Significant Difference In Visual Analogue Scale Score Research Articles

Comparison of Pain With Ultrasound-Guided Intra-Articular Hip Injections With and Without Prior Subcutaneous Local Anesthesia.

To compare pain levels of intra-articular hip steroid injections performed with and without prior subcutaneous local anesthesia (LA) injection. Randomized prospective study. University-based musculoskeletal clinic. Forty-one adult patients undergoing a first-time ultrasound-guided unilateral intra-articular hip steroid injection. Subjects were randomized into 1 of 2 groups: intra-articular hip injection with prior subcutaneous LA with 2 mL of lidocaine 1% (With LA) or hip injection without prior subcutaneous LA (Without LA). Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores (0-100) were collected before and after each injection. Visual analog scale pain score for the intra-articular hip injection. Of the 41 total subjects, 18 were randomized to the Without LA group and 23 to the With LA group. There was no significant difference in baseline (preprocedure) VAS scores between the Without LA (mean ± SD = 39.2 ± 27.2) and With LA (41.2 ± 24.0) groups (P = 0.864). The mean ± SD VAS score for the subcutaneous LA injection in the With LA group was 20.4 ± 16.1. There was no significant difference in VAS scores for the intra-articular hip injection between the Without LA (48.5 ± 27.7) and With LA (39.5 ± 25.7) groups (P = 0.232). Subcutaneous injection of lidocaine before an intra-articular hip injection did not significantly decrease pain from the intra-articular hip injection. Providers may perform intra-articular hip injections with a 22-gauge 3.5-inch spinal needle without the need for an extra subcutaneous LA injection.

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Combined with Traditional Chinese Medicine Bone-setting Manipulation for External Humeral Epicondylitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of extracorporeal shock waves combined with traditional Chinese medicine bone-setting manipulation for external humeral epicondylitis. Methods: Ninety-two patients with external humeral epicondylitis were randomly divided into an observation group and a control group. Patients in the control group were treated with extracorporeal shock waves while those in the observation group with traditional Chinese medicine bone-setting manipulation based on the control group. Patients in both groups were evaluated by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) before and after treatment. The inflammatory factors such as IL-6, IL-10, TNF-ɑ, and clinical outcomes were contrasted before and after treatment. Results: There were statistically significant differences in VAS score, MEPS score, and DASH score between the two groups before and after treatment (p < 0.05). The observation group exhibited a more pronounced improvement in each score compared to the control group. Post-treatment, the inflammatory factors of both groups were significantly lower than pre-treatment levels (p < 0.05), with the observation group showing a more noticeable decrease. The overall effectiveness of the observation group was higher than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The combination of extracorporeal shock wave therapy and traditional Chinese medicine bone-setting manipulation can effectively alleviate pain symptoms and improve dysfunction caused by external humeral epicondylitis, while also reducing inflammatory factor expression. This combined treatment may prove more effective than extracorporeal shock wave therapy alone. Clinical Trial: Registration: ChiCTR2200066075.

Clinical efficacy and pain follow-up after arthroscopic discoid meniscoplasty of the knee: a retrospective study

BackgroundTo assess the viability and efficiency of performing arthroscopic meniscoplasty in treating discoid meniscus (DM) in the knee joint.MethodsA total of 29 patients diagnosed with symptomatic lateral DM between October 2014 and December 2019 were included in the study. Among them, 7 patients with intact DM underwent arthroscopic discoid meniscoplasty (group A), while 22 patients with torn DM received arthroscopic DM plasty along with repair and suturing (group B). Both Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score and Lysholm score assessments were conducted preoperatively and postoperatively.ResultThe favorable and acceptable outcome rate was 85.71% in group A and 95.45% in group B (P > 0.05). The VAS scores post-operatively at each follow-up time point were consistently lower compared to pre-operative values, while the Lysholm knee function scores showed improvement. There were no significant differences in VAS score and Lysholm score between group A and group B at different stages (P > 0.05). Both surgical techniques (discoid meniscoplasty and discoid meniscoplasty combined with repair and suture) showed significant improvement in postoperative VAS score and Lysholm score, but there was no difference in outcomes between the two groups.ConclusionOverall, the two surgical techniques studied in this study (discoid meniscoplasty and discoid meniscoplasty combined with repair and suture) produced similar results in terms of pain reduction and improved knee function.

