Percutaneous Laser Discectomy Research Articles

Feasibility study of ultrasound-guided percutaneous laser discectomy for cervical radicular pain

Percutaneous laser discectomy is one common and effective treatment for cervical radicular pain. Currently, the surgery is performed with blind cannulation technique, mainly relies on the experience of surgeon. However, it still remains unsafe and difficult to reach the target. As an alternative, ultrasound-guided cannulation provides visualization of important structures, thus increasing the precision and safety. The primary goal of this study is to report the detail of the ultrasound-guided technique in the percutaneous laser cervical discectomy. The secondary purpose is to evaluate the feasibility of the novel therapy. This is a single center, feasibility study conducted in one teaching hospital. Thirteen intervertebral discs in 9 patients presented with cervical radicular pain. Accuracy of the cannulation with ultrasonic guidance was confirmed by the anterior–posterior and lateral view of fluoroscopy. We compared the pain severity pre- and post-treatment with Visual Analogue Score (VAS), and functional improvement was assessed with the modified Macnab Criteria and Neck Disability Index (NDI) respectively. Ultrasonic short-axis was used to scan the cervical nerve root, and its transition was used to identify the distinct intervertebral space. Following the recognition of targeted cervical level, the ultrasound probe was moved medially for the visualization of the surface of the cervical vertebrae. In plane cannulation was then applied to avoid the injury of the vessels. The location of cannula was confirmed by the fluoroscopic imaging. Low-power laser was set for the cervical disc ablation in this cohort. The majority of the surgical sites maintained in the C5/6 level (38%), and 31% for the C6/7 level respectively. Despite the distinct cervical level, the tip of needle was properly placed near by the targeted intervertebral disc in all participants, which was confirmed by the imaging of fluoroscopy. We did not observe any obvious complications during the procedure. The mean VAS decreased from 7.6 ± 1.1 to 2.3 ± 2.7 one month after discharge, and 2.1 ± 2.6 at the last follow-up (median duration of nine months). All patients reported significant improvement of NDI up to last follow-up (p = 0.011). Meanwhile, the good to excellent rate was reported in 8 of 9 patients (89%) according to the modified Macnab Criteria. The finding of this feasibility assessment indicates the ultrasound-based cannulation technique is capable of guiding the cannulation for the percutaneous laser discectomy. It may facilitate identifying the corresponding site of cervical intervertebral disc and prevent the damage of vessel.

Clinical and Radiological Comparisons of Percutaneous Low-Power Laser Discectomy and Low-Temperature Plasma Radiofrequency Ablation for Cervical Radiculopathy: A Prospective, Multicenter, Cohort Study

BackgroundMinimally invasive techniques, such as percutaneous low-power laser discectomy (PLLD) and low-temperature plasma radiofrequency ablation (coblation) can be applied to treat degenerative cervical radiculopathy. However, less evidence supports the superiority of distinct minimally-invasive therapy. Our study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiological characteristics of the PLLD and coblation for cervical radiculopathy.MethodsThis was a prospective, multicenter, cohort study (ChiCTR-ONC-17010356). The modified Macnab criteria was performed to assess the clinical improvement pre- and post-surgery. To evaluate the radiological effect, the Pfirrmann grading system and disk herniation index were applied with MRI.ResultsIn this study, 28 patients were enrolled in the coblation group and 30 patients in the PLLD group. The mean good-excellent rate at 3-month follow-up was 82.1% for PLLD group, and 66.7% for coblation group, respectively (p = 0.179). The PLLD group achieved higher good-excellent rate 6 and 12 months after discharge (92.9 vs. 70.0%, p = 0.026). Radiological data revealed that PLLD but not coblation treatment achieved significant reduction of disk herniation index (p < 0.0001). Coblation treatment did not change the Pfirrmann grades of cervical radiculopathy patients (n = 18), and 7 out of 17 (41.2%) patients achieved improvement after PLLD therapy. None obvious adverse event was observed in this study.ConclusionBoth PLLD and coblation are effective and safe option for patients with cervical radiculopathy. Better long-term clinical outcomes may be potentially associated with the improvement of disk degeneration after PLLD treatment.

