scholarly journals ‘Progressive-Onset’ versus Injury-Associated Discogenic Low Back Pain: Features of Disc Internal Derangement in Patients Studied with Provocation Lumbar Discography

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 110-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
W.S. Bartynski ◽  
L.M. Dejohn ◽  
W.E. Rothfus ◽  
P.C. Gerszten

Chronic low back pain (LBP) can be ‘progressive onset’ or injury-related. This study compares the patient-reported cause of chronic LBP to features of disc internal derangement at painful concordant discs evaluated by provocation lumbar discography. Concordant LBP was identified in 114 patients with chronic LBP studied by provocation discography. LBP cause, discogram pain response and discogram/post-discogram CT features of internal derangement were retrospectively reviewed. ‘Progressive-onset’ LBP was reported in 32 (28%) patients, injury-related LBP in 75 (66%) with LBP equated to non-specific causes in seven. Injury-related LBP was more commonly identified in men (52 of 63 [83%]) with women reporting near-equal frequency of ‘progressive-onset’ (23 of 44 [52%]) and injury-related (21 of 44 [48%]) LBP (p=0.002). In 172 concordant painful discs, near-equal frequency of severely degenerative (Dallas grade-3: 82 of 172 [47.3%]) and full-thickness radial fissure discs (Dallas grade-3: 90 of 172 [52.7%]) were identified. Women with ‘progressive-onset’ LBP demonstrated more frequent severely degenerative discs (24 of 37 [65%]); women with injury-related LBP demonstrated more frequent radial-defect discs (21 of 31 [68%]; p=0.01). In men with injury-related LBP, severe degeneration-only (44 of 89 [49%]) and radial defect discs (45 of 89 [51%] were seen with equal frequency. In men with ‘progressive-onset’ LBP, radial defects are more common (11 of 15 [73%]). ‘Progressive-onset’ and injury-related chronic LBP subgroups are definable. Gender-related differences in incidence and internal derangement features at concordant discs are identified at discogram/post-discogram CT. These differences may have implications related to LBP origin/treatment-response.

2013 ◽  
Vol 93 (12) ◽  
pp. 1603-1614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin Verkerk ◽  
Pim A.J. Luijsterburg ◽  
Martijn W. Heymans ◽  
Inge Ronchetti ◽  
Annelies L. Pool-Goudzwaard ◽  
...  

Background Few data are available on the course of and predictors for disability in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP). Objective The purpose of this study was to describe the course of disability and identify clinically important prognostic factors of low-back-pain–specific disability in patients with CNSLBP receiving multidisciplinary therapy. Design A prospective cohort study was conducted. Methods A total of 1,760 patients with CNSLBP who received multidisciplinary therapy were evaluated for their course of disability and prognostic factors at baseline and at 2-, 5-, and 12-month follow-ups. Recovery was defined as 30% reduction in low back pain–specific disability at follow-up compared with baseline and as absolute recovery if the score on the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS) was ≤20 points at follow-up. Potential prognostic factors were identified using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results Mean patient-reported disability scores on the QBPDS ranged from 51.7 (SD=15.6) at baseline to 31.7 (SD=15.2), 31.1 (SD=18.2), and 29.1 (SD=20.0) at 2, 5, and 12 months, respectively. The prognostic factors identified for recovery at 5 and 12 months were younger age and high scores on disability and on the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (Physical and Mental Component Summaries) at baseline. In addition, at 5-month follow-up, a shorter duration of complaints was a positive predictor, and having no comorbidity and less pain at baseline were additional predictors at 12-month follow-up. Limitations Missing values at 5- and 12-month follow-ups were 11.1% and 45.2%, respectively. Conclusion After multidisciplinary treatment, the course of disability in patients with CNSLBP continued to decline over a 12-month period. At 5- and 12-month follow-ups, prognostic factors were identified for a clinically relevant decrease in disability scores on the QBPDS.