Prospective comparative study of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis

To compare the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) and endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) in the treatment of single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis. Between November 2019 and May 2023, a total of 81 patients with single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis who met the selection criteria were enrolled. They were randomly divided into UBE-TLIF group (39 cases) and Endo-TLIF group (42 cases). There was no significant difference in baseline data between the two groups ( P>0.05), including gender, age, body mass index, surgical segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and serum markers including creatine kinase (CK) and C reactive protein (CRP). Total blood loss (TBL), intraoperative blood loss, hidden blood loss (HBL), postoperative drainage volume, and operation time were recorded and compared between the two groups. Serum markers (CK, CRP) levels were compared between the two groups at 1 day before operation and 1, 3, and 5 days after operation. Furthermore, the VAS scores for low back and leg pain, and ODI at 1 day before operation and 1 day, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after operation, and intervertebral fusion rate at 12 months after operation were compared between the two groups. All surgeries were completed successfully without occurrence of incision infection, vascular or nerve injury, epidural hematoma, dural tear, or postoperative paraplegia. The operation time in UBE-TLIF group was significantly shorter than that in Endo-TLIF group, but the intraoperative blood loss, TBL, and HBL in UBE-TLIF group were significantly more than those in Endo-TLIF group ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative drainage volume between the two groups ( P>0.05). The levels of CK at 1 day and 3 days after operation and CRP at 1, 3, and 5 days after operation in UBE-TLIF group were slightly higher than those in the Endo-TLIF group ( P<0.05), while there was no significant difference in the levels of CK and CPR between the two groups at other time points ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12 months. VAS score of low back and leg pain and ODI at each time point after operation significantly improved when compared with those before operation in the two groups ( P<0.05); there was no significant difference in VAS score of low back and leg pain and ODI between the two groups at each time point after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the intervertebral fusion rate between the two groups at 12 months after operation ( P>0.05). UBE-TLIF and Endo-TLIF are both effective methods for treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis. However, compared to Endo-TLIF, UBE-TLIF requires further improvement in minimally invasive techniques to reduce tissue trauma and blood loss.

Acute Ankle Diastasis Injuries Treated with Dynamic, Static Fixation or Anatomic Repair: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Comparison Studies.

Acute ankle diastasis injuries are complex and debilitating. These injuries occur when the syndesmotic complex becomes compromised. Treatments of acute syndesmotic injuries include static fixation with screws, dynamic fixation with an elastic device, or anatomic repair of the damaged ligament. However, there is disagreement over which method is most effective. The primary purpose of this study was to compare the 3 treatment methods for acute syndesmotic injuries. A systematic literature search was conducted on Embase and PubMed. Studies that compared at least 2 groups with relevant American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), reoperation rate, and complication (implant failure, implant irritation, and infection) data were analyzed. Statistical analysis for this study was performed using Review Manager 5.4, with a standard p-value of ≤0.05 for statistical significance. Twenty-one studies including a total of 1,059 patients (452 dynamic, 529 static, and 78 anatomic) were included for analysis. Dynamic fixation had significantly higher mean AOFAS scores at 3 months postoperation by 5.12 points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-9.96, p = 0.04) as well as at 1 year postoperation by 4.64 points (95% CI, 1.74-7.55, p = 0.002) than static fixation. Anatomic repair had significantly higher AOFAS scores at 6 months postoperation by 3.20 points (95% CI, 1.06-5.34, p = 0.003) and 1 year postoperation by 1.86 points (95% CI, 0.59-3.14, p = 0.004) than static fixation. Dynamic fixation had significantly higher AOFAS scores at 6 months postoperation by 2.81 points (95% CI, 0.76-4.86, p = 0.007), 12 months postoperation by 3.17 points (95% CI, 0.76-5.58, p = 0.01), and at 2 years postoperation by 5.56 points (95% CI, 3.80-7.32, p < 0.001) than anatomic repair. Dynamic fixation also had a lower VAS score average (favorable), only significant at 12 months postoperation, than static fixation by 0.7 points (95% CI -0.99 to -0.40, p < 0.001). Anatomic repair did not have significant difference in VAS scores compared with static fixation. Anatomic repair had significantly lower VAS scores at 12 months postoperation by 0.32 points (95% CI -0.59 to -0.05, p = 0.02) than dynamic fixation. Dynamic fixation had significantly less implant failures (odds ratio [OR], 0.13, 95% CI, 0.05-0.32, p < 0.001) than static fixation. Anatomic repair was not significantly different from static fixation in the complication metrics. Dynamic fixation and anatomic repair were not significantly different in the complication metrics either. Dynamic fixation had a significantly lower reoperation rate than static fixation (OR, 0.23, 95% CI, 0.09-0.54, p < 0.001). Anatomic repair did not have a significantly different reoperation rate compared with static fixation. However, dynamic fixation had a significantly lower reoperation rate than anatomic repair (OR, 4.65, 95% CI, 1.10-19.76, p = 0.04). Dynamic fixation seems to demonstrate superior early clinical outcomes. However, these advantages become negligible in the long term when compared with alternative options. Dynamic fixation is associated with a lower risk for complications, specifically seen with the decrease in implant failures. This method also presents a significantly lower reoperation rate compared with the other treatment approaches. Apart from showing improved early clinical outcomes in comparison with static fixation, anatomic repair did not have significant distinctions in other metrics, including complications or reoperation rate. Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Percutaneous kyphoplasty with or without posterior pedicle screw fixation for the management of severe osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with nonunion