The Effect of Percutaneous Laser Disc Decompression on Reducing Pain and Disability in Patients With Lumbar Disc Herniation.

Introduction: As low back pain incidence is increasing, noninvasive modalities are gaining attention for their ability to achieve the best possible outcome with the least complications. Percutaneous laser disc decompression (PLDD) is currently popular for this purpose. This study aims to evaluate the effect of PLDD on disability and pain reduction in patients with lumbar disc herniation. Methods: Thirty patients were enrolled in this study. Spinal nerve blocks were conducted by laser discectomy single stage injection of a needle into the disc space. The nucleus pulposus of herniated discs were irradiated with laser in order to vaporize a small part of the nucleus pulposus of the intervertebral discs and reduce the voluminosity of diseased discs. Patients were treated with 1000 J of 980 nm diode laser with 5 W energy. In order to measure the severity of pain, visual analog scale (VAS) and also ODI (Oswestry Disability Index) were used. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 12. Results: Thirty patients participated in this trial including 11 men and 19 women with a mean age (SD) of 40.8 (10.8) years. The mean patients VAS score and ODI level before and after discectomy showed statistically significant differences. The mean VAS and ODI scores showed no statistical difference between males and females (P<0.05) and percutaneous laser discectomy decreased the VAS and ODI at both groups of patients similarly. Conclusion: We found the use of PLDD reduces pain and disability in patients as a noninvasive procedure.

Percutaneous Lumbar Laser Discectomy: Literature Review and a Retrospective Analysis of 65 Cases.

Percutaneous lumbar laser discectomy is a minimally invasive treatment option for patients with a contained disc herniation with back and/or leg pain. The goal of this study was to present our experience and results with patients who underwent percutaneous lumbar laser discectomy in our practice. A total of 65 patients were included, and their charts were retrospectively reviewed. The most common level at which we performed the laser discectomy was the L5/S1 level 47.4% of the time. The next most common level was L4/L5 37.2% of the time and the least common level was L3/4 15.4% of the time. Neuritis was reported in four patients, which was treated with medication in two patients, and resolved in all four patients. The average preprocedure visual analog scale (VAS) score was 7.6/10 (range, 5-10/10). There was an improvement in the VAS score at 2-week follow-up. The average VAS score at 2-week follow-up was 3.7/10 (range, 0-10/10). The average VAS score at 6-week follow-up was 4.3/10 (range, 0-8/10). The average VAS score at 3-6 months was 4.1/10 [range, 0-8/10 and at 6-12 months was 4.2 (range, 0-8/10)]. Appropriate patient selection and following a systematic stepwise approach are important in treatment planning for patients in whom percutaneous laser discectomy is being considered. Following appropriate patient selection criteria maximizes the success rate of percutaneous laser discectomy. In our experience with patients with persistent back and/or leg pain not responding appropriately to conservative therapy, percutaneous laser discectomy offers a minimally invasive treatment option with nominal complications.

Sedation Monitoring and Management during Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy.

Percutaneous endoscopic laser discectomy (PELD) is a painful intervention that requires deep sedation and analgesia. However, sedation should be light at some point because cooperation by the patient during the procedure is required for successful surgical treatment. Light sedation poses a problem for endotracheal intubation, while patients placed in the prone position during percutaneous endoscopic discectomy pose a problem for airway management. Therefore, under these conditions, sedation should be not deeper than required. Here we report the sedation management of three cases that underwent PELD, with a focus on deep and safe sedation that was monitored using bispectral index score and observer's assessment of alertness/sedation score.

