scholarly journals Clinical outcome of instrumented fusion for the treatment of failed back surgery syndrome: a case series of 100 patients

2012 ◽  
Vol 154 (7) ◽  
pp. 1213-1217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark P. Arts ◽  
Nicola I. Kols ◽  
Suzanne M. Onderwater ◽  
Wilco C. Peul
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Instrumented Fusion ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Back Surgery

scholarly journals Clinical Outcome of Pulsed-Radiofrequency Combined With Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection for Lumbosacral Radicular Pain Caused by Distinct Etiology

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liuqing Yang ◽  
Yuzhao Huang ◽  
Jiahui Ma ◽  
Zhenxing Li ◽  
Rui Han ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Steroid Injection ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Pulsed Radiofrequency ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Back Surgery ◽  
Transforaminal Epidural Steroid Injection ◽  
Epidural Steroid

BackgroundLumbosacral radicular pain (LSRP) can be caused by disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and failed back surgery syndrome. The clinical effect of pulsed-radiofrequency (PRF) combined with transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TESI) for radiating pain in different population remains unclear.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical recordings of patients with LSRP caused by different etiologies, who underwent PRF and TESI treatment. The primary clinical outcome was assessed by a 10-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pre- and post-treatment.ResultsA total of 34 LSRP patients were identified and classified into 3 subgroups (disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and failed back surgery syndrome). The overall immediate pain reduction was 4.4 ± 1.1 after procedure. After a median follow-up of 9.5 months, the VAS decreased from 6.5 ± 1.0 to 2.4 ± 1.9 at the last follow-up.ConclusionPRF combined with TESI is an effective approach to treat persistent LSRP in distinct population.

scholarly journals Sensor driven-position adaptive versus conventional spinal cord stimulation in failed back surgery syndrome: a retrospective case series

2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mert Akbas ◽  
Haitham Hamdy Salem ◽  
Tamer Hussien Emara ◽  
Bora Dinc ◽  
Bilge Karsli
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Spinal Cord Stimulation ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Back Surgery ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Background Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is a common problem affecting 20–40% of cases undergoing spine surgeries. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been shown to be an efficient and relatively safe treatment in managing many intractable chronic pain syndromes. Objectives This study compares the efficacy and safety of MR-compatible sensor driven-position adaptive SCS and conventional SCS in treating FBSS. Methods This is a retrospective case series of 120 consecutive FBSS patients who underwent SCS between February 2011 and March 2018. Pain levels, analgesic/opioid use, and sleep problems were assessed before and 3 months after the procedure in patients who received either conventional SCS (group 1; n = 62) or sensor-driven position adaptive SCS (group 2; n = 34). The degree of patient satisfaction, the change in the activities of daily living (ADLs) together with the rate of complications were compared in both treatment groups. Results The two treatment groups were homogenous at baseline. Patients in both groups improved significantly regarding pain, opioid consumption, sleep, and ADLs. The magnitude of improvement was statistically higher in group 2. An absolute reduction of 6 points on the VAS in patients who received position adaptive SCS vs a 3.3 point reduction in conventional SCS cases (p < 0.0001). Half of the patients in group 2 (n = 17) showed excellent satisfaction after the procedure versus 14.5% of cases in group 1 (n = 9). Conclusion SCS is an efficient and reliable treatment in FBSS. MR-compatible sensor driven-position adaptive SCS can be a more effective treatment in this patient group.

Dextrose injections for failed back surgery syndrome: a consecutive case series

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 1610-1617
Author(s):  
İlker Solmaz ◽  
Serkan Akpancar ◽  
Aydan Örsçelik ◽  
Özlem Yener-Karasimav ◽  
Deniz Gül
Keyword(s):  
Case Series ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Consecutive Case ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Back Surgery

scholarly journals Korean Medicinal Combination Treatments for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Retrospective Case Series

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young Woo Seo ◽  
Han Sol Park ◽  
Min Chul Kim ◽  
Seh Young Kim ◽  
Young Hoon Seo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Case Series ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Combination Treatments ◽  
Retrospective Case Series ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Back Surgery

Clinical outcome of surgical treatment of failed back surgery syndrome

2005 ◽  
Vol 64 (6) ◽  
pp. 483-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ghassan Skaf ◽  
Carmel Bouclaous ◽  
Ali Alaraj ◽  
Roukoz Chamoun
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Back Surgery

scholarly journals Early Clinical Outcome of Comparative Study between Revision Operation and Radiofrequency Treatment for Management of Failed Back Surgery Syndrome

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 3
Author(s):  
Se-Heum Park ◽  
Junseok W. Hur ◽  
Jang-Bo Lee ◽  
Jung Yul Park
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome ◽  
Revision Operation ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Radiofrequency Treatment ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Failed Back Surgery ◽  
Back Surgery

Objective: Intractable back pain and radicular pain after lumbosacral spine surgery are challenges for surgeons because the pathophysiology of failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) remains unknown. Various medications, exercise, reoperation, spinal cord stimulation, and various interventional treatments, such as epidural injection, and radiofrequency treatment, have been suggested as treatment options. However, the clinical outcomes for each treatment are unclear. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes of consecutive FBSS patients who underwent revision operation or radiofrequency treatment from 2014 to 2017, who previously showed response to nerve block. Pain was analyzed preoperatively and 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were assessed preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. Results: A total of 70 patients was included in the present study (33 males, 37 females). When comparing preoperative and postoperative 12-month results, back pain VAS score decreased from 5.5 to 4.2 for revision operation and from 5.1 to 4.7 for radiofrequency treatment. Leg pain VAS score decreased from 6.5 to 4.02 for revision operation and 6.2 to 4.3 for radiofrequency treatment. ODI score decreased from 70.9 to 36.1 for revision operation and 70.2 to 36.1 for radiofrequency treatment. SF-36 score increased from 28.9 to 64.1 for revision operation and from 29.6 to 59.6 for radiofrequency treatment. Differences between treatments were not statistically significant after 12 months (p>0.05) but were at 1 month (p=0.01). Conclusion: Compared with revision operation, radiofrequency treatment is not inferior on early clinical outcome (up to 1 year following the treatment) in terms of pain relief, functional capacity, patient satisfaction, and quality of life in patients with FBSS. Radiofrequency treatment can be considered in patients who are not good candidates for surgical treatment based on imaging results or underlying diseases and who are responsive to diagnostic/therapeutic nerve blocks.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document