Minimally Invasive versus Open Thoracolumbar Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes: A CSORN Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 13
Author(s):  
Kalpesh Hathi
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Patients With Diabetes ◽  
One Year ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Introduction: This study was aimed at comparing outcomes of minimally invasive (MIS) versus OPEN surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in patients with diabetes. Methodology: This retrospective cohort study included patients with diabetes who underwent spinal decompression alone or with fusion for LSS within the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) database. Outcomes of MIS and OPEN approaches were compared for two cohorts: (i) patients with diabetes who underwent decompression alone (N = 116; MIS, n = 58, OPEN, n = 58) and (ii) patients with diabetes who underwent decompression with fusion (N = 108; MIS, n = 54, OPEN, n = 54). Mixed measures analyses of covariance compared modified Oswestry Disability Index (mODI) and back and leg pain at one-year post operation. The number of patients meeting minimum clinically important difference (MCID) or minimum pain/disability at one year were compared. Result: MIS approaches had less blood loss (decompression alone difference 99.66 mL, p = 0.002; with fusion difference 244.23, p < 0.001) and shorter LOS (decompression alone difference 1.15 days, p = 0.008; with fusion difference 1.23 days, p = 0.026). MIS compared to OPEN decompression with fusion had less patients experience an adverse event (difference, 13 patients, p = 0.007). The MIS decompression with fusion group had lower one-year mODI (difference, 14.25, p < 0.001) and back pain (difference, 1.64, p = 0.002) compared to OPEN. More patients in the MIS decompression with fusion group exceeded MCID at one year for mODI (MIS 75.9% vs OPEN 53.7%, p = 0.028) and back pain (MIS 85.2% vs OPEN 70.4%, p = 0.017). Conclusion: MIS approaches were associated with more favorable outcomes for patients with diabetes undergoing decompression with fusion for LSS.

scholarly journals Minimally Invasive vs. Open Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes – A Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110425
Author(s):  
Kalpesh Hathi ◽  
Erin Bigney ◽  
Eden Richardson ◽  
Tolu Alugo ◽  
Dana El-Mughayyar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Patients With Diabetes ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Study Design Retrospective cohort. Objectives To compare outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) vs open surgery (OPEN) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in patients with diabetes. Methods Patients with diabetes who underwent spinal decompression alone or with fusion for LSS within the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) database were included. MIS vs OPEN outcomes were compared for 2 cohorts: (1) patients with diabetes who underwent decompression alone (N = 116; MIS n = 58 and OPEN n = 58), (2) patients with diabetes who underwent decompression with fusion (N = 108; MIS n = 54 and OPEN n = 54). Modified Oswestry Disability Index (mODI) and back and leg pain were compared at baseline, 6–18 weeks, and 1-year post-operation. The number of patients meeting minimum clinically important difference (MCID) or minimum pain/disability at 1-year was compared. Results MIS approaches had less blood loss (decompression alone difference 100 mL, P = .002; with fusion difference 244 mL, P < .001) and shorter length of stay (LOS) (decompression alone difference 1.2 days, P = .008; with fusion difference 1.2 days, P = .026). MIS compared to OPEN decompression with fusion had less patients experiencing adverse events (AEs) (difference 13 patients, P = .007). The MIS decompression with fusion group had lower 1-year mODI (difference 14.5, 95% CI [7.5, 21.0], P < .001) and back pain (difference 1.6, 95% CI [.6, 2.7], P = .002) compared to OPEN. More patients in the MIS decompression with fusion group exceeded MCID at 1-year for mODI (MIS 75.9% vs OPEN 53.7%, P = .028) and back pain (MIS 85.2% vs OPEN 70.4%, P = .017). Conclusions MIS approaches were associated with more favorable outcomes for patients with diabetes undergoing decompression with fusion for LSS.

scholarly journals Improvement of Back and Leg Pain after Lumbar Spinal Decompression without Fusion