Spine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tao Wu ◽  
Hai-xin Song ◽  
Yan Dong ◽  
Jian-hua Li

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A. M. Garratt ◽  
H. Furunes ◽  
C. Hellum ◽  
T. Solberg ◽  
J. I. Brox ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The EuroQol EQ-5D is one of the most widely researched and applied patient-reported outcome measures worldwide. The original EQ-5D-3L and more recent EQ-5D-5L include three and five response categories respectively. Evidence from healthy and sick populations shows that the additional two response categories improve measurement properties but there has not been a concurrent comparison of the two versions in patients with low back pain (LBP). Methods LBP patients taking part in a multicenter randomized controlled trial of lumbar total disc replacement and conservative treatment completed the EQ-5D-3L and 5L in an eight-year follow-up questionnaire. The 3L and 5L were assessed for aspects of data quality including missing data, floor and ceiling effects, response consistency, and based on a priori hypotheses, associations with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Pain-Visual Analogue Scales and Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL-25). Results At the eight-year follow-up, 151 (87%) patients were available and 146 completed both the 3L and 5L. Levels of missing data were the same for the two versions. Compared to the EQ-5D-5L, the 3L had significantly higher floor (pain discomfort) and ceiling effects (mobility, self-care, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression). For these patients the EQ-5D-5L described 73 health states compared to 28 for the 3L. Shannon’s indices showed the 5L outperformed the 3L in tests of classification efficiency. Correlations with the ODI, Pain-VAS and HSCL-25 were largely as hypothesized, the 5L having slightly higher correlations than the 3L. Conclusion The EQ-5D assesses important aspect of health in LBP patients and the 5L improves upon the 3L in this respect. The EQ-5D-5L is recommended in preference to the 3L version, however, further testing in other back pain populations together with additional measurement properties, including responsiveness to change, is recommended. Trial registration: retrospectively registered: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01704677.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. e0203518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miranda L. van Hooff ◽  
Johanna M. van Dongen ◽  
Veerle M. Coupé ◽  
Maarten Spruit ◽  
Raymond W. J. G. Ostelo ◽  
...  

Spine ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 30 (19) ◽  
pp. 2230-2236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rudolf Bertagnoli ◽  
James J. Yue ◽  
Rahul V. Shah ◽  
Regina Nanieva ◽  
Frank Pfeiffer ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 1231-1237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nianhu Li ◽  
Camden Whitaker ◽  
Zhanwang Xu ◽  
Michael Heggeness ◽  
Shang-You Yang

Background: Anecdotal evidence indicates the possible efficacy of cannabis use as an adjunctive treatment in chronic low back pain. The purpose of the current study was to assess the results of treatment of patients suffering from chronic low back pain by medicinal cannabis (MCT). Methods: A cohort of 46 patients was followed for a minimum of twelve months. They were evaluated at baseline prior to MCT, 3 months later when MCT was begun and up to 12 months of MCT by patient reported outcome questionnaire (SF-12), visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), back specific function was assessed using the Oswestry score, range of motion was measured using the Saunders digital inclinometer. Opiate use was assessed using pharmacy dispensation records at baseline and after 12 months of MCT. Inclusion criteria included: age over 25 years, sciatica with documented treatment for at least 12 months, evidence on CT or MRI scan of disc herniation or spinal stenosis, failure of at least two narcotic drugs, and consent to use medicinal cannabis. Exclusion criteria included evidence of bone cancer, evidence of diabetic neuropathy, and evidence of prior psychotic reactions. Treatment protocol: Cannabis usage was at a fixed dosage of 20 grams per month, dose increase was considered at least after 6 months of treatment. The cannabis was smoked at a recommended rate of 4 dosages per day. Results: After 12 months of MCT BPI VAS decreased from 8.4 ± 1.4 to 2.0 ± 2.0; SF12-PCS improved from 47 ± 14 to 55 ± 12; SF12-MCS improved from 44 ± 6 to 50 ± 10; and sagittal plane active range of motion improved from 34º ± 8º degrees to 48º ± 8º, In conclusion, short term usage of smoked medicinal cannabis appear to improve both physical and mental function while decreasing pain levels of chronic low back pain sufferers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document