgical techniques and devices are currently in marked decline or have been completely abandoned. Although used in thousands of patients, such treatments failed to demonstrate durable and sound effectiveness, and sometimes associate inacceptable morbidity. Chemopapain injections, percutaneous discectomy, laser discectomy or antiadhesion gels are examples of abandoned therapies. Some other techniques are in frank decline like implantation of interspinous devices or lumbar disc prosthesis. In general, a technique is abandoned due to inefficacy, excessive associated morbidity, substituted by another more efficacious and less aggressive technique, end of commercialization, or usage prohibition. In the last decades, a great commercial pressure plus an increasing social demand have managed to convince many spine surgeons to indicate treatments not sufficiently supported by scientific evidence nor consolidated over time, many of which are eventually abandoned.

Effective treatment options for musculoskeletal pain in primary care: A systematic overview of current evidence

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Musculoskeletal pain, the most common cause of disability globally, is most frequently managed in primary care. People with musculoskeletal pain in different body regions share similar characteristics, prognosis, and may respond to similar treatments. This overview aims to summarise current best evidence on currently available treatment options for the five most common musculoskeletal pain presentations (back, neck, shoulder, knee and multi-site pain) in primary care.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted. Initial searches identified clinical guidelines, clinical pathways and systematic reviews. Additional searches found recently published trials and those addressing gaps in the evidence base. Data on study populations, interventions, and outcomes of intervention on pain and function were extracted. Quality of systematic reviews was assessed using AMSTAR, and strength of evidence rated using a modified GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Moderate to strong evidence suggests that exercise therapy and psychosocial interventions are effective for relieving pain and improving function for musculoskeletal pain. NSAIDs and opioids reduce pain in the short-term, but the effect size is modest and the potential for adverse effects need careful consideration. Corticosteroid injections were found to be beneficial for short-term pain relief among patients with knee and shoulder pain. However, current evidence remains equivocal on optimal dose, intensity and frequency, or mode of application for most treatment options.

CONCLUSION

This review presents a comprehensive summary and critical assessment of current evidence for the treatment of pain presentations in primary care. The evidence synthesis of interventions for common musculoskeletal pain presentations shows moderate-strong evidence for exercise therapy and psychosocial interventions, with short-term benefits only from pharmacological treatments. Future research into optimal dose and application of the most promising treatments is needed.

Surgical versus conservative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Evidence comparing the effectiveness of surgical and conservative treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation is controversial. We sought to compare short-term and long-term effectiveness of surgical and conservative treatment in sciatica symptom severity and quality of life in patients with lumbar disc herniation in a routine clinical setting.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of a routine clinical practice registry consisting of 370 patients. Outcome measures were the North American Spine Society questionnaire and the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey to assess patient-reported back pain, physical function, neurogenic symptoms and quality of life. Primary outcomes were back pain at 6 and 12 weeks. Standard open discectomy was assessed versus conservative interventions at 6, 12, 52 and 104 weeks. We filled in missing outcome variable values with multiple imputation, accounted for repeated measures within patients with mixed-effects models and adjusted baseline group differences in relevant prognostic indicators by inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

Surgical treatment patients reported less back pain at 6 weeks than those receiving conservative therapy (-0.97; 95% CI -1.89 to -0.09), were more likely to report ≥50% decrease in back pain symptoms from baseline to 6 weeks (48% vs 17%, risk difference: 0.34; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.47) and reported less physical function disability at 52 weeks (-3.7; 95% CI -7.4 to -0.1). The other assessments showed minimal between-group differences with CIs, including the null effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with conservative therapy, surgical treatment provided faster relief from back pain symptoms in patients with lumbar disc herniation, but did not show a benefit over conservative treatment in midterm and long-term follow-up.

A randomised controlled trial of transforaminal endoscopic discectomy vs microdiscectomy

PURPOSE

Transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (TED) minimises paraspinal muscle damage. The aim of this trial was to compare clinical outcomes of TED to Microdiscectomy (Micro).

METHODS

143 patients, age 25-70 years and <115 kg, with single level lumbar prolapse and radiculopathy, were recruited and randomised. 70 received TED under conscious sedation and 70 Micro under general anaesthesia. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analogue scores (VAS) of back and leg pain, and Short Form Health Survey indices (SF-36) were measured preoperatively and at 3, 12 and 24 months.

