scholarly journals Effectiveness and Safety of Acupotomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Randomized, Assessor-Blinded, Controlled Pilot Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
So Yun Kim ◽  
Eunseok Kim ◽  
Ojin Kwon ◽  
Chang-Hyun Han ◽  
Young-Il Kim
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Functional Disability ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Acupuncture Group ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Manual Acupuncture ◽  
Intention To Treat

Objective. Patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) suffer from pain, physical disabilities, and low quality of life. This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupotomy in patients with LDH. Method. Fifty participants with LDH were recruited to this randomized, assessor-blinded, controlled study and randomly assigned to the acupotomy (n = 25) or manual acupuncture (n = 25) group. The acupotomy group received acupotomy four times in 2 weeks, while the manual acupuncture group received manual acupuncture six times in 2 weeks. The follow-up visit was planned in the 4th week (i.e., 2 weeks after the final intervention). The primary outcome was the change in the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at follow-up. The changes in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Modified-Modified Schober Test (MMST), and EuroQol Five Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire were also evaluated. An intention-to-treat analysis was applied and adverse events were recorded. Results. The acupotomy group showed significant changes in VAS, ODI, and EQ-5D after intervention. VAS and ODI in the 4th week were lower in the acupotomy than in the manual acupuncture group. The acupotomy group showed consistent changes in VAS and ODI in the 1st, 2nd, and 4th week. No serious adverse event was reported in the acupotomy group. Conclusion. This study suggests greater therapeutic effects of acupotomy on relieving pain and improving the functional disability associated with LDH than those observed with manual acupuncture.

scholarly journals Does paravertebral ozone injection have efficacy as an additional treatment for acute lumbar disc herniation? A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Hamza Sucuoğlu ◽  
Nalan Soydaş
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Additional Treatment ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Placebo Control ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
New Treatment

OBJECTIVE: In this study we investigate the effects of paravertebral ozone injections (POI), which have been used as a new treatment approach for lower back pain in recent years, on pain and physical activity in patients with acute lumbar disc herniation (LDH) as an additional treatment. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients were assigned into the ozone therapy (OT) group (n= 20) and placebo control (PC) group (n= 18). Both groups received two sessions per week, a total of 8 sessions of lumbar POI. The ozone concentrations of 20–25 μg/ml (30 ml) and 0.1 μg/ml (30 ml) were administered to the OT and PC groups, respectively. The patients were assessed with the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) before the treatment (V1), 15 (V2) and 30 (V3) days after the treatment started, and one month (V4) after the treatment ended. RESULTS: A significant improvement was seen in the VAS and ODI scores in the final follow-up (V4) as compared with the baselines scores (V1) in both groups (P< 0.05). The patients in the OT group had lower mean VAS and ODI scores in V2, V3, and V4 follow-ups compared with the patients in the PC group. This significant difference reached its peak in the final follow-up (V4) (P< 0.05). CONCLUSION: As an additional treatment combined with conservative treatment, lumbar POI can lessen pain and disability in patients with acute LDH.

scholarly journals Ma's Bamboo-Based Medicinal Moxibustion Therapy of Low Back Pain in Lumbar Disc Herniation: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xian-Zhu Wang ◽  
Jin Cui ◽  
Jing FU ◽  
Kai-Yang Xue ◽  
Ping-Nan Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Moxibustion Therapy ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Acupuncture Group ◽  
Low Back ◽  
End Of Treatment

Abstract Background Lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is a common and frequently-occurring disease in clinic. Low back pain and sciatica are the presenting symptoms of LDH. To some extent, it can be considered that measures with the capability to improve low back pain or sciatica have the potential to treat LDH. Ma's bamboo-based medicinal moxibustion therapy can effectively reduce the degree of low back pain and has been widely used. Studies of small sample size have seen significant improvement on pain relief. Methods/design: The trial is a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, non-inferiority study. Three hundred and twelve patients will be randomly assigned to a Ma's bamboo-based medicinal moxibustion group (n=156) and an acupuncture group (n=156).Patients in each group will receive treatment every day,6 times a week, 12 times in total. Follow-up will be conducted 14 days after treatment. The primary outcome will be the visual analogue scale(VAS)at baseline, after 6 times of treatment,the end of treatment, and follow-up. the secondary outcomes will include Oswestry disability indexes (ODI) ,modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association low back pain (M-JOA) score,serum β-endorphin (β-EP) and serum substance P (SP). β-EP and SP as well as safety evaluation indexes (routine blood test, liver and kidney function, and ECG) will be measure at baseline and after the end of treatment. Discussion The results of the trial will compare the efficacy on low back pain in LDH between Ma's bamboo-based medicinal moxibustion group and acupuncture group and will be expected to make a systematic and objective evaluation on the clinical efficacy and safety of Ma's bamboo-based medicinal moxibustion therapy. Trial registration: ChiCTR, ChiCTR2000038725. Registered on 29 September 2020.

scholarly journals Microscopic extra-laminar sequestrectomy (MELS) for the treatment of hidden zone lumbar disc herniation: report of the surgical technique, patient selection, and clinical outcomes