Sciatica. From stretch rack to microdiscectomy

In ancient times as well as in the Middle Ages treatment options for discogenic nerve compression syndrome were limited and usually not very specific because of low anatomical and pathophysiological knowledge. The stretch rack (scamnum Hippocratis) was particularly prominent but was widely used as a therapeutic device for very different spinal disorders. Since the beginning of the nineteenth century anatomical knowledge increased and the advances in the fields of asepsis, anesthesia and surgery resulted in an increase in surgical interventions on the spine. In 1908 the first successful lumbar discectomy was initiated and performed by the German neurologist Heinrich O. Oppenheim (1858-1919) and the surgeon Fedor Krause (1857-1937); however, neither recognized the true pathological condition of discogenic nerve compression syndrome. With the landmark report in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1934, the two American surgeons William Jason Mixter (1880-1958) and Joseph Seaton Barr (1901-1963) finally clarified the pathomechanism of lumbar disc herniation and furthermore, propagated discectomy as the standard therapy. Since then interventions on intervertebral discs rapidly increased and the treatment options for lumbar disc surgery quickly evolved. The surgical procedures changed over time and were continuously being refined. In the late 1960s the surgical microscope was introduced for spinal surgery by the work of the famous neurosurgeon Mahmut Gazi Yasargil and his colleague Wolfhard Caspar and so-called microdiscectomy was introduced. Besides open discectomy other interventional techniques were developed to overcome the side effects of surgical procedures. In 1964 the American orthopedic surgeon Lyman Smith (1912-1991) introduced chemonucleolysis, a minimally invasive technique consisting only of a cannula and the proteolytic enzyme chymopapain, which is injected into the disc compartment to dissolve the displaced disc material. In 1975 the Japanese orthopedic surgeon Sadahisa Hijikata described percutaneous discectomy for the first time, which was a further minimally invasive surgical technique. Further variants of minimally invasive surgical procedures, such as percutaneous laser discectomy in 1986 and percutaneous endoscopic microdiscectomy in 1997, were also introduced; however, open discectomy, especially microdiscectomy remains the therapeutic gold standard for lumbar disc herniation.

An Update of the Systematic Assessment of Mechanical Lumbar Disc Decompression with Nucleoplasty

Background: Lumbar disc prolapse, protrusion, and extrusion account for less than 5% of all low back problems, but are the most common causes of nerve root pain and surgical interventions. The primary rationale for any form of surgery for disc prolapse is to relieve nerve root irritation or compression due to herniated disc material. The primary modality of treatment continues to be either open or microdiscectomy, although several alternative techniques are also utilized, including nucleoplasty, automated percutaneous discectomy and laser discectomy. There is a paucity of evidence for all decompression techniques, specifically alternative techniques including nucleoplasty. Study Design: A systematic review of the literature of mechanical lumbar disc decompression with nucleoplasty. Objective: To determine the effectiveness and update the effectiveness of mechanical lumbar disc decompression with nucleoplasty. Methods: The available literature on mechanical lumbar disc decompression with nucleoplasty was reviewed. The quality assessment and clinical relevance criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and the criteria developed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria for observational studies. The level of evidence was classified as good, fair, and limited or poor based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to September 2012, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Outcome Measures: Pain relief and functional improvement were the primary outcome measures. Other outcome measures were improvement of psychological status, reduction in opioid intake, and return to work. Short-term effectiveness was defined as one year or less, whereas long-term effectiveness was defined as greater than one year. Results: For this systematic review, 37 studies were considered for inclusion. Of these, there was one randomized trial and 14 observational studies meeting inclusion criteria for methodological quality assessment. Based on USPSTF criteria, the level of evidence for nucleoplasty is limited to fair in managing radicular pain due to contained disc herniation. Limitations: A paucity of literature with randomized trials. Conclusion: This systematic review illustrates limited to fair evidence for nucleoplasty in managing radicular pain due to contained disc herniation. Key words: Intervertebral disc disease, chronic low back pain, disc herniation, disc protrusion, radiculitis, contained disc herniation, mechanical disc decompression, nucleoplasty, Coblation technology, nucleotomy

