Nonsurgical medical treatment in the management of pain due to lumbar disc prolapse: A network meta-analysis

Repairing Annulus Fibrosus Fissures Using Methacrylated Gellan Gum Combined with Novel Silk

Intervertebral disc (IVD) herniation often causes severe pain and is frequently associated with the degeneration of the IVD. As the IVD degenerates, more fissures with increasing size appear within the outer region of the IVD, the annulus fibrosus (AF), favoring the initiation and progression of IVD herniation. For this reason, we propose an AF repair approach based on methacrylated gellan gum (GG-MA) and silk fibroin. Therefore, coccygeal bovine IVDs were injured using a biopsy puncher (⌀ 2 mm) and then repaired with 2% GG-MA as a filler material and sealed with an embroidered silk yarn fabric. Then, the IVDs were cultured for 14 days either without any load, static loading, or complex dynamic loading. After 14 days of culture, no significant differences were found between the damaged and repaired IVDs, except for a significant decrease in the IVDs' relative height under dynamic loading. Based on our findings combined with the current literature that focuses on ex vivo AF repair approaches, we conclude that it is likely that the repair approach did not fail but rather insufficient harm was done to the IVD.

Early Postoperative Iatrogenic Neuropraxia After Lumbar Disc Herniation Surgery: Analysis of 87 Cases

BACKGROUND

Postoperative early neuropraxia after lumbar disc herniation surgery is common. The emergence of new paresthesia findings with increased sensory and motor deficits in the postoperative period suggests iatrogenic neuropraxia. This study aimed to discuss the causes and prognosis of iatrogenic neuropraxia detected in the early postoperative period in patients who have been operated on for lumbar disc herniation.

METHODS

Cases with postoperative iatrogenic neuropraxia were determined retrospectively. Deficits were evaluated at intervals of 0-2 hours, 2-12 hours, 12-24 hours, and 24-48 hours. The cases were evaluated in 2 groups as those who underwent aggressive discectomy and simple discectomy. In addition, the treatment results were compared between the 2 groups as the cases that were treated and not treated with methylprednisolone.

RESULTS

The iatrogenic neuropraxia rate was significantly higher in patients who underwent aggressive discectomy. Although it was observed that paresthesia findings improved more rapidly in cases treated with methylprednisolone, no difference was found between the 2 groups in terms of its effects on the motor deficit.

CONCLUSIONS

Iatrogenic neuropraxia is a finding whose cause cannot be determined by quantitative criteria. It is common in patients who underwent aggressive discectomy. Methylprednisolone treatment is effective in recovering the paresthesia finding faster and may show that the radicular injury is in the neuropraxia stage in the early period.

Interventional treatments for chronic, axial or radicular, non-cancer, spinal pain: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials

INTRODUCTION

Chronic, non-cancer, axial or radicular spinal pain is a common condition associated with considerable socioeconomic burden. Clinicians frequently offer patients various interventional procedures for the treatment of chronic spine pain; however, the comparative effectiveness and safety of available procedures remains uncertain.

METHODS

We will conduct a systematic review of randomised controlled trials that explores the effectiveness and harms of interventional procedures for the management of axial or radicular, chronic, non-cancer, spine pain. We will identify eligible studies through a systematic search of Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science from inception without language restrictions. Eligible trials will: (1) enrol primarily adult patients (≥18 years old) with axial or radicular, chronic, non-cancer, spine pain, (2) randomise patients to different, currently available, interventional procedures or to an interventional procedure and a placebo/sham procedure or usual care, and (3) measure outcomes at least 1 month after randomisation.Pairs of reviewers will independently screen articles identified through searches and extract information and assess risk of bias of eligible trials. We will use a modified Cochrane instrument to evaluate risk of bias. We will use frequentist random-effects network meta-analyses to assess the relative effects of interventional procedures, and five a priori hypotheses to explore between studies subgroup effects. We will use the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to assess the certainty in evidence for each outcome, including direct, indirect and network estimates.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No research ethics approval is required for this systematic review, as no confidential patient data will be used. We will disseminate our findings through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations, and our review will support development of a BMJ Rapid Recommendations providing contextualised clinical guidance based on this body of evidence.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020170667.