2018 ◽  
Vol 80 (02) ◽  
pp. 081-087
Author(s):  
Nicola Bongartz ◽  
Christian Blume ◽  
Hans Clusmann ◽  
Christian Müller ◽  
Matthias Geiger
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Clear Trend ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Background To evaluate whether decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis without fusion leads to sufficient improvement of back pain and leg pain and whether re-decompression alone is sufficient for recurrent lumbar spinal stenosis for patients without signs of instability. Material and Methods A successive series of 102 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (with and without previous lumbar surgery) were treated with decompression alone during a 3-year period. Data on pre- and postoperative back pain and leg pain (numerical rating scale [NRS] scale) were retrospectively collected from questionnaires with a return rate of 65% (n = 66). The complete cohort as well as patients with first-time surgery and re-decompression were analyzed separately. Patients were dichotomized to short-term follow-up (< 100 weeks) and long-term follow-up (> 100 weeks) postsurgery. Results Overall, both back pain (NRS 4.59 postoperative versus 7.89 preoperative; p < 0.0001) and leg pain (NRS 4.09 versus 6.75; p < 0.0001) improved postoperatively. The short-term follow-up subgroup (50%, n = 33) showed a significant reduction in back pain (NRS 4.0 versus 6.88; p < 0.0001) and leg pain (NRS 2.49 versus 6.91: p < 0.0001). Similar results could be observed for the long-term follow-up subgroup (50%, n = 33) with significantly less back pain (NRS 3.94 versus 7.0; p < 0.0001) and leg pain (visual analog scale 3.14 versus 5.39; p < 0.002) postoperatively. Patients with previous decompression surgery benefit significantly regarding back pain (NRS 4.82 versus 7.65; p < 0.0024), especially in the long-term follow-up subgroup (NRS 4.75 versus 7.67; p < 0.0148). There was also a clear trend in favor of leg pain in patients with previous surgery; however, it was not significant. Conclusions Decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis without fusion led to a significant and similar reduction of back pain and leg pain in a short-term and a long-term follow-up group. Patients without previous surgery benefited significantly better, whereas patients with previous decompression benefited regarding back pain, especially for long-term follow-up with a clear trend in favor of leg pain.

scholarly journals The Influence of Pain Sensitivity on the Symptom Severity in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

2013 ◽  
Vol 2;16 (2;3) ◽  
pp. 135-144
Author(s):  
Jin S. JYeom
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Disc Degeneration ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Pain Sensitivity ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Canal Stenosis ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Background: The symptom severity of back pain/leg pain is not correlated with the severity of degenerative changes and canal stenosis in lumbar stenosis. Considering the individual pain sensitivity might play an important role in pain perception, this discordance between the radiologic findings and clinical symptoms in degenerative lumbar stenosis might originate from the individual difference of pain sensitivity for back pain and/or leg pain. Objective: To determine the relationship among the clinical symptoms, radiologic findings, and the individual pain sensitivity in the patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Study Design: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Setting: A spine center in the department of orthopedic surgery. Methods: In 94 patients who had chronic back pain and/or leg pain caused by degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, a medical history, a physical examination, and completion of a series of questionnaires, including pain sensitivity questionnaire (PSQ) [total PSQ and PSQ-minor], Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Pain Scale (VAS) for back pain, and Short Form36 (SF-36) were recorded on the first visit. Radiologic analysis was performed using the MRI findings. The grading of canal stenosis was based on the method by Schizas, and the degree of disc degeneration was graded from T2-weighted images with the Pfirrmann classification. The correlations among variables were statistically analyzed. Results: Total PSQ and PSQ-minor were not dependent on the grade of canal stenosis after gender adjustment. VAS for leg pain and back pain was highly associated with the total PSQ and the PSQ-minor. Total PSQ and PSQ-minor were also significantly associated with ODI. Among SF36 scales, the PSQ minor had significant correlations with SF-36 such as bodily pain (BP), Roleemotional (RE), and Mental Component Summary (MCS) after control of confounding variables such as body mass index (BMI), age, and the grade of canal stenosis/disc degeneration. Total PSQ was significantly associated with the SF-36 RP, BP, and RE. Furthermore, after adjustment for gender and pain sensitivity, there was no significant association between the grade of canal stenosis and VAS for back pain/leg pain and ODI, and no correlation was found between the grade of disc degeneration and VAS for back pain/leg pain and ODI, either. Limitations: The multiple lesions of canal stenosis and/or disc degeneration and the grade of facet degeneration were not considered as a variable. Conclusion: The current study suggests that the pain sensitivity could be a determining factor for symptom severity in the degenerative spinal disease. Key words: Pain sensitivity, pain sensitivity questionnaire, lumbar spinal stenosis, visual analog pain scale, Oswestry disability index, Short Form-36

scholarly journals Prevalence of Vitamin D Deficiency in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and its Relationship with Pain