ObjectiveTo assess the radiographic outcomes, clinical outcomes and complications of percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) with and without posterior pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) in the treatment of severe osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (sOVCF) with nonunion.MethodsThis study involved 51 patients with sOVCF with nonunion who underwent PKP or PPSF + KP. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, volume of injected bone cement, operation costs and hospital stays were all recorded. In addition, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were assessed separately for each patient before and after surgery.ResultsCompared with the PPSF + KP group, the PKP group had shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stays and fewer operation costs. However, cobb’s angle improvement (13.4 ± 4.3° vs. 21.4 ± 5.3°), VWR improvement ratio (30.4 ± 11.5% vs. 52.8 ± 12.7%), HA (34.9 ± 9.0% vs. 63.7 ± 7.6%) and HM (28.4 ± 11.2% vs. 49.6 ± 7.7%) improvement ratio were all higher in PPSF + KP group than that in PKP group. In addition, the ODI index and VAS score in both groups were significantly decreased at the postoperative and final follow-up. PKP group's postoperative VAS score was significantly lower than that in PPSF + KP group, but there was no statistically significant difference in VAS score at the last follow-up.ConclusionPKP and PPSF + KP can both effectively relieve the pain associated with sOVCF with nonunion. PPSF + KP can achieve more satisfactory vertebral reduction effects compared to PKP. However, PKP was less invasive and it has more advantages in shortening operation time and hospital stay, as well as decreasing intraoperative blood loss and operation costs.

Effectiveness Of E-Backnshou Exercise To The Improvement Of Neck, Shoulder And Back Pain In Computer Vision Syndrome Patient

BACKGROUND : Extra-ocular complaints of Computer Vision Syndrome (CVS) are neck, shoulder, back pain. The 20-20-20 rule and E-BACKNSHOU exercise are expected to improve accommodative mechanisms, ocular surface of the eye and extra ocular symptoms of CVS. AIMS : Proving the effectiveness of E-BACKNSHOU exercise for the improvement of neck, shoulder and back pain in CVS patient. METHOD : The research design was Pre-Post Test with Control Design. Subjects were 30 medical students of Faculty of Medicine, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Indonesia who experienced CVS and neck, shoulder and back pain. The treatment group got the 20-20-20 rule and E-BACKNSHOU exercise and the control group got the 20-20-20 rule for 1 month. Pain was measured by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Statistical test was conducted using paired t-test, unpaired t-test and chi square. Value of significance p&lt;0.05. RESULT : There were significant differences in VAS score of neck, shoulder, upper back pain (p=0.00), and low back pain (p=0.022) before and after the intervention in the treatment group and VAS score of neck (p=0,002), shoulder (p=0.020), upper back (p=0.011), and low back pain (p=0.019) in the control group. Delta VAS score of the treatment group was greater than the control group and there was a significant difference in delta VAS score of shoulder pain (p=0,030), but there were no significant differences in delta VAS score of neck (p=0,934), upper back (p=0,356), and low back pain (p=0,150). CONCLUSION : The effectiveness of 20-20-20 rule and E-BACKNSHOU exercise is better than the 20-20-20 rule alone on treating neck, shoulder and back pain in CVS patient.