BMC Surgery ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunxiao Wang ◽  
Yao Zhang ◽  
Xiaojie Tang ◽  
Haifei Cao ◽  
Qinyong Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Loss ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Operation Duration ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background The area which located at the medial pedicle, posterior vertebral body and ventral hemilamina is defined as the hidden zone. Surgical management of hidden zone lumbar disc herniation (HZLDH) is technically challenging due to its difficult surgical exposure. The conventional interlaminar approach harbors the potential risk of post-surgical instability, while other approaches consist of complicated procedures with a steep learning curve and prolonged operation time. Objective To introduce microscopic extra-laminar sequestrectomy (MELS) technique for treatment of hidden zone lumbar disc herniation and present clinical outcomes. Methods Between Jan 2016 to Jan 2018, twenty one patients (13 males) with HZLDH were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent MELS (19 patients underwent sequestrectomy only, 2 patients underwent an additional inferior discectomy). The nerve root and fragment were visually exposed using MELS. The operation duration, blood loss, intra- and postoperative complications, and recurrences were recorded. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate clinical outcomes. Postoperative stability was evaluated both radiologically and clinically. Results The mean follow-up period was 20.95 ± 2.09 (18–24) months. The mean operation time was 32.43 ± 7.19 min and the mean blood loss was 25.52 ± 5.37 ml. All patients showed complete neurological symptom relief after surgery. The VAS and ODI score were significantly improved at the final follow-up compared to those before operation (7.88 ± 0.70 vs 0.10 ± 0.30, 59.24 ± 10.83 vs 11.29 ± 3.59, respectively, p < 0.05). Seventeen patients (81%) obtained an “excellent” outcome and the remaining four (19%) patients obtained a “good” outcome based the MacNab criteria. One patient suffered reherniation at the same level one year after the initial surgery and underwent a transforaminal endoscopic discectomy. No major complications and postoperative instability were observed. Conclusions Our observation suggest that MELS is safe and effective in the management of HZLDH. Due to its relative simplicity, it comprises a flat surgical learning curve and shorter operation duration, and overall results in reduced disturbance to lumbar stability.

scholarly journals Follow-up study of lumbar disc herniation.

1989 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-97
Author(s):  
Toyoko Asami ◽  
Hideo Watanabe ◽  
Minoru Saika ◽  
Kazuyuki Moriyama ◽  
Akihiko Asami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Follow Up Study

118. Prosthetic Disc Nucleus (PDN) Replacement for Lumbar Disc Herniation Report with Four Year Follow-Up

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 60S ◽  
Author(s):  
Liang Zhao ◽  
Dongbin Qu ◽  
Dadi Jin ◽  
Hui Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc

scholarly journals A Comparison of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy and Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation in the Korean: A Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manyoung Kim ◽  
Sol Lee ◽  
Hyeun-Sung Kim ◽  
Sangyoon Park ◽  
Sang-Yeup Shim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy ◽  
Lumbar Microdiscectomy ◽  
Surgical Methods ◽  
Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy

Background. Among the surgical methods for lumbar disc herniation, open lumbar microdiscectomy is considered the gold standard. Recently, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy is also commonly performed for lumbar disc herniation for its various strong points. Objectives. The present study aims to examine whether percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and open lumbar microdiscectomy show better results as surgical treatments for lumbar disc herniation in the Korean population. Methods. In the present meta-analysis, papers on Korean patients who underwent open lumbar microdiscectomy and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy were searched, both of which are surgical methods to treat lumbar disc herniation. The papers from 1973, when percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy was first introduced, to March 2018 were searched at the databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. Results. Seven papers with 1254 patients were selected. A comparison study revealed that percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy had significantly better results than open lumbar microdiscectomy in the visual analogue pain scale at the final follow-up (leg: mean difference [MD]=-0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI]=-0.61, -0.09; p=0.009; back: MD=-0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI]=-1.42, -0.17; p=0.01), Oswestry Disability Index (MD=-2.12; 95% CI=-4.25, 0.01; p=0.05), operation time (MD=-23.06; 95% CI=-32.42, -13.70; p<0.00001), and hospital stay (MD=-4.64; 95% CI=-6.37, -2.90; p<0.00001). There were no statistical differences in the MacNab classification (odds ratio [OR]=1.02; 95% CI=0.71, 1.49; p=0.90), complication rate (OR=0.72; 95% CI=0.20, 2.62; p=0.62), recurrence rate (OR=0.83; 95% CI=0.50, 1.38; p=0.47), and reoperation rate (OR=1.45; 95% CI=0.89, 2.35; p=0.13). Limitations. All 7 papers used for the meta-analysis were non-RCTs. Some differences (type of surgery (primary or revisional), treatment options before the operation, follow-up period, etc.) existed depending on the selected paper, and the sample size was small as well. Conclusion. While percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy showed better results than open lumbar microdiscectomy in some items, open lumbar microdiscectomy still showed good clinical results, and it is therefore reckoned that a randomized controlled trial with a large sample size would be required in the future to compare these two surgical methods.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document