Treatment of 94 Outpatients With Chronic Discogenic Low Back Pain with the DRX9000: A Retrospective Chart Review

Regenerative Medicine: Pharmacological Considerations and Clinical Role in Pain Management

Purpose of Review

Low back pain affects at least 80% of individuals at some point in their lifetime and is the fifth most common reason for physician visits in the USA. Treatment of an acute episode of LBP generally includes rest, activity modification, physical therapy, NSAIDs, and patient education.

Recent Findings

A small percentage of patients will develop chronic pain lasting > 6 months duration. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is one of the main pillars of regenerative medicine, as its release of bioactive proteins supports the aim of RM of restoring the anatomical function in degenerative conditions. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are multipotent stem cells, multipotent progenitor cells, or marrow stromal cells found in various body tissues, including bone marrow, lung, and adipose tissue. Evidence from well-designed case–control or cohort studies for the use of PRP and MSCs in lumbar facet joint, lumbar epidural, and sacroiliac joint injections is currently described as level IV evidence. PRP and MSCs are used autogenously to help facilitate the healing process, and their injection has been studied in the long-term management of discogenic low back pain. PRP has been compared to steroid injections in the sacroiliac joint for chronic low back pain, with favorable results. MSCs have also been shown to be useful in intervertebral disc regeneration and treatment of chronic low back pain associated with degenerative disc disease.

Summary

Currently, the price for these treatments is extremely high, and thus the standard of care continues to be steroid injections and other treatments. This could change, however, with more robust data and research on the safety and long-term efficacy of biologics compared to other interventional management.

Effect of Nonsurgical Spinal Decompression on Intensity of Pain and Herniated Disc Volume in Subacute Lumbar Herniated Disc

OBJECTIVE

Nonsurgical spinal decompression therapy (NSDT) is a conservative treatment for the lumbosacral herniated intervertebral disc (L-HIVD). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the NSDT and change in disc volume through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in subacute L-HIVD.

METHODS

Sixty patients with subacute L-HIVD were randomized into either the decompression group (group D, n = 30) or the nondecompression group (group N, n = 30). In group D, NSDT was performed ten times in eight weeks. In group N, pseudodecompression therapy (no force) was performed with the same protocol. Lower back and lower leg pain intensities and functional improvements were measured by the visual analog scale and the Korean Oswestry Disability Index (K-ODI). The change in the lumbosacral disc herniation index (HI) was evaluated through a follow-up MRI three months after the therapy.

RESULTS

The lower leg pain intensity in group D was lower than that in group N at two months (p=0.028). Additionally, there were significantly lower K-ODI scores in group D at two and three months (p=0.023, 0.019) than in group N. The change in HI after the therapy was -27.6 ± 27.5 (%) in group D and -7.1 ± 24.9 (%) in group N, with a significant difference (p=0.017). Approximately 26.9% of patients in group D and no patients in group N showed over 50% reduction in HI (p=0.031).

CONCLUSION

NSDT may be a suitable treatment option for conservative treatment of subacute L-HIVD.

The Real Time Geometric Effect of a Lordotic Curve-Controlled Spinal Traction Device: A Randomized Cross Over Study

Background: A standard spinal traction (ST) device was designed to straighten the spine without considering physiological lumbar lordosis. Using lordotic curve-controlled traction (LCCT), which maintains the lordotic curve during traction, the traction force would be applied to the posterior spinal structure effectively. Thus, the purpose of our study was to evaluate real-time biomechanical changes while applying the LCCT and ST. Methods: In this study, 40 subjects with mild non-radicular low back pain (LBP) were included. The participants underwent LCCT and ST in random order. Anterior and posterior intervertebral distance, ratios of anterior/posterior intervertebral distance (A/P ratio), and lordotic angles of intervertebral bodies (L2~L5) were measured by radiography. Results: Mean intervertebral distances were greater during LCCT than those measured prior to applying traction (p < 0.05). Mean A/P ratio was also significantly greater during LCCT than during ST or initially (p < 0.05). In particular, for the L4/5 intervertebral segment, which is responsible for most of the lordotic curve, mean LCCT angle was similar to mean lordotic angle in the standing position (10.9°). Conclusions: Based on measurements of radiologic geometrical changes with real-time clinical setting, the newly developed LCCT appears to be a useful traction device for increasing intervertebral disc spaces by maintaining lordotic curves.

Effect of spinal decompression therapy and core stabilization exercises in management of lumbar disc prolapse: A single blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Spinal decompression therapy (SDT) has recently been used as a conservative treatment for lumbar disc prolapse (LDP). The effectiveness of SDT when compared with other conservative techniques with a well-designed randomized controlled trials is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To find the efficacy of SDT and core stabilization exercises (CSE) on pain and functional disability in individuals with chronic LDP, and to compare with CSE alone.

METHODS

This single blind randomized controlled trial included thirty-one participants with a mean age of 38.68 ± 8.79 having chronic LDP with or without radiating symptoms were included in the study. The study group received SDT with CSE and control group received CSE alone along with interferential therapy for both groups. Pain and disability were estimated by Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and Modified Oswestry Questionnaire (mOQ).