RESULTS

All outcome measures improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.001). Affected side leg pain was lower in the TED group at 2 years (1.9 ± 2.6 vs 3.5 ± 3.1, p = 0.002). Hospital stay was shorter following TED (0.7 ± 0.7 vs 1.4 ± 1.3 days, p < 0.001). Two Micro patients and five TED patients required revision giving a relative risk of revision for TED of 2.62 (95% CI 0.49-14.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Functional improvements were maintained at 2 years in both groups with less ongoing sciatica after TED. A greater revision rate after TED was offset by a more rapid recovery.

Sedation for Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Although anesthetic requirements for minimally invasive neurosurgical techniques have been described in detail and applied successfully since the early 2000s, most of the literature on this subject has dealt with cranial cases that were operated on in the supine or sitting positions. However, spinal surgery has also used minimally invasive techniques that were performed in prone position for more than 30 years to date. Although procedures in both these neurosurgical techniques require the patient to be awake for a certain period of time, the main surgical difference with minimally invasive spinal surgery is that the patients are in the prone position, which may result in increased requirement of airway management because of deep sedation. In addition, although minimally invasive spinal surgery progresses slowly and different techniques are used with no agreement on the terminology used to describe these techniques thus far, the anesthetist needs to understand the surgical and anesthetic requirements for each type of intervention in order to take necessary precautions. This paper reviews the literature on this topic and discusses the anesthetic necessities for percutaneous endoscopic laser surgery.

What were the advantages of microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation comparing with open discectomy: a meta-analysis?

The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of micro-endoscopic discectomy (MED) and open discectomy (OD) for lubmar disc herniation (LDH). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MED with OD for LDH were searched comprehensively in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library. Relevant studies retrieved, data extracted and the quality of included studies were independently performed by two authors. RevMan software (Version 5.2.0) was used to analyse and synthesis relevant data of the included studies. Nine RCTs involving 774 patients were obtained and reported the relevant outcome measures. Compared with OD group, there were significant difference in the general operation indicators including operation time, blood loss, site of incision, hospital stay and time of return to work, biochemical indexes including C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) in MED group. Meanwhile, there were no difference in effective rate, complication including total complications, dural leaks occurred and recurrence of the disc herniation, compared MED group with OD group. MED had slighter trauma, milder blood loss and shorter healing time than OD. The results demonstrated MED has great efficacy and safety comparable to OD. So we think that MED can be used routinely for LDH patients, especially the patients of old and intolerable major surgery. Meanwhile, it is necessary for surgeon to master indication and contraindication of MED and improve the operative technique.

Surgery or physical activity in the management of sciatica: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Previous reviews have compared surgical to non-surgical management of sciatica, but have overlooked the specific comparison between surgery and physical activity-based interventions.

METHODS

Systematic review using MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase and PEDro databases was conducted. Randomised controlled trials comparing surgery to physical activity, where patients were experiencing the three most common causes of sciatica-disc herniation, spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. Two independent reviewers extracted pain and disability data (converted to a common 0-100 scale) and assessed methodological quality using the PEDro scale. The size of the effects was estimated for each outcome at three different time points, with a random effects model adopted and the GRADE approach used in summary conclusions.

RESULTS

Twelve trials were included. In the short term, surgery provided better outcomes than physical activity for disc herniation: disability [WMD -9.00 (95 % CI -13.73, -4.27)], leg pain [WMD -16.01 (95 % CI -23.00, -9.02)] and back pain [WMD -12.44 (95 % CI -17.76, -7.09)]; for spondylolisthesis: disability [WMD -14.60 (95 % CI -17.12, -12.08)], leg pain [WMD -35.00 (95 % CI -39.66, -30.34)] and back pain [WMD -20.00 (95 % CI -24.66, -15.34)] and spinal stenosis: disability [WMD -11.39 (95 % CI -17.31, -5.46)], leg pain [WMD, -27.17 (95 % CI -35.87, -18.46)] and back pain [WMD -20.80 (95 % CI -25.15, -16.44)]. Long-term and greater than 2-year post-randomisation results favoured surgery for spondylolisthesis and stenosis, although the size of the effects reduced with time. For disc herniation, no significant effect was shown for leg and back pain comparing surgery to physical activity.