Arthroscopic debridement improves range of motion for heterotopic ossification after total knee replacement: a retrospective cohort study

The presence of heterotopic ossification (HO) after primary total knee replacement (TKR) is rare and associated with limited mobility and stiffness of the knee. This study aimed to identify if the arthroscopic debridement after TKR could decrease HO and improve the function and range of motion. Thirty HO patients after TKR were retrospectively separated into 2 cohorts. 15 patients of group A accepted the arthroscopic debridement, while 15 patients of group B only had non-operative treatment, mainly including oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and rehabilitative treatment. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores, knee society knee scores (KSS), range of motion (knee flexion and knee extension) were obtained before treatment and at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after treatment. Radiography of after-treatment was also evaluated to assess the changes in HO. There were 3 males and 27 females with a mean age of 67.4 ± 0.8 years in group A and 68.2 ± 1.3 in group B. The onset time of HO was 3–6 months. The maximum size of the ossification was < 2 cm in 23 knees, 2 cm < heterotopic bone < 5 cm in 6 knees and > 5 cm in 1 knee. The size of HO decreased gradually in all knees by X-ray film at the last follow-up. There were no significant differences in VAS scores after replacement between two groups (p > 0.05). The average range of motion preoperatively in group A was − 15.2–90.6°, which postoperatively increased to − 4.2–110.0°. Meanwhile, the KSS scores and average range of motion of the group A were better than those of the group B at each follow-up time after treatment. Arthroscopic debridement can decrease HO seen from postoperative X-rays, improve the function and range of motion, as well as the pain remission between two groups are comparable. Consequently, arthroscopic resection of HO after TKR is recommended as soon as there is aggravating joint stiffness.

Revolutionizing Back Pain Management: Is Epidural Platelet-Rich Plasma the Superior Choice Over Steroids?

Background and objective Low back discomfort is one of the main factors that restrict physical activity, and it is becoming more and more common. Surgery is the best option when all other conservative treatment methods have failed, but it is not a panacea. While local anesthetic-free and combined epidural steroid injections have been used for many years, their usefulness is limited to shorter periods. In the field of orthopedics, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has gained widespread recognition as an adjuvant component. PRPhas been applied to improve tissue repair, both soft and hard.This comparative study aimed to evaluate the potential of PRP as atherapy for low back pain (LBP). Methods We included 64 adult individuals with complaints ofLBP. They were classified into two groups: group A underwent a single injection in the afflicted lumbar intervertebral disc (IVD) level with 1.5 ml of methylprednisolone, 1.5 ml 2% lidocaine, and 0.5 ml of saline under rigorous aseptic precautions; in contrast, group B was administered a single injection of 3 milliliters of autologous PRP. Patients' scores on the visual analog scale (VAS), the Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ), and the Straight Leg Raising Test (SLRT) were assessed before and during therapy. Results The datagathered were subjected to statistical analysis. Statistically significant differences were found in the VAS scores between group A (methylprednisolone group) and group B (PRP group) post-one hour (6.0 ±0.74 vs. 6.92 ±0.57) and after three months (5.2 ±0.65 vs. 3.26 ±0.79). Conclusions Our study revealed gradual progressive improvement in the symptoms of patients in the PRP group as indicated by scores onSLRT, VAS, and MODQ. The results were comparable to those who received methylprednisolone injections. There was a statistically significant difference in VAS scores between the two groups, with the PRP group reporting a higher degree of pain reduction, showing that PRP is an effective alternative to epidural steroid infiltration in managing chronic LBP.