RESULTS

The results demonstrated significant within-group improvements in all outcomes in both groups, the mean differences between pre to post intervention in SDT with CSE group were (NRS: 4.75, t= 12.81, p⩽ 0.001) and (mOQ: 45.13, t= 29.34, p⩽ 0.001), while in CSE group (NRS: 2.60, t= 13.67, p⩽ 0.001) and (mOQ: 27.67, t= 24.52, p⩽ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of SDT with CSE has proven to be more significant when compared with CSE alone to reduce pain and disability in subjects with chronic LDP.

Efficacy of high intensity laser therapy in treatment of patients with lumbar disc protrusion: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the effect of high intensity laser therapy (HILT) in patients with lumbar disc protrusion (LDP).

METHODS

This study included 63 patients suffering from protrusion of lumbar intervertebral disc; they were divided into Groups 1 (n= 32) and 2 (n= 31). Group 1 was treated with HILT and spinal decompression system (SDS). Patients in Group 2 received SDS alone. Evaluations were conducted on oswestry disability index (ODI), lumbosacral portion pain, and lower limb radiation pain with visual analogue scale (VAS) of two patient groups before treatment, two weeks after treatment, and 1 month after follow-up visit. Lumbar flexion range and angle of straight leg raising before treatment and 2 weeks after treatment.

RESULTS

After two weeks of treatment of two patient groups, ODI, VAS, lumbar flexion range and angle of straight leg raising significantly improved compared with their conditions before treatment (P< 0.01). A significant difference was noted in ODI, lumbar flexion range, and angle of straight leg raising between groups after two weeks of treatment (P< 0.05). Non-statistical significant difference was observed in lumbosacral portion pain and lower limb radiation pain with VAS (P> 0.05). However, difference in was VAS smaller in Group 1. All groups showed significantly different results in terms of ODI, lumbosacral portion pain, and lower limb radiation pain with VAS.

CONCLUSION

As one of available treatments for LDP, HILT can speed up improvement in lumbar segment motion, angle of straight leg raising, and overall function and allow early return of patients to their family and society. Treatment effect is long-lasting and can be widely promoted and applied clinically.

Comparison of the short-term effects of the conventional motorized traction with non-surgical spinal decompression performed with a DRX9000 device on pain, functionality, depression, and quality of life in patients with low back pain associated with lumbar disc herniation: A single-blind randomized-controlled trial

Objectives

This study aims to compare the efficiency of conventional motorized traction (CMT) with non-surgical spinal decompression (NSD) using the DRX9000™ device in patients with low back pain associated with lumbar disc herniation (LDH).

Patients and methods

Between March 2009 and September 2009, a total of 48 patients (29 females, 19 males; mean age 43.1±9.8 years; range, 18 to 65 years) were randomized into two groups. The first group (n=24) underwent CMT and the second group (n=24) underwent NSD for a total of 20 sessions over six weeks. The patients were evaluated before and after the treatment. Pain was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), functional status using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), quality of life using the Short Form-36 (SF-36), state of depression mood using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and the global assessment of the illness using the Patient's Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (PGART) and Investigator's Global Assessment of Response to Therapy (IGART) scales.

Results

There was no significant difference in the evaluation outcomes before the treatment between the groups. However, a statistically significant decline was found in the VAS, ODI, and BDI scores after the treatment in both groups (all p<0.001). Except for two subgroups, no significant changes were observed in the SF-36 form. Assessment of "marked improvement" was globally most frequently reported one in both groups. No significant difference was observed in the evaluation outcomes after treatment between the groups.

Conclusion

Our study results show that both CMT and NSD are effective methods in pain management and functional status and depressive mood improvement in patients with LDH, and NSD is not superior to CMT in terms of pain, functionality, depression and quality of life.

Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) versus Autologous Whole Blood on Pain and Function Improvement in Tennis Elbow: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background. Autologous whole blood and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) have been both suggested to treat chronic tennis elbow. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of PRP versus autologous whole blood local injection in chronic tennis elbow. Methods. Forty patients with tennis elbow were randomly divided into 2 groups. Group 1 was treated with a single injection of 2 mL of autologous PRP and group 2 with 2 mL of autologous blood. Tennis elbow strap, stretching, and strengthening exercises were administered for both groups during a 2-month followup. Pain and functional improvements were assessed using visual analog scale (VAS), modified Mayo Clinic performance index for the elbow, and pressure pain threshold (PPT) at 0, 4, and 8 weeks. Results. All pain and functional variables including VAS, PPT, and Mayo scores improved significantly in both groups 4 weeks after injection. No statistically significant difference was noted between groups regarding pain scores in 4-week follow-up examination (P > 0.05). At 8-week reevaluations, VAS and Mayo scores improved only in PRP group (P < 0.05). Conclusion. PRP and autologous whole blood injections are both effective to treat chronic lateral epicondylitis. PRP might be slightly superior in 8-week followup. However, further studies are suggested to get definite conclusion.