CONCLUSION

There are indications that surgery is superior to physical activity-based interventions in reducing pain and disability for disc herniation at short-term follow-up only; but high-quality evidence in this field is lacking (GRADE). For spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis, surgery is superior to physical activity up to greater than 2 years follow-up. Results should guide clinicians and patients when facing the difficult decision of having surgery or engaging in active care interventions. PROSPERO registration number : CRD42013005746.

Developments in intervertebral disc disease research: pathophysiology, mechanobiology, and therapeutics

Low back pain is a leading cause of disability worldwide and the second most common cause of physician visits. There are many causes of back pain, and among them, disc herniation and intervertebral disc degeneration are the most common diagnoses and targets for intervention. Currently, clinical treatment outcomes are not strongly correlated with diagnoses, emphasizing the importance for characterizing more completely the mechanisms of degeneration and their relationships with symptoms. This review covers recent studies elucidating cellular and molecular changes associated with disc mechanobiology, as it relates to degeneration and regeneration. Specifically, we review findings on the biochemical changes in disc diseases, including cytokines, chemokines, and proteases; advancements in disc disease diagnostics using imaging modalities; updates on studies examining the response of the intervertebral disc to injury; and recent developments in repair strategies, including cell-based repair, biomaterials, and tissue engineering. Findings on the effects of the omega-6 fatty acid, linoleic acid, on nucleus pulposus tissue engineering are presented. Studies described in this review provide greater insights into the pathogenesis of disc degeneration and may define new paradigms for early or differential diagnostics of degeneration using new techniques such as systemic biomarkers. In addition, research on the mechanobiology of disease enriches the development of therapeutics for disc repair, with potential to diminish pain and disability associated with disc degeneration.

A meta-analysis of endoscopic discectomy versus open discectomy for symptomatic lumbar disk herniation

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to systematically compare the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic discectomy (ED) with open discectomy (OD) for the treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

METHODS

A highly sensitive search strategy was used to identify all published randomized controlled trials up to August 2014. A criteria list taken from Koes et al. was used to evaluate the risk of bias of the included studies. The five questions that were recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group were used to evaluate the clinical relevance. Cochrane methodology was used for the results of this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Nine relevant RCTs involving 1,092 patients were identified. Compared with OD, ED results in slightly better clinical outcomes which were evaluated by the Macnab criteria without clinical significance (ED group: 95.76 %; OD group: 80 %; OR: 3.72, 95 % CI: [0.76, 18.14], P = 0.10), a significantly greater patient satisfaction rate (ED group: 93.21 %; OD group: 86.57 %; OR: 2.19; 95 % CI: [1.09, 4.40]; P = 0.03), lower intraoperative blood loss volume (WMD: -123.71, 95 % CI: [-173.47, -73.95], P < 0.00001), and shorter length of hospital stay (WMD: -Table 2144.45, 95 % CI: [-239.54, -49.37], P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

From the existing outcomes, ED surgery could be viewed as a sufficient and safe supplementation and alternative to standard open discectomy. The cost-effectiveness analyses still remain unproved from the existing data. More independent high-quality RCTs using sufficiently large sample sizes with cost-effectiveness analyses are needed.

Minimally invasive discectomy versus microdiscectomy/open discectomy for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation

BACKGROUND

Microdiscectomy or open discectomy (MD/OD) are the standard procedures for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation and they involve removal of the portion of the intervertebral disc compressing the nerve root or spinal cord (or both) with or without the aid of a headlight loupe or microscope magnification. Potential advantages of newer minimally invasive discectomy (MID) procedures over standard MD/OD include less blood loss, less postoperative pain, shorter hospitalisation and earlier return to work.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of MID versus MD/OD for management of lumbar intervertebral discopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (November 2013), MEDLINE (1946 to November 2013) and EMBASE (1974 to November 2013) and applied no language restrictions. We also contacted experts in the field for additional studies and reviewed reference lists of relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled trials (QRCTs) that compared MD/OD with a MID (percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar or transforaminal lumbar discectomy, transmuscular tubular microdiscectomy and automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy) for treatment of adults with lumbar radiculopathy secondary to discopathy. We evaluated the following primary outcomes: pain related to sciatica or low back pain (LBP) as measured by a visual analogue scale, sciatic specific outcomes such as neurological deficit of lower extremity or bowel/urinary incontinence and functional outcomes (including daily activity or return to work). We also evaluated the following secondary outcomes: complications of surgery, duration of hospital stay, postoperative opioid use, quality of life and overall participant satisfaction. Two authors checked data abstractions and articles for inclusion. We resolved discrepancies by consensus.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We used pre-developed forms to extract data and two authors independently assessed risk of bias. For statistical analysis, we used risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 11 studies (1172 participants). We assessed seven out of 11 studies as having high overall risk of bias. There was low-quality evidence that MID was associated with worse leg pain than MD/OD at follow-up ranging from six months to two years (e.g. at one year: MD 0.13, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.16), but differences were small (less than 0.5 points on a 0 to 10 scale) and did not meet standard thresholds for clinically meaningful differences. There was low-quality evidence that MID was associated with worse LBP than MD/OD at six-month follow-up (MD 0.35, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.51) and at two years (MD 0.54, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.79). There was no significant difference at one year (0 to 10 scale: MD 0.19, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.59). Statistical heterogeneity was small to high (I(2) statistic = 35% at six months, 90% at one year and 65% at two years). There were no clear differences between MID techniques and MD/OD on other primary outcomes related to functional disability (Oswestry Disability Index greater than six months postoperatively) and persistence of motor and sensory neurological deficits, though evidence on neurological deficits was limited by the small numbers of participants in the trials with neurological deficits at baseline. There was just one study for each of the sciatica-specific outcomes including the Sciatica Bothersomeness Index and the Sciatica Frequency Index, which did not need further analysis. For secondary outcomes, MID was associated with lower risk of surgical site and other infections, but higher risk of re-hospitalisation due to recurrent disc herniation. In addition, MID was associated with slightly lower quality of life (less than 5 points on a 100-point scale) on some measures of quality of life, such as some physical subclasses of the 36-item Short Form. Some trials found MID to be associated with shorter duration of hospitalisation than MD/OD, but results were inconsistent.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

MID may be inferior in terms of relief of leg pain, LBP and re-hospitalisation; however, differences in pain relief appeared to be small and may not be clinically important. Potential advantages of MID are lower risk of surgical site and other infections. MID may be associated with shorter hospital stay but the evidence was inconsistent. Given these potential advantages, more research is needed to define appropriate indications for MID as an alternative to standard MD/OD.

Is NICE guidance for identifying lumbar nerve root compression misguided?

PURPOSE

To determine the extent to which the clinical manifestations of a cohort of people undergoing surgery for lumbosacral nerve root compression satisfy those described in The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance.

METHOD

We studied consecutive admissions for lumbar nerve root decompression surgery at two neurosurgical units. Pre-operatively, each person's clinical manifestations were documented and compared with NICE's description. Post-operatively, at three time points (within 48 h, 3 months, 12 months), each person rated their symptoms as either better, the same, or worse.

RESULTS

Pre-operatively, one person (0.8%), from 123 admissions, under 20 different consultant neurosurgeons, had manifestations consistent with NICE's clinical description of lumbar nerve root compression. Post-operatively, self-reported benefit associated with surgery appeared high, at all three time points (78-91%), supporting the diagnosis of symptomatic nerve root compression and the value of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

In this small sample, from two units, NICE's description of the clinical manifestations of lumbar nerve root compression did not describe 99% of people having surgery for it. Using NICE's definition to triage people with low back pain could result in prolonged symptoms and delayed treatment. Diagnosing lumbar nerve root compression is complex. NICE's guidance requires examination.

Systematic review of microendoscopic discectomy for lumbar disc herniation

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

To search and analyse randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published since the Cochrane review by Gibson and Waddell (2007) comparing microendoscopic discectomy (MED) with open discectomy (OD) or microdiscectomy (MD) and to assess whether MED improves patient-reported outcomes. Discectomy for symptomatic herniated lumbar discs is an effective operative treatment. A number of operative techniques exist including OD, MD, and MED. A 2007 Cochrane review identified OD as an effective treatment for symptom improvement, and found sufficient evidence for MD. However, evidence for MED was lacking.