Kinematic Alignment Technique Outperforms Mechanical Alignment in Simultaneous Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the clinical results of kinematic alignment (KA) with those of mechanical alignment (MA) in single-stage bilateral total knee arthroplasty. MethodsIn this double-blinded randomized controlled trial, 65 patients who had bilateral knee osteoarthritis underwent simultaneous bilateral total knee arthroplasty. One knee was randomly selected to be operated on with the calipered-KA technique and the other with MA. The participants were assessed via the Oxford Knee Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index questionnaire, and visual analog scale before the surgery and the same plus the Forgotten Joint Score at their last follow-up visit, 2 years postoperatively. Maximum knee flexion and the time reaching maximum knee flexion, named the recovery time, were also recorded. Hip-knee-ankle angle, medial proximal tibial angle, and lateral distal femoral angle were measured before and after the surgery using 3-joint-view radiographs. ResultsAt 2 years, there were significant differences between the KA and MA techniques in terms of duration of surgery, recovery time, and final Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Forgotten Joint Score, and maximum flexion range in favor of KA (P < .05), but no significant difference in visual analog scale score or Oxford Knee Score. In patients who have a preferred knee, the KA knee was preferred over the MA knee by most patients. No prosthetic failure or revision was reported in either group. ConclusionsThe KA technique yields acceptable functional outcomes compared to the MA technique. The KA technique was associated with a shorter surgery time, a faster recovery time, and higher patient satisfaction in 2-year follow-ups. Larger multicenter studies with longer follow-ups are warranted to confirm these findings. Level of EvidenceI.

Efficacy of Integrated Yoga and Naturopathy With Physiotherapy or Acupuncture for Low Back Pain: A Parallel, Two-Arm, Randomized Trial.

Low back pain (LBP) is a musculoskeletal condition that affects many individuals. While physiotherapy and acupuncture are frequently used treatments, determining their specific contributions when used alongside integrated yoga and naturopathy (IYN) therapy for relieving chronic LBP symptoms and enhancing quality of life is important. In the present prospective randomized comparative trial, a total of 60 participants were divided into the following two groups: physiotherapy with IYN and acupuncture with IYN. The treatment duration was 10 days, and assessments were conducted both before (baseline) and after the intervention. Various assessment tools, such as the visual analogscale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), fingertip-to-floor test (FTF), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and Short Form 36 (SF-36), were utilized. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 21.0 (Armonk, NY:IBM Corp). The results revealed significant differences in VAS score, ODI, FTF score, STAI score, and SF-36 score between the physiotherapy and acupuncture groups (p<0.001). A t-test for the equality of means and a Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare the two groups; these tests revealed a significant difference in disability levels, range of motion, and state of anxiety. The acupuncture group showed a significant difference in the ODI (15.9 {12.6, 19.3}; p <0.001) and state anxiety (23.0 {20.0, 26.0}; p<0.001) compared to the physiotherapy ODI (22.4 {18.5, 26.4}) and state anxiety (27.5 {25.0, 30.0}). The physiotherapy group showed a significant difference in range of motion (7.7 {5.7, 9.7}; p<0.001) compared to the acupuncture group (11.6 {9.8, 13.5}). The present study findings revealed that both physiotherapy and acupuncture, as interventions along with integrated yoga and naturopathy may be considered an effective treatment strategy for chronic LBP.

Short Versus Regular Periods of Cast Immobilization for Distal Radial Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The current research on the recommended durations for cast immobilization in adults with distal radial fractures (DRFs) lacks a clear consensus or definitive conclusion. The standard practice involves casting immobilization for five to six weeks. The debate revolves around the potential benefits of shorter periods (three to four weeks) without compromising patient outcomes. While previous research has delved into this subject through systematic reviews, our study stands out by conducting a meta-analysis, aiming for a more precise understanding of whether short or regular cast immobilization duration proves more effective for treating DRFs. A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant studies. The focus was on comparing the outcomes of DRFs between short (three to four weeks) and regular (five to six weeks) periods of cast immobilization. The evaluated parameters include the shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire (quick (q) DASH); patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE); visual analog scale (VAS) score after cast removal; total complications; and the occurrence of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Data synthesis employed the random-effects models, presenting the results as mean difference (MD) and weighted odds ratio (OR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). We included three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 252 patients, of whom 125 (49.6%) were immobilized in a cast for three to four weeks. The average age of participants was 61.20 years, and the follow-up duration was one year. The QDASH scores were significantly lower at 12 weeks (MD -6.72; 95% CI -10.76 to -2.69; p = 0.001), six months (MD -4.46; 95% CI -7.42 to -1.50; p = 0.003), and one year (MD -4.89; 95% CI -7.45 to -2.33; p = 0.0002) in patients treated with short periods compared to those with regular periods. The PRWE scores at six months (MD -2.33; 95% CI -8.10 to 3.43; p=0.43) did not significantly differ between groups. Also, the PRWE scores were significantly lower at one year (MD -4.93; 95% CI -9.03 to -0.82; p = 0.02) in the shorter cast-immobilization-period group. There were no significant differences in VAS score after cast removal, total complications, or CRPS. The meta-analysis of RCTs on DRFs reveals that shorter periods of cast immobilization lead to better patient-reported functional outcomes (qDASH and PRWE). This suggests a potential benefit of reducing the immobilization duration for DRF patients, offering clinicians valuable insights for improved patient care and informed decision-making in clinical practice.