Percutaneous Lumbar Laser Disc Decompression: An Update of Current Evidence

Background: Since the descriptions by Mixter and Barr of surgical treatment for rupture of the intervertebral disc in 1934, open surgical procedures have become a common practice. Disc herniations are often classified as being contained or non-contained. The results of open surgical discectomy for contained disc herniation have been poor. Consequently, several less invasive techniques have been developed including percutaneous lumbar laser disc decompression. Study Design: A systematic review of the literature of percutaneous lumbar laser disc decompression. Objective: The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate and update the clinical effectiveness of percutaneous lumbar laser discectomy in managing radicular pain secondary to contained disc herniation. Methods: The available literature on lumbar laser disc decompression in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain was reviewed. Quality assessment and clinical relevance of randomized trials were graded according to the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria for interventional techniques, and observational studies according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria. The level of evidence was classified as good, fair, and limited or poor based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to September 2012, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Outcome Measures: Pain relief was the primary outcome measure. Other outcome measures were functional improvement, improvement of psychological status, opioid intake, and return-to-work. Short-term effectiveness was defined as effectiveness lasting one year or less, whereas, long-term effectiveness was defined as benefit persisting for greater than one year. Results: Based on USPSTF criteria, the indicated level of evidence for percutaneous lumbar laser disc decompression is limited for short- and long-term relief. Limitations: Although laser discectomy has been utilized for many years, there is a paucity of randomized clinical trials. Conclusion: This systematic review shows limited evidence for percutaneous lumbar laser disc decompression. Key words: Intervertebral disc disease, chronic low back pain, disc herniation, disc protrusion, radiculitis, contained disc herniation, mechanical disc decompression, percutaneous lumbar laser discectomy, laser assisted spinal endoscopy

The Survey of the Patient Received the Epiduroscopic Laser Neural Decompression

BackgroundNeuroplasty using a Racz catheter or epiduroscope and percutaneous endoscopic laser discectomy are performed as treatment for chronic refractory low back and/or lower extremity pain, but they are limited in that they cannot completely remove the causing pathology. Lately, epiduroscopic laser neural decompression (ELND) has been receiving attention as an alternative treatment, but there are insufficient reports of results. Hence we aimed to investigate and report the data in our hospital.MethodsSeventy-seven patients were selected who had received ELND via the anterior and posterior epidural approach through the pain clinic in our hospital from March 2011 to July 2012. Their medical records including age, diagnosis, epiduroscopic findings and degree of symptom relief were investigated. The degree of symptom relief following the procedure was categorized into 5 stages of very good (5), good (4), no change (3), bad (2), and very bad (1) at 2 weeks and 1 month after the procedure.ResultsThe subjects were 30 males and 47 females. Mean age was 54.6 for males and 59.6 for females, so the overall mean age was 58.1 years old, with the youngest being 23 and the oldest 88 years old. In epiduroscopic images of all patients, more than one situation of herniated disc, fibrous tissue and adhesion, or inflammation was observed. Sixty-seven patients (87.0%) showed symptom relief 2 weeks after the procedure and 63 patients (81.8%) showed relief after 1 month.ConclusionsELND is considered to be an effective treatment alternative for chronic refractory low back and/or lower extremity pain, including lumbar disc herniation, lumbar spinal stenosis, and failed back surgery syndrome which cannot be alleviated with existing non-invasive conservative treatment.

The Return to Sports Activity After Conservative or Surgical Treatment in Athletes with Lumbar Disc Herniation

The purpose of this study was to clarify the efficacy of conservative or surgical treatment in athletes with lumbar disc herniation by reviewing the literature. A search of the literature was performed through PubMed, seeking studies published from 1990 to 2009 with regard to the outcomes of conservative or surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation in athletes. The percentage of athletes who returned to their original levels of sports activities and the period until their return after the start of treatment were assessed. One prospective and six retrospective studies were identified. One study was for conservative treatment, three for microdiscectomy, and the remaining three for percutaneous discectomy. The respective percentages of athletes who returned to original levels of sports activities (the period until their return) were 78.9% (4.7 mos), 85.1% (5.2-5.8 mos), and 69.9% (7.0 wks to 12 mos). The efficacy of conservative treatment and microdiscectomy, but not percutaneous discectomy, was comparable. No studies were found available for conventional open discectomy, percutaneous laser discectomy, or microendoscopic discectomy. It was revealed that the outcomes of conservative treatment or microdiscectomy in athletes with lumbar disc herniation seemed to be satisfactory in terms of their ability to return the injured athletes to their original levels of sports activities.

Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines for Interventional Techniques in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: Comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines for interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain are described here to provide recommendations for clinicians. Objective: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic spinal pain. Design: Systematic assessment of the literature. Methods: Strength of evidence was assessed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria utilizing 5 levels of evidence ranging from Level I to III with 3 subcategories in Level II. Outcomes: Short-term pain relief was defined as relief lasting at least 6 months and longterm relief was defined as longer than 6 months, except for intradiscal therapies, mechanical disc decompression, spinal cord stimulation and intrathecal infusion systems, wherein up to one year relief was considered as short-term. Results: The indicated evidence for accuracy of diagnostic facet joint nerve blocks is Level I or II1 in the diagnosis of lumbar, thoracic, and cervical facet joint pain. The evidence for lumbar and cervical provocation discography and sacroiliac joint injections is Level II-2, whereas it is Level II-3 for thoracic provocation discography. The indicated evidence for therapeutic interventions is Level I for caudal epidural steroid injections in managing disc herniation or radiculitis, and discogenic pain without disc herniation or radiculitis. The evidence is Level II-1 or II-2 for therapeutic cervical, thoracic, and lumbar facet joint nerve blocks; for caudal epidural injections in managing pain of post-lumbar surgery syndrome, and lumbar spinal stenosis, for cervical interlaminar epidural injections in managing cervical pain; for lumbar transforaminal epidural injections; for percutaneous adhesiolysis in management of pain secondary to post-lumbar surgery syndrome; and spinal cord stimulation for post-lumbar surgery syndrome. The indicated evidence for intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET), mechanical disc decompression with automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy (APLD), and percutaneous lumbar laser discectomy (PLDD) is Level II-2. Limitations: The limitations of these guidelines include a continued paucity of the literature, lack of updates, and conflicts in preparation of systematic reviews and guidelines by various organizations. Conclusion: The indicated evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic inverventions is variable from Level I to III. These guidelines include the evaluation of evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in managing chronic spinal pain and recommendations for managing spinal pain. However, these guidelines do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. Further, these guidelines also do not represent “standard of care.” Key words: Interventional techniques , chronic spinal pain, diagnostic blocks, therapeutic interventions, facet joint interventions, epidural injections, epidural adhesiolysis, discography, radiofrequency, disc decompression, spinal cord stimulation, intrathecal implantable systems

Percutaneous Lumbar Laser Disc Decompression: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence

Background: Since the descriptions by Mixter and Barr of open surgical treatment for rupture of the intervertebral disc in 1934, open surgical procedures have become a common practice. Disc herniations have been reported as being contained and non-contained. The results of open surgical discectomy for contained disc herniation have been poor. Consequently, several alternative techniques have been developed which are minimally invasive including percutaneous laser disc decompression. Study Design: A systematic review of the literature. Objective: The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of percutaneous laser discectomy in managing radicular pain secondary to contained disc herniation. Methods: A comprehensive evaluation of the literature relating to mechanical disc decompression was performed. The literature was evaluated according to Cochrane review criteria for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria was utilized for observational studies. A literature search was conducted by using only the English language literature through PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, systematic reviews, and cross references from reviews and systematic reviews. The level of evidence was classified as Level I, II, or III with 3 subcategories in Level II based on the quality of evidence developed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Outcome Measures: Pain relief was the primary outcome measure. Other outcome measures were functional improvement, improvement of psychological status, opioid intake, and return to work. Short-term effectiveness was defined as one year or less, whereas, long-term effectiveness was defined as greater than one year. Results: Based on USPSTF criteria the indicated level of evidence for percutaneous lumbar laser discectomy (PLLD) is II-2 for short- and long-term relief. Limitations: Even though laser discectomy has been in utilization for a number of years and numerous procedures have been performed there continues to be a paucity of literature of randomized clinical trials. Conclusion: This systematic review illustrates Level II-2 evidence for percutaneous laser disc decompression which is equivalent to automated percutaneous lumbar disc decompression. Key words: Intervertebral disc disease, chronic low back pain, disc herniation, disc protrusion, radiculitis, contained disc herniation, mechanical disc decompression, percutaneous lumbar laser discectomy, laser assisted spinal endoscopy