METHODS

A systematic review of Medline and Embase was carried out. Aiming to identify RCTs carried out after 2007, which compared OD with MD and MED which reported the Oswestry disability index (ODI) as an outcome.

RESULTS

Four RCTs were identified. None of the studies found a significant difference in the ODI scores between study groups at any time point. Three studies compared MED to OD and one compared OD, MD, and MED. The largest study reported an increased number of severe complications in the MED group.

CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence to suggest that MED performed by surgeons skilled in the technique in tertiary referral centres is as effective as OD.

The evidence on surgical interventions for low back disorders, an overview of systematic reviews

PURPOSE

Many systematic reviews have been published on surgical interventions for low back disorders. The objective of this overview was to evaluate the available evidence from systematic reviews on the effectiveness of surgical interventions for disc herniation, spondylolisthesis, stenosis, and degenerative disc disease (DDD). An earlier version of this review was published in 2006 and since then, many new, better quality reviews have been published.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed in the Cochrane database of systematic reviews (CDSR), database of reviews of effectiveness (DARE) and Pubmed. Two reviewers independently performed the selection of studies, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction. Included are Cochrane reviews and non-Cochrane systematic reviews published in peer-reviewed journals. The following conditions were included: disc herniation, spondylolisthesis, and DDD with or without spinal stenosis. The following comparisons were evaluated: (1) surgery vs. conservative care, and (2) different surgical techniques compared to one another. The methodological quality of the systematic reviews was evaluated using AMSTAR. We report (pooled) analyses from the individual reviews.

RESULTS

Thirteen systematic reviews on surgical interventions for low back disorders were included for disc herniation (n = 6), spondylolisthesis (n = 2), spinal stenosis (n = 4), and DDD (n = 4). Nine (69 %) were of high quality. Five reviews provided a meta-analysis of which two showed a significant difference. For the treatment of spinal stenosis, intervertebral process devices showed more favorable results compared to conservative treatment on the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire [mean difference (MD) 23.2 95 % CI 18.5-27.8]. For degenerative spondylolisthesis, fusion showed more favorable results compared to decompression for a mixed aggregation of clinical outcome measures (RR 1.40 95 % CI 1.04-1.89) and fusion rate favored instrumented fusion over non-instrumented fusion (RR 1.37 95 % CI 1.07-1.75).

CONCLUSIONS

For most of the comparisons, the included reviews were not significant and/or clinically relevant differences between interventions were identified. Although the quality of the reviews was quite acceptable, the quality of the included studies was poor. Future studies are likely to influence our assessment of these interventions.

Surgical techniques for sciatica due to herniated disc, a systematic review

Introduction

Disc herniation with sciatica accounts for five percent of low-back disorders but is one of the most common reasons for spine surgery. The goal of this study was to update the Cochrane review on the effect of surgical techniques for sciatica due to disc herniation, which was last updated in 2007.

Materials and methods

In April 2011, we conducted a comprehensive search in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDRO, ICL, and trial registries. We also checked the reference lists and citation tracking results of each retrieved article. Only randomized controlled trials (RCT) of the surgical management of sciatica due to disc herniation were included. Comparisons including chemonucleolysis and prevention of scar tissue or comparisons against conservative treatment were excluded. Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias of the studies and extracted data. Quality of evidence was graded according to the GRADE approach.

Results

Seven studies from the original Cochrane review were included and nine additional studies were found. In total, 16 studies were included, of which four had a low risk of bias. Studies showed that microscopic discectomy results in a significantly, but not clinically relevant longer operation time of 12 min (95 % CI 2–22) and shorter incision of 24 mm (95 % CI 7–40) compared with open discectomy, but did not find any clinically relevant superiority of either technique on clinical results. There were conflicting results regarding the comparison of tubular discectomy versus microscopic discectomy for back pain and surgical duration.

Conclusions

Due to the limited amount and quality of evidence, no firm conclusions on effectiveness of the current surgical techniques being open discectomy, microscopic discectomy, and tubular discectomy compared with each other can be drawn. Those differences in leg or back pain scores, operation time, and incision length that were found are clinically insignificant. Large, high-quality studies are needed, which examine not only effectiveness but cost-effectiveness as well.