2013 ◽  
Vol 2;16 (2;3) ◽  
pp. 165-176
Author(s):  
Seong-Hwan Moon
Keyword(s):  
Bone Mineral Density ◽  
Vitamin D ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Vitamin D Deficiency ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Sunlight Exposure ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Mineral Density ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Background: Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) are at a great risk of a fall and fracture, which vitamin D protects against. Vitamin D deficiency is expected to be highly prevalent in LSS patient, and pain is thought to have a profound effect on vitamin D status by limiting activity and sunlight exposure. Objective: To identify the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency (serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25-OHD] < 20ng/mL) and its relationship with pain. Study Design: Nonblinded, cross-sectional clinical study. Setting: University-based outpatient clinic of the Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Korea. Methods: Consecutive patients who visited the orthopedic outpatient clinic for chronic low back pain and leg pain and were diagnosed as LSS between May 2012 and October 2012 were included. Pain was categorized into 4 groups based on location and severity: 1) mild to moderate back or leg pain; 2) severe back pain; 3) severe leg pain; and 4) severe back and leg pain. Covariates for vitamin D deficiency included age, sex, body mass index, level of education, medical history, season, region of residence, sunlight exposure score and functional disability. 25-OHD level was measured by radioimmunoassay, and bone metabolic status including bone mineral density and bone turnover markers was also measured. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to adjust all risk estimates for covariates. Results: The study had 350 patients enrolled. Mean serum 25-OHD level was 15.9 ± 7.1 ng/mL (range, 2.5 ~ 36.6). of the 350 patients, 260 patients out of 350 (74.3%) were vitamin D deficient. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed a significantly higher prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in the following patients: 1) medical comorbidity; 2) urban residence rather than rural; 3) lower score for sunlight exposure; and 4) severe leg pain, or severe back and leg pain rather than mild to moderate pain. Pain category was significantly associated with lower sunlight exposure; however, the association between pain category and vitamin D deficiency remained significant even after adjustment for the sunlight exposure. Furthermore, severe back pain, and severe back and leg pain were also associated with higher incidence of osteoporosis and higher level of bone resorption marker (serum CTx). Limitations: The limitation of our study is that due to its cross-sectional design, causal relationships between pain and vitamin D deficiency could not be established. Conclusion: Vitamin D deficiency was highly prevalent in LSS patients (74.3%), and severe pain was associated with higher prevalence of vitamin D deficiency and osteoporosis which could be potential risk factors or a fall and fracture. As evidenced by the present study, assessment of serum 25-OHD and bone mineral density are recommended in LSS patients with severe pain, and active treatment combining vitamin D, calcium, or bisphosphonate should be considered according to the status of the bone metabolism. Key words: Vitamin D, lumbar spinal stenosis, pain, bone mineral density

scholarly journals Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients With Mild Leg Pain Levels Is Associated With Unsatisfactory Outcome

2020 ◽  
pp. 219256822094251
Author(s):  
Freyr Gauti Sigmundsson ◽  
Anders Möller ◽  
Fredrik Strömqvist
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Successful Outcome ◽  
Neurogenic Claudication ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Outcome Of Surgery

Study Design: Prospective register cohort study. Objectives: The indication for surgery in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is considered to be leg pain and neurogenic claudication (NC). Nevertheless, a significant part of patients operated for LSS have mild leg pain levels defined as leg pain ≤minimally important clinical difference (MICD). Information is lacking on how to inform these patients about the probable outcome of surgery. The objective was to report the outcome of surgery for LSS in patients with a mild preoperative level of leg pain. Methods: A total of 2559 patients operated upon for LSS with preoperative leg pain ≤3 NRS (Numerical Rating Scale) were evaluated for outcome at the 1-year follow-up. NRS for back pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the EuroQol (EQ-5D) were used. Results: In the period 2007 to 2017, we identified 3239 patients (14%) who had mild leg pain (≤3 on the NRS). In this cohort, leg pain increased 0.40 (0.56-0.37) and back pain decreased 1.0 (0.95-1.2) at the 1-year follow up. ODI decreased 11.1 (10.2-11.4) and the EQ-5D increased 0.15 (0.17-0.14). A total of 31% reached successful outcome in terms of back pain, 43% in terms of ODI and 48% in terms of EQ-5D. 63% of the patients were satisfied with the outcome. Conclusion: A minority of patients with mild leg pain levels operated upon for LSS attain MICD for back pain, ODI, and EQ-5D. The results from this study can aid the surgeon in the shared decision-making process before surgery.