Percutaneous laser discectomy guided with stereotactic computer‐assisted surgical navigation

Percutaneous laser discectomy at various wavelengths has been used for minimally invasive surgery of herniated intervertebral discs. Using a high-intensity diode laser at 980-nm wavelength, we aimed to improve the safe insertion of the laser trocar with the aid of a stereotactic computer-assisted surgical navigation system. The experiments were performed on ex vivo porcine spines with intact soft tissue. Before laser irradiation, each specimen was imaged by computed tomography (CT) with fiduciary markers. The Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM standard) data sets were retrieved into the GE Healthcare Surgery InstaTRAK3500 Plus computer-assisted surgical navigation platform via the hospital Ethernet using a picture archiving and communication system. A special trocar with quartz waveguide connected to the navigation system was inserted into a total of 12 lumbar discs of two fresh intact porcine specimens. Various laser energies (200-700 J) with different exposure times were delivered. Pre- and post-irradiation magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and postoperative macroscopic and histologic studies were carried out. A navigation system accuracy of better than 2 mm was achieved. Tracking of the instrument from pre-acquired formatted CT reconstructed images reduced overall radiation exposure by limiting the need for continuous intraoperative C-arm fluoroscopy. The use of surgical navigation by CT images enhanced the precision insertion of the laser trocar. Irradiation with the 980-nm wavelength diode laser resulted in tissue evaporation changes of the intervertebral disc material as demonstrated by comparing pre- and post-irradiation changes of MR images and macro- and microscopic changes of the dissected disc material. This preclinical study demonstrates the clinical utility of a 980-nm diode laser delivered through a fiber-optic waveguide trocar in which precise insertion was enabled by the use of surgical navigation. This in turn decreases the exposure to ionizing radiation during the procedure.

Percutaneous cervical nucleoplasty in the treatment of cervical disc herniation

Percutaneous disc decompression procedures have been performed in the past. Various percutaneous techniques such as percutaneous discectomy, laser discectomy, and nucleoplasty have been successful. Our prospective study was directly to evaluate the results of percutaneous cervical nucleoplasty (PCN) surgery for cervical disc herniation, and illustrate the effectiveness of PCN in symptomatic patients who had cervical herniated discs. From July of 2002 to June of 2005, 126 consecutive patients with contained cervical disc herniations have presented at the authors' clinic and treated by PCN. The patients' gender distribution for PCN was 65 male, 61 female. The age of patients ranged from 34 to 66 years (mean 51.9 +/- 10.2 years). The levels of involvement were 21 cases at C3-4, 30 cases at C4-5, 40 cases at C5-6, and 35 cases at C6-7. The clinical outcomes, pain reduction and the segment stability were all recorded during this study. A clinical outcome was quantified by the Macnab standard and using VAS. The angular displacement (AD) > or =11 degrees or horizontal displacement (HD) > or =3 mm was considered to be radiographically unstable. In the results of this study, puncture of the needle into the disc space was accurately performed under X-ray guidance in all cases. There was one case where the Perc-D Spine Wand had broken in the disc space during the procedure. The partial Perc-D Spine Wand, which had broken in the disc space could not be removed by the percutaneous cervical discectomy and thus remained there. There were no recurrent cases or complications in our series. Macnab standard results were excellent in 62 cases, good in 41 cases and fair in 23 cases. The rate of excellent and good was 83.73%. The VAS scores demonstrated statistically significant improvement in PCN at the 2-week, 1, 3, 6, and 12-month follow-up visits when compared to preoperational values (P < 0.01). There were no cases of instability following the PCN procedure. There was no significant difference in stability either preoperatively or postoperatively (P > 0.05). Our findings confirm that PCN for the treatment of cervical disc herniation results in a good outcome without any tampering of the stability of the cervical spine. Hence, PCN as a procedure is safe, minimally invasive, less traumatic, requiring less time with an excellent clinical outcome. PCN should be performed for those patients who fail conservative medical management including medication, physical therapy, behavioral management, psychotherapy, and who are unwilling to undergo a more invasive technique such as spinal surgery.