Effectiveness of heat-sensitive moxibustion in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Lumbar disc herniation is a common and costly problem. Moxibustion is employed to relieve symptoms and might therefore act as a therapeutic alternative. Many studies have already reported encouraging results in heat-sensitive moxibustion for lumbar disc herniation. Hence, we designed a randomized controlled clinical trial to investigate the effectiveness of heat-sensitive moxibustion compared with conventional moxibustion.

METHODS

This trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial. The 316 eligible patients are randomly allocated to two different groups. The experimental group is treated with heat-sensitive moxibustion (n = 158); while the control group (n = 158) is treated with conventional moxibustion. The moxibustion locations are different for the groups. The experimental group selects heat-sensitization acupoints from the region which consists of bilateral Da Changshu (BL25) and Yao Shu (Du2). Meanwhile, fixed acupoints are used in control group; patients in both groups receive 18 sessions in 2 weeks.

DISCUSSION

The study design guarantees a high internal validity for the results. It is one large-scale randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of heat-sensitive moxibustion compared to conventional moxibustion and may provide evidence for this therapy as a treatment for moderate and severe lumbar disc herniation. Moreover, the result may uncover the inherent laws to improve the therapeutic effect with suspended moxibustion.

Surgery versus conservative management of sciatica due to a lumbar herniated disc: a systematic review

The effectiveness of surgery in patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniations is not without dispute. The goal of this study was to assess the effects of surgery versus conservative therapy (including epidural injections) for patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation. A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro up to October 2009. Randomised controlled trials of adults with lumbar radicular pain, which evaluated at least one clinically relevant outcome measure (pain, functional status, perceived recovery, lost days of work) were included. Two authors assessed risk of bias according to Cochrane criteria and extracted the data. In total, five studies were identified, two of which with a low risk of bias. One study compared early surgery with prolonged conservative care followed by surgery if needed; three studies compared surgery with usual conservative care, and one study compared surgery with epidural injections. Data were not pooled because of clinical heterogeneity and poor reporting of data. One large low-risk-of-bias trial demonstrated that early surgery in patients with 6-12 weeks of radicular pain leads to faster pain relief when compared with prolonged conservative treatment, but there were no differences after 1 and 2 years. Another large low-risk-of-bias trial between surgery and usual conservative care found no statistically significant differences on any of the primary outcome measures after 1 and 2 years. Future studies should evaluate who benefits more from surgery and who from conservative care.

Injection therapy and denervation procedures for chronic low-back pain: a systematic review

Injection therapy and denervation procedures are commonly used in the management of chronic low-back pain (LBP) despite uncertainty regarding their effectiveness and safety. To provide an evaluation of the current evidence associated with the use of these procedures, a systematic review was performed. Existing systematic reviews were screened, and the Cochrane Back Review Group trial register was searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Studies were included if they recruited adults with chronic LBP, evaluated the use of injection therapy or denervation procedures and measured at least one clinically relevant outcome (such as pain or functional status). Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility and risk of bias (RoB). A meta-analysis was performed with clinically homogeneous studies, and the GRADE approach was used to determine the quality of evidence. In total, 27 RCTs were included, 14 on injection therapy and 13 on denervation procedures. 18 (66%) of the studies were determined to have a low RoB. Because of clinical heterogeneity, only two comparisons could be pooled. Overall, there is only low to very low quality evidence to support the use of injection therapy and denervation procedures over placebo or other treatments for patients with chronic LBP. However, it cannot be ruled out that in carefully selected patients, some injection therapy or denervation procedures may be of benefit.

Physical examination for lumbar radiculopathy due to disc herniation in patients with low-back pain

BACKGROUND

Low-back pain with leg pain (sciatica) may be caused by a herniated intervertebral disc exerting pressure on the nerve root. Most patients will respond to conservative treatment, but in carefully selected patients, surgical discectomy may provide faster relief of symptoms. Primary care clinicians use patient history and physical examination to evaluate the likelihood of disc herniation and select patients for further imaging and possible surgery.

