1
|
Dorsi MJ, Buchanan P, Vu C, Bhandal HS, Lee DW, Sheth S, Shumsky PM, Brown NJ, Himstead A, Mattie R, Falowski SM, Naidu R, Pope JE. Pacific Spine and Pain Society (PSPS) Evidence Review of Surgical Treatments for Lumbar Degenerative Spinal Disease: A Narrative Review. Pain Ther 2024; 13:349-390. [PMID: 38520658 PMCID: PMC11111626 DOI: 10.1007/s40122-024-00588-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2023] [Accepted: 02/19/2024] [Indexed: 03/25/2024] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Interventional treatment options for the lumbar degenerative spine have undergone a significant amount of innovation over the last decade. As new technologies emerge, along with the surgical specialty expansion, there is no manuscript that utilizes a review of surgical treatments with evidence rankings from multiple specialties, namely, the interventional pain and spine communities. Through the Pacific Spine and Pain Society (PSPS), the purpose of this manuscript is to provide a balanced evidence review of available surgical treatments. METHODS The PSPS Research Committee created a working group that performed a comprehensive literature search on available surgical technologies for the treatment of the degenerative spine, utilizing the ranking assessment based on USPSTF (United States Preventative Services Taskforce) and NASS (North American Spine Society) criteria. RESULTS The surgical treatments were separated based on disease process, including treatments for degenerative disc disease, spondylolisthesis, and spinal stenosis. CONCLUSIONS There is emerging and significant evidence to support multiple approaches to treat the symptomatic lumbar degenerative spine. As new technologies become available, training, education, credentialing, and peer review are essential for optimizing patient safety and successful outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Patrick Buchanan
- Spanish Hills Interventional Pain Specialists, Camarillo, CA, USA
| | - Chau Vu
- Evolve Restorative Center, Santa Rosa, CA, USA
| | | | - David W Lee
- Fullerton Orthopedic Surgery Medical Group, Fullerton, CA, USA.
| | | | | | - Nolan J Brown
- Department of Neurosurgery, UC Irvine, Orange, CA, USA
| | | | | | | | - Ramana Naidu
- California Orthopedics and Spine, Novato, CA, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Yuan H, Yi X. Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression: A Narrative Review. J Pain Res 2023; 16:3707-3724. [PMID: 37954472 PMCID: PMC10637222 DOI: 10.2147/jpr.s428112] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2023] [Accepted: 09/27/2023] [Indexed: 11/14/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common pain condition that causes lumbar back pain, radiating leg pain, and possible functional impairment. MILD is an emerging minimally invasive treatment for LSS. It is an image-guided percutaneous procedure designed to debulk hypertrophied ligamentum flavum. However, the exact short- and long-term efficacy, safety profile, indication criteria, and certain procedure details reported in medical literature vary. Objective This narrative review was to elucidate efficacy, safety profile, certain procedure details, advantages, and limitations of MILD. Study Design This is a narrative review. Setting All included articles are clinic trials including analytic studies and descriptive studies. Methods PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched. Only clinical trials of MILD procedure were included. Information of indications, contraindications, VAS scores, ODI scores, effective rate, efficacy durations, and certain procedure details was focused on. Results According to the literature, for the MILD procedure, the VAS score could be reduced from a pre-treatment level of 6.3-9.6 to a post-treatment level of 2.3-5.8. The ODI score could be reduced from a pre-treatment level of 38.8-55.3 to a post-treatment level of 27.4-39.8. The effective rate of the MILD procedure was reported to be 57.1%-88%. A 2-year postoperative stability of efficacy was also supported. One RCT study testified superior efficacy of MILD over epidural steroid injection. Limitations There is few high-quality literature in the review. Moreover, the long-term efficacy of MILD cannot be revealed according to the current literature. Conclusion Based on the reviewed literature, MILD is an effective and safe procedure. MILD can reduce pain intensity and improve functional status significantly. Therefore, it is a preferable option for LSS patients who failed conservative treatments, but not for those who require immediate invasive decompression surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hongjie Yuan
- Department of Pain Medicine, Xinhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
| | - Xiaobin Yi
- Pain Division, Department of Anesthesiology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Deer TR, Grider JS, Pope JE, Lamer TJ, Wahezi SE, Hagedorn JM, Falowski S, Tolba R, Shah JM, Strand N, Escobar A, Malinowski M, Bux A, Jassal N, Hah J, Weisbein J, Tomycz ND, Jameson J, Petersen EA, Sayed D. Best Practices for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Treatment 2.0 (MIST): Consensus Guidance from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN). J Pain Res 2022; 15:1325-1354. [PMID: 35546905 PMCID: PMC9084394 DOI: 10.2147/jpr.s355285] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2021] [Accepted: 04/06/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Methods Results Discussion Conclusion
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy R Deer
- Centers for Pain Relief, Charleston, WV, USA
- Correspondence: Timothy R Deer, The Spine and Nerve Centers of the Virginias, 400 Court Street, Suite 100, Charleston, WV, 25301, USA, Tel +1 304 347-6141, Email
| | - Jay S Grider
- UK HealthCare Pain Services, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, KY, USA
| | | | - Tim J Lamer
- Division of Pain Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Sayed E Wahezi
- Montefiore Medical Center, SUNY-Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA
| | - Jonathan M Hagedorn
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Steven Falowski
- Director Functional Neurosurgery, Neurosurgical Associates of Lancaster, Lancaster, PA, USA
| | - Reda Tolba
- Pain Management Department, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Abu Dhabi, UAE
| | - Jay M Shah
- SamWell Institute for Pain Management, Colonia, NJ, USA
| | - Natalie Strand
- Department of Anesthesiology, Division of Pain Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA
| | - Alex Escobar
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, USA
| | | | - Anjum Bux
- Bux Pain Management, Lexington, KY, USA
| | | | - Jennifer Hah
- Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA
| | | | - Nestor D Tomycz
- Department of Neurological Surgery, Allegheny General Hospital, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | | | - Erika A Petersen
- Department of Neurosurgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
| | - Dawood Sayed
- Pain Medicine, Multidisciplinary Pain Fellowship, The University of Kansas Health System, Kansas City, KS, USA
| |
Collapse
|