scholarly journals Nonsurgical Korean Integrative Treatments for Symptomatic Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Three-Armed Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial Protocol

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kiok Kim ◽  
Kyung-Min Shin ◽  
Jun-Hwan Lee ◽  
Bok-Nam Seo ◽  
So-Young Jung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Treatment Program ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Medicinal Treatment ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

This is a study protocol for a pilot three-armed randomized controlled trial on nonsurgical integrative Korean medicinal treatment for symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Thirty-six participants who have been diagnosed with (LSS) and recommended for spinal surgery by neurosurgeons or orthopedics and have had spinal symptoms such as severe low back pain and neurological claudication regardless of at least three months of conservative treatments will be recruited. Participants will be randomly assigned to be one of the three intervention groups, including the Mokhuri treatment program group 1 or 2 or usual care group. All treatments will be administered in inpatient units over a period of 4 weeks. The primary outcomes are 0 to 100 Visual Analogue Scales for low back pain and leg pain and the secondary outcomes are Oswestry Disability Index; EQ-5D; Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire; Oxford Claudication Score; physical function test, including treadmill test, walking duration, and distance assessment for free leg pain; radiologic testing; and adverse events which will be assessed during the 4-week treatment period as well as after 3 and 6 months of follow-up. Then, we will assess the feasibility of the clinical trial design as well as a nonsurgical integrative treatment program. This trial is registered with CRIS registration number: KCT0001218.

scholarly journals Five-Level Unilateral Laminectomy Bilateral Decompression (ULBD) by Two-Stage Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wenlong Wang ◽  
Zheng Liu
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Invasive Procedure ◽  
Rigid Fixation ◽  
Minimally Invasive Procedure ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Abstract Background Unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) is a relatively new yet common minimally invasive procedure in spine surgery, capable of achieving adequate decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis through unilateral laminectomy bilateral decompression (ULBD). Neither additional fusion nor rigid fixation is required, as UBE-ULBD rarely causes iatrogenic lumbar instability. However, to our knowledge, five-level ULBD via two-stage UBE without lumbar fusion has been yet to be reported in the treatment of multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis.Case description We present a case of an 80-year-old female patient who developed progressive paralysis of the lower extremities. Radiographic examinations showed multilevel degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis and extensive compression of the dural sac and nerve roots from L1-2 to L5-S1. The patient underwent five-level ULBD through two-stage UBE without lumbar fusion or fixation. One week after the final procedure, the patient could ambulate with walking aids and braces. Moreover, no back pain or limited lumbar motion was observed at the 6-month follow-up.Conclusions Multilevel ULBD through UBE may provide elderly patients with an alternative, minimally invasive procedure for treating spinal stenosis. This procedure could be achieved by staging surgeries. In this case, we reported complaints of little back pain, despite not needing to perform lumbar fusion or fixation.

scholarly journals Clinical Features and Efficacy Analysis of Redundant Nerve Roots