OBJECTIVES

(1) To assess the performance of tests performed during physical examination (alone or in combination) to identify radiculopathy due to lower lumbar disc herniation in patients with low-back pain and sciatica;(2) To assess the influence of sources of heterogeneity on diagnostic performance.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched electronic databases for primary studies: PubMed (includes MEDLINE), EMBASE, and CINAHL, and (systematic) reviews: PubMed and Medion (all from earliest until 30 April 2008), and checked references of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered studies if they compared the results of tests performed during physical examination on patients with back pain with those of diagnostic imaging (MRI, CT, myelography) or findings at surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed the quality of each publication with the QUADAS tool, and extracted details on patient and study design characteristics, index tests and reference standard, and the diagnostic two-by-two table. We presented information on sensitivities and specificities with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for all aspects of physical examination. Pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were computed for subsets of studies showing sufficient clinical and statistical homogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 cohort studies (median N = 126, range 71 to 2504) and three case control studies (38 to100 cases). Only one study was carried out in a primary care population. When used in isolation, diagnostic performance of most physical tests (scoliosis, paresis or muscle weakness, muscle wasting, impaired reflexes, sensory deficits) was poor. Some tests (forward flexion, hyper-extension test, and slump test) performed slightly better, but the number of studies was small. In the one primary care study, most tests showed higher specificity and lower sensitivity compared to other settings.Most studies assessed the Straight Leg Raising (SLR) test. In surgical populations, characterized by a high prevalence of disc herniation (58% to 98%), the SLR showed high sensitivity (pooled estimate 0.92, 95% CI: 0.87 to 0.95) with widely varying specificity (0.10 to 1.00, pooled estimate 0.28, 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.40). Results of studies using imaging showed more heterogeneity and poorer sensitivity. The crossed SLR showed high specificity (pooled estimate 0.90, 95% CI: 0.85 to 0.94) with consistently low sensitivity (pooled estimate 0.28, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.35).Combining positive test results increased the specificity of physical tests, but few studies presented data on test combinations.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

When used in isolation, current evidence indicates poor diagnostic performance of most physical tests used to identify lumbar disc herniation. However, most findings arise from surgical populations and may not apply to primary care or non-selected populations. Better performance may be obtained when tests are combined.

Spontaneously disappearing lumbar disc protrusion

Spontaneous disappearance of a herniated lumbar disc is known to occur. This case study describes a 45-year-old patient whose symptoms of lumbar radiculopathy resolved and follow-up imaging showed complete disappearance of the disc prolapse. This phenomenon strengthens the role of conservative treatment in the management of lumbar disc protrusions.

Surgery for disc disease

New evidence supports its use in selected patients

Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse

BACKGROUND

Disc prolapse accounts for five percent of low-back disorders but is one of the most common reasons for surgery.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of surgical interventions for the treatment of lumbar disc prolapse.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PubMed, Spine and abstracts of the main spine society meetings within the last five years. We also checked the reference lists of each retrieved articles and corresponded with experts. All data found up to 1 January 2007 are included.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials (RCT) and quasi-randomized trials (QRCT) of the surgical management of lumbar disc prolapse.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed trial quality and extracted data from published papers. Additional information was sought from the authors if necessary.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty RCTs and two QRCTs were identified, including 17 new trials since the first edition of this review in 1999. Many of the early trials were of some form of chemonucleolysis, whereas the majority of the later studies either compared different techniques of discectomy or the use of some form of membrane to reduce epidural scarring. Despite the critical importance of knowing whether surgery is beneficial for disc prolapse, only four trials have directly compared discectomy with conservative management and these give suggestive rather than conclusive results. However, other trials show that discectomy produces better clinical outcomes than chemonucleolysis and that in turn is better than placebo. Microdiscectomy gives broadly comparable results to standard discectomy. Recent trials of an inter-position gel covering the dura (five trials) and of fat (four trials) show that they can reduce scar formation, though there is limited evidence about the effect on clinical outcomes. There is insufficient evidence on other percutaneous discectomy techniques to draw firm conclusions. Three small RCTs of laser discectomy do not provide conclusive evidence on its efficacy, There are no published RCTs of coblation therapy or trans-foraminal endoscopic discectomy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Surgical discectomy for carefully selected patients with sciatica due to lumbar disc prolapse provides faster relief from the acute attack than conservative management, although any positive or negative effects on the lifetime natural history of the underlying disc disease are still unclear. Microdiscectomy gives broadly comparable results to open discectomy. The evidence on other minimally invasive techniques remains unclear (with the exception of chemonucleolysis using chymopapain, which is no longer widely available).