Diagnostic criteria and treatment of discogenic pain: a systematic review of recent clinical literature

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Pain innate to intervertebral disc, often referred to as discogenic pain, is suspected by some authors to be the major source of chronic low back and neck pain. Current management of suspected discogenic pain lacks standardized diagnosis, treatment, and terminology.

PURPOSE

In an attempt to determine whether patterns existed that may facilitate standardization of care, we sought to analyze the terminologies used and the various modes of diagnosis and treatment of suspected discogenic pain.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review of the recent literature.

METHODS

A Medline search was performed using the terms degenerative disc disease, discogenic pain, internal disc disruption while using the limits of human studies, English language, and clinical trials, for the last 10 years. The search led to a total of 149 distinct citations, of which 53 articles, where the intervertebral disc itself was considered the principal source of patient's pain and was the main target of the treatment, were retained for further analysis.

RESULTS

The results of this review confirm and help quantify the significant differences that existed in the terminology and all the areas of diagnosis and treatment of presumed discogenic pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that suspected discogenic pain, despite its extensive affirmation in the literature and enormous resources regularly devoted to it, currently lacks clear diagnostic criteria and uniform treatment or terminology.

Restoration of disk height through non-surgical spinal decompression is associated with decreased discogenic low back pain: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Because previous studies have suggested that motorized non-surgical spinal decompression can reduce chronic low back pain (LBP) due to disc degeneration (discogenic low back pain) and disc herniation, it has accordingly been hypothesized that the reduction of pressure on affected discs will facilitate their regeneration. The goal of this study was to determine if changes in LBP, as measured on a verbal rating scale, before and after a 6-week treatment period with non-surgical spinal decompression, correlate with changes in lumbar disc height, as measured on computed tomography (CT) scans.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of adults with chronic LBP attributed to disc herniation and/or discogenic LBP who underwent a 6-week treatment protocol of motorized non-surgical spinal decompression via the DRX9000 with CT scans before and after treatment. The main outcomes were changes in pain as measured on a verbal rating scale from 0 to 10 during a flexion-extension range of motion evaluation and changes in disc height as measured on CT scans. Paired t-test or linear regression was used as appropriate with p < 0.05 considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

We identified 30 patients with lumbar disc herniation with an average age of 65 years, body mass index of 29 kg/m2, 21 females and 9 males, and an average duration of LBP of 12.5 weeks. During treatment, low back pain decreased from 6.2 (SD 2.2) to 1.6 (2.3, p < 0.001) and disc height increased from 7.5 (1.7) mm to 8.8 (1.7) mm (p < 0.001). Increase in disc height and reduction in pain were significantly correlated (r = 0.36, p = 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-surgical spinal decompression was associated with a reduction in pain and an increase in disc height. The correlation of these variables suggests that pain reduction may be mediated, at least in part, through a restoration of disc height. A randomized controlled trial is needed to confirm these promising results.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00828880.

No effect of traction in patients with low back pain: a single centre, single blind, randomized controlled trial of Intervertebral Differential Dynamics Therapy

Low back pain (LBP) poses a significant problem to society. Although initial conservative therapy may be beneficial, persisting chronic LBP still frequently leads to expensive invasive intervention. A novel non-invasive therapy that focuses on discogenic LBP is Intervertebral Differential Dynamics Therapy (IDD Therapy, North American Medical Corp. Reg U.S.). IDD Therapy consists of intermittent traction sessions in the Accu-SPINA device (Steadfast Corporation Ltd, Essex, UK), an FDA approved, class II medical device. The intervertebral disc and facet joints are unloaded through axial distraction, positioning and relaxation cycles. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of IDD Therapy when added to a standard graded activity program for chronic LBP patients. In a single blind, single centre, randomized controlled trial; 60 consecutive patients were assigned to either the SHAM or the IDD Therapy. All subjects received the standard conservative therapeutic care (graded activity) and 20 sessions in the Accu-SPINA device. The traction weight in the IDD Therapy was systematically increased until 50% of a person's body weight plus 4.45 kg (10 lb) was reached. The SHAM group received a non-therapeutic traction weight of 4.45 kg in all sessions. The main outcome was assessed using a 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) for LBP. Secondary outcomes were VAS scores for leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-Form 36 (SF-36). All parameters were measured before and 2, 6 and 14 weeks after start of the treatment. Fear of (re)injury due to movement or activities (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia), coping strategies (Utrecht Coping List) and use of pain medication were recorded before and at 14 weeks. A repeated measures analysis was performed. The two groups were comparable at baseline in terms of demographic, clinical and psychological characteristics, indicating that the random allocation had succeeded. VAS low back pain improved significantly from 61 (+/-25) to 32 (+/-27) with the IDD protocol and 53 (+/-26) to 36 (+/-27) in the SHAM protocol. Moreover, leg pain, ODI and SF-36 scores improved significantly but in both groups. The use of pain medication decreased significantly, whereas scores for kinesiophobia and coping remained at the same non-pathological level. None of the parameters showed a difference between both protocols. Both treatment regimes had a significant beneficial effect on LBP, leg pain, functional status and quality of life after 14 weeks. The added axial, intermittent, mechanical traction of IDD Therapy to a standard graded activity program has been shown not to be effective.