Interventional Techniques: Evidence-based Practice Guidelines in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: The evidence-based practice guidelines for the management of chronic spinal pain with interventional techniques were developed to provide recommendations to clinicians in the United States. Objective: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic spinal pain, utilizing all types of evidence and to apply an evidence-based approach, with broad representation by specialists from academic and clinical practices. Design: Study design consisted of formulation of essentials of guidelines and a series of potential evidence linkages representing conclusions and statements about relationships between clinical interventions and outcomes. Methods: The elements of the guideline preparation process included literature searches, literature synthesis, systematic review, consensus evaluation, open forum presentation, and blinded peer review. Methodologic quality evaluation criteria utilized included the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) criteria, and Cochrane review criteria. The designation of levels of evidence was from Level I (conclusive), Level II (strong), Level III (moderate), Level IV (limited), to Level V (indeterminate). Results: Among the diagnostic interventions, the accuracy of facet joint nerve blocks is strong in the diagnosis of lumbar and cervical facet joint pain, whereas, it is moderate in the diagnosis of thoracic facet joint pain. The evidence is strong for lumbar discography, whereas, the evidence is limited for cervical and thoracic discography. The evidence for transforaminal epidural injections or selective nerve root blocks in the preoperative evaluation of patients with negative or inconclusive imaging studies is moderate. The evidence for diagnostic sacroiliac joint injections is limited. The evidence for therapeutic lumbar intraarticular facet injections is moderate for short-term and long-term improvement, whereas, it is limited for cervical facet joint injections. The evidence for lumbar and cervical medial branch blocks is moderate. The evidence for medial branch neurotomy is moderate. The evidence for caudal epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief in managing chronic low back and radicular pain, and limited in managing pain of postlumbar laminectomy syndrome. The evidence for interlaminar epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term relief and limited for long-term relief in managing lumbar radiculopathy, whereas, for cervical radiculopathy the evidence is moderate. The evidence for transforaminal epidural steroid injections is strong for short-term and moderate for long-term improvement in managing lumbar nerve root pain, whereas, it is moderate for cervical nerve root pain and limited in managing pain secondary to lumbar post laminectomy syndrome and spinal stenosis. The evidence for percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis is strong. For spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis, the evidence is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. For sacroiliac intraarticular injections, the evidence is limited. The evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy for sacroiliac joint pain is limited. The evidence for intradiscal electrothermal therapy is moderate in managing chronic discogenic low back pain, whereas for annuloplasty the evidence is limited. Among the various techniques utilized for percutaneous disc decompression, the evidence is moderate for short-term and limited for long-term relief for automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy, and percutaneous laser discectomy, whereas it is limited for nucleoplasty and for DeKompressor technology. For vertebral augmentation procedures, the evidence is moderate for both vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty. The evidence for spinal cord stimulation in failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome is strong for shortterm relief and moderate for long-term relief. The evidence for implantable intrathecal infusion systems is strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. Conclusion: These guidelines include the evaluation of evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in managing chronic spinal pain and recommendations for managing spinal pain. However, these guidelines do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. These guidelines also do not represent a “standard of care.” Key words: Interventional techniques, chronic spinal pain, diagnostic blocks, therapeutic interventions, facet joint interventions, epidural injections, epidural adhesiolysis, discography, radiofrequency, disc decompression, vertebroplasty, kyphoplasty, spinal cord stimulation, intrathecal implantable systems