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianzhong Xu ◽  
Yong Hu
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Clinical Features ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Common Finding ◽  
Nerve Roots ◽  
Standard Deviations ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Introduction: Redundant nerve roots (RNRs) are common finding in lumbar spinal stenosis patients. Up to now, many relevant studies were carried out on the mechanism, pathogenic factors, and clinical features of redundant nerve roots. However, there are few studies on the surgical methods. In this study, posterior lumbar interbody fusion and internal fixations were used in 30 patients with RNRs in our hospital. Moreover, we also proposed new ideas about different types and subtypes of RNRs using patterns and their corresponding MRI images.Methods: Thirty patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and RNRs were enrolled in this study and underwent surgery between January 2009 and December 2014. Redundant nerve roots are identified as elongated, tortuous, or serpiginous nerve roots present in the subarachnoid space on sagittal T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies. Patients were treated with posterior decompression, intervertebral disc resection, and instrumented interbody fusion. The age, sex, disease course, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, operative segments were recorded. Outcome measures recorded to identify symptom improvement included pre-operative and post-operative visual analog scale (VAS), pre-operative and post-operative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and pre-operative and post-operative Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores.Results: VAS back pain, VAS leg pain VAS, ODI, and JOA with standard deviations were 6.4 ± 0.9, 7.1 ± 0.8, 43.0 ± 2.2, and 10.3 ± 2.6, respectively. At 3 months post-operatively, VAS back pain, VAS leg pain VAS, ODI, and JOA with standard deviations were 1.4 ± 0.5, 1.6 ± 0.6, 13.0 ± 1.6, and 25.0 ± 1.8, respectively. Nerve redundancy resolved in all cases on post-operative MRI.Conclusion: Posterior lumbar laminectomy and instrumented interbody fusion relieves low back and leg pain in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and RNRs and can alleviate the tortuous appearance of the cauda equina in the decompressed segment.

scholarly journals Outcomes of decompression without fusion in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and substantial back pain

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Rachid Bech-Azeddine ◽  
Søren Fruensgaard ◽  
Mikkel Andersen ◽  
Leah Y. Carreon
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Structural Instability ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Neurogenic Claudication ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

OBJECTIVEThe predominant symptom of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is neurogenic claudication or radicular pain. Some surgeons believe that the presence of substantial back pain is an indication for fusion, and that decompression alone may lead to worsening of back pain from destabilization associated with facet resection. The purpose of this study was to determine if patients with LSS and clinically significant back pain could obtain substantial improvements in back pain after a decompression alone without fusion.METHODSThe DaneSpine database was used to identify 2737 patients with LSS without segmental instability and a baseline back pain visual analog scale (VAS) score ≥ 50 who underwent a decompression procedure alone without fusion. Standard demographic and surgical variables and patient outcomes, including back and leg pain VAS score (0–100), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EQ-5D at baseline and at 12 months postoperatively, were collected.RESULTSA total of 1891 patients (69%) had 12-month follow-up data available for analysis; the mean age was 66.4 years, 860 (46%) were male, the mean BMI was 27.8 kg/m2, and 508 (27%) were current smokers. At 12 months postoperatively, there were statistically significant improvements (p < 0.001) from baseline for back pain (72.1 to 42.1), leg pain (71.2 to 41.3), EQ-5D (0.35 to 0.61), and ODI (44.1 to 27.8).CONCLUSIONSPatients with LSS, clinically substantial back pain, and no structural instability obtain improvement in back pain after decompression-only surgery and do not need a concomitant fusion.

scholarly journals Pregabalin for Refractory Radicular Leg Pain due to Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Preliminary Prospective Study

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sumihisa Orita ◽  
Masaomi Yamashita ◽  
Yawara Eguchi ◽  
Miyako Suzuki ◽  
Gen Inoue ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Japanese Orthopaedic Association ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Vas Scores ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

We investigated the efficacy of pregabalin (PGB) for neuropathic leg pain in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) patients with disturbed activities of daily living (ADL)/quality of life (QOL) in a prospective observational study. Subjects were a total of 104 LSS patients with neuropathic pain (NeP) in leg and neurological intermittent claudication (IMC) refractory to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for at least a month. NeP was identified using screening tool, Pain DETECT questionnaire. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores and responses to the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) were assessed before and 6 weeks after PGB treatment initiation. Changes in IMC distance and adverse events were also recorded. PGB significantly improved their VAS scores for pain and sleep quality (P<0.001). With respect to JOABPEQ, significant improvements were observed with regard to the following dimensions: pain-related disorders (P<0.01), lumbar spine dysfunction (P=0.031), gait disturbance (P=0.028), and psychological disorders (P=0.014). The IMC distance showed an improvement tendency after PGB treatment, albeit with no significance (P=0.063). Minor adverse events such as dizziness were observed. PGB can be effective for neuropathic leg pain refractory to NSAIDs in LSS patients, resulting in not only pain control but also improving lower back pain-related ADL/QOL scores.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document