Comparative effectiveness of percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis for different sacrum types in patients with chronic pain due to lumbar disc herniation: A propensity score matching analysis

Efficacy of Percutaneous Adhesiolysis in Managing Low Back and Lower Extremity Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Chronic refractory low back and lower extremity pain recalcitrant to conservative management and epidural injections secondary to postsurgery syndrome, spinal stenosis, and disc herniation are sometimes managed with percutaneous adhesiolysis. Consequently, this systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the efficacy of percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing low back and lower extremity pain.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was performed. A comprehensive literature search of multiple databases from 1966 to July 2022, including manual searches of the bibliography of known review articles was performed. Quality assessment of the included trials, meta-analysis, and best evidence synthesis was performed. The primary outcome measure was a significant reduction in pain (short term up to 6 months and long term more than 6 months).

RESULTS

The search identified 26 publications, with 9 trials meeting the inclusion criteria. The results of dual-arm and single-arm analyses showed significant improvement in pain and function at 12 months. Opioid consumption was also significantly reduced at 6 months with dual-arm analysis, whereas single-arm analysis showed a significant decrease from baseline to treatment at the 3-, 6-, and 12-month analyses. At 1 year follow-up, seven of seven trials were positive for improvements in pain relief, function, and diminution of opioid use.

DISCUSSION

Based on the present systematic review of nine RCTs, the evidence level is I to II, with moderate to strong recommendation for percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing low back and lower extremity pain. The limitations of the evidence include paucity of literature, lack of placebo-controlled trials, and the majority of the trials studying post lumbar surgery syndrome.

CONCLUSION

The evidence is level I to II or strong to moderate based on five high-quality and two moderate-quality RCTs, with 1 year follow-up that percutaneous adhesiolysis is efficacious in the treatment of chronic refractory low back and lower extremity pain.

The role of percutaneous neurolysis in lumbar disc herniation: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Recalcitrant disc herniation may result in chronic lumbar radiculopathy or sciatica. Fluoroscopically directed epidural injections and other conservative modalities may provide inadequate improvement in some patients. In these cases, percutaneous neurolysis with targeted delivery of medications is often the next step in pain management.

Methods

An evidence-based system of methodologic assessment, namely, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used. Multiple databases were searched from 1966 to January 2021. Principles of the best evidence synthesis were incorporated into qualitative evidence synthesis. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients with significant pain relief and functional improvement (≥ 50%). Duration of relief was categorized as short-term (< 6 months) and long-term (≥ 6 months).

Results

This assessment identified one high-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT) and 5 moderate-quality non-randomized studies with an application of percutaneous neurolysis in disc herniation. Overall, the results were positive, with level II evidence.

Conclusions

Based on the present systematic review, with one RCT and 5 nonrandomized studies, the evidence level is II for percutaneous neurolysis in managing lumbar disc herniation.

An Evidence Based Review of Epidurolysis for the Management of Epidural Adhesions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review presents epidurolysis as a procedure to alleviate pain and disability from epidural adhesions. It reviews novel and groundbreaking evidence, describing the background, indications, benefits and adverse events from this procedure in an effort to provide healthcare experts with the data required to decide on an intervention for their patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Epidural adhesions (EA) or epidural fibrosis (EF) is defined as non-physiologic scar formation secondary to a local inflammatory reaction provoked by tissue trauma in the epidural space. Often, it is a sequelae of surgical spine intervention or instrumentation. The cost associated with chronic post-operative back pain has been reported to be up to nearly $12,500 dollars per year; this, coupled with the increasing prevalence of chronic lower back pain and the subsequent increase in surgical management of back pain, renders EF a significant cost and morbidity in the U.S. Though risk factors leading to the development of EA are not well established, epidural fibrosis has been reported to be the culprit in up to 46% of cases of Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS), a chronic pain condition found in up to 20-54% of patients who receive back surgery. Moreover, EF has also been associated with lumbar radiculopathy after lumbar disc surgery. Epidurolysis is defined as the mechanical dissolution of epidural fibrotic scar tissue for persistent axial spine or radicular pain due to epidural fibrosis that is refractory to conservative therapy Endoscopic lysis of adhesions is a procedural technique which has been shown to improve chronic back pain in one-third to one-half of patients with clinically symptomatic fibrous adhesions. Here we review some of the novel evidence that supports this procedure in EA and FBSS.

SUMMARY

The literature concerning epidurolysis in the management of epidural adhesions is insufficient. Prospective studies, including randomized controlled trials and observational studies, have suggested epidurolysis to be effective in terms of pain reduction, functional improvement, and patient satisfaction scores. Observational studies report epidurolysis as a well-tolerated, safe procedure. Current evidence suggests that epidurolysis may be used as an effective treatment modality for epidural adhesions. Nonetheless, further high quality randomized controlled studies assessing the safety and efficacy of epidurolysis in the management of epidural adhesions is needed.

Relationship of Success Rate for Balloon Adhesiolysis with Clinical Outcomes in Chronic Intractable Lumbar Radicular Pain: A Multicenter Prospective Study

Combined balloon decompression and epidural adhesiolysis has been reported to be effective in refractory lumbar spinal stenosis. Many cases of intractable stenosis have symptom-related multiple target sites for interventional treatment. In this situation it may not be possible to perform balloon adhesiolysis, or even only epidural adhesiolysis, for all target sites. Therefore, this multicenter prospective observational study aimed to evaluate the relationship of successful ballooning rate for multiple target sites with clinical outcome. Based on the ballooning success rate of multiple target sites, the patients were divided into three groups: below 50%, 50–85%, and above 85% ballooning. A greater ballooning success rate for multiple target sites provided a more decreased pain intensity and improved functional status in patients with chronic refractory lumbar spinal stenosis, and the improvement was maintained for 6 months. The estimated proportions of successful responders according to a multidimensional approach in the below 50%, 50–85%, and above 85% balloon success groups at 6 months after the procedure were 0.292, 0.468, and 0.507, respectively (p = 0.038). Our study suggests the more successful balloon adhesiolysis procedures for multiple target lesions are performed, the better clinical outcome can be expected at least 6 months after treatment.