Intradiscal Therapy

A systematic review of the medical literature regarding current intradiscal therapeutic methods. To establish an understanding of the current intradiscal treatment options for the management of low back pain. Current treatment of intradiscal disease is rapidly evolving and as such should be a multidisciplinary effort that follows a logical, orderly algorithm. Minimally invasive techniques, namely, intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), percutaneous endoscopic laser discectomy (PELD), and cryoablation have challenged the conventional surgical management of back pain. Thirty-eight research reports, published between 1986 and 2005, were systematically reviewed for disease classification, surgical intervention, and treatment outcomes (neurologic status, pain scores, and ambulation). The surgical literature on the management of intradiscal disease continues to be limited to large series with short clinical follow-ups. Arthrodesis continues to be the primary treatment modality in the majority of patients. Newer treatment options including IDET, RFA, PELD, and cryoablation have shown promising results with regards to symptomatic relief and early return to function. Low back pain is an extremely common and potentially debilitating problem. Adding biophysical methods to well-tested biomechanical and newly investigated biomolecular solutions allows for multiple avenues of therapeutic interventions. With future clinical and basic science studies regarding intradiscal therapies forthcoming, we may soon alter our current treatment algorithms for the management of discogenic back pain.

Percutaneous laser discectomy: MR findings within the first 24 hours after treatment and their relationship to clinical outcome

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the early MR appearances of the intervertebral disc obtained within 24h after percutaneous laser discectomy and to determine if a correlation exists between the MR images and the clinical outcome. Subjects and Methods: Twenty-nine discs in 26 patients with contained lumbar disc herniation treated by laser were included. Laser intervention was performed using Ho:YAG laser system. The results were quantitatively analysed by measuring areal changes of the herniated mass on axial T1-weighted images and signal changes within the disc on sagittal T2-weighted images. Clinical outcomes were evaluated according to Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (JOA score), and recovery rates based on JOA score immediately and 1 year after treatment were calculated. Results: The recovery rate immediately after treatment was 53.1%, and increasing to 64.6% 1 year later. The size of the disc herniation ranged from 7% to 55% of the axial cross-section of the spinal canal pre-operatively and no significant changes were noted postoperatively. Also no correlation was found between the pre-operative herniation size and the recovery rate. The signal changes within the disc increased significantly after treatment, but no correlation was present between the signal changes and the recovery rate. In five patients, soft-tissue changes along the laser tract were well demonstrated on MR imaging. Conclusion: Although immediate postoperative MR imaging shows early tissue changes induced by laser, our study has not proven that immediate postoperative MR imaging could predict the clinical outcome after percutaneous laser discectomy.

Percutaneous Laser Nucleolysis of the Intervertebral Lumbar Disc: An Experimental Study

Percutaneous laser discectomy has developed as a new modality in the treatment of herniated intervertebral discs. An experimental study of percutaneous nucleolysis using a carbon dioxide laser beam was performed in 10 dogs, each dog having 2 intervertebral disc spaces treated, for a total of 20 discs. The intradiscal pressure decreased in all instances with the drop ranging from 10% to 55% at the L2-L3 disc and 40% to 69% at the L4-L5 disc. The macroscopic and microscopic studies showed vaporization of the nucleus pulposus, and in 8 spaces, thermal damage to the end plate was observed. This study suggests that carbon dioxide laser nucleolysis is easy and effective, but 300 J of laser energy can damage the end plates in some intervertebral discs in dogs.

腰椎椎間板ヘルニアに対する経皮的レーザー椎間板切除術

Percutaneous laser discectomy (PLD) is a safe, simple and minimally invasive procedure for lumbar disc herniation. Early therapeutic results were evaluated for 10 patients with lumbar disc herniation treated by PLD. The improvement rate of PLD according to JOA scroe was more than 75% in 3 patients, 74 to 50% in 5 and less than 49% in 2 at least 3 months after PLD, giving an overall success rate of 80%. There was no significant difference in clinical data and total irradiated energy between successful (8 patients) and unsuccessful (2 patients) groups. However, the age of 3 patients who obtained excellent results was under 40 years old.

Percutaneous Laser Discectomy

A variety of lasers have been employed to perform the percutaneous laser discectomy procedure, including Nd:YAG and the KTP/532. They all can effect a tract through the annulus and nucleus that is believed to reduce disc pressure under load. Although success rates following laser discectomy range between 70% and 80%, criteria for selecting patients are rather vague. Newer technology employing visualization within the disc vice fiberoptics is of questionable benefit.