Comparison of effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion for degree Ⅰdegenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

To compare the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) in the treatment of degreeⅠdegenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). A clinical data of 58 patients with degreeⅠDLS who met the selection criteria between October 2021 and October 2022 was retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 28 cases were treated with unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression (decompression group) and 30 cases with ULIF (ULIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups ( P>0.05) in the gender, age, lesion segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), disk height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), and other baseline data. The operation time, postoperative drainage volume, postoperative ambulation time, VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, ODI, laboratory examination indexes (CRP, ESR), and imaging parameters (DH, SL) were compared between the two groups. Compared with the ULIF group, the decompression group had shorter operation time, less postoperative drainage, and earlier ambulation ( P<0.05). All incisions healed by first intention, and no complication such as nerve root injury, epidural hematoma, or infection occurred. All patients were followed up 12 months. Laboratory tests showed that ESR and CRP at 3 days after operation in decompression group were not significantly different from those before operation ( P>0.05), while the above indexes in ULIF group significantly increased at 3 days after operation compared to preoperative values ( P<0.05). There were significant differences in the changes of ESR and CRP before and after operation between the two groups ( P<0.05). Except that the VAS score of low back pain at 3 days after operation was not significantly different from that before operation in decompression group ( P>0.05), there were significant differences in VAS score of low back pain and VAS score of leg pain between the two groups at other time points ( P<0.05). The VAS score of low back pain in ULIF group was significantly higher than that in decompression group at 3 days after operation ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in VAS score of low back pain and VAS score of leg pain between the two groups at other time points ( P>0.05). The ODI of the two groups significantly improved after operation ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between 3 days and 6 months after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups at the two time points after operation ( P<0.05). Imaging examination showed that there was no significant difference in DH and SL between pre-operation and 12 months after operation in decompression group ( P>0.05). However, the above two indexes in ULIF group were significantly higher than those before operation ( P<0.05). There were significant differences in the changes of DH and SL before and after operation between the two groups ( P<0.05). Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression can achieve good effectiveness in the treatment of degree Ⅰ DLS. Compared with ULIF, it can shorten operation time, reduce postoperative drainage volume, promote early ambulation, reduce inflammatory reaction, and accelerate postoperative recovery. ULIF has more advantages in restoring intervertebral DH and SL.

Safety and effectiveness of opioid-free anaesthesia in thoracoscopic surgery: a preliminary retrospective cohort study

BackgroundThis study aimed to observe the effect of opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) on intraoperative haemodynamic,postoperative analgesia and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in thoracoscopic surgery in order to provide more evidence for evaluating the safety and effectiveness of OFA technology.MethodsThis was a single-centre retrospective observational study.Adult patients who underwent thoracoscopic surgery with the preoperative thoracic paravertebral block between January 2017 and June 2020 were included.A cohort of 101 thoracoscopic surgery patients who received the OFA technique were matched with 101 thoracoscopic surgery patients who received standard opioid-containing anaesthesia(SOA). Heart rate (HR) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) were measured before anaesthesia induction, immediately after endotracheal intubation, at the beginning of surgery, and 10, 20, and 30 min after surgery began.The total amount of intraoperative infusion, frequency of vasoactive drugs use, morphine ingested via the patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) 24 h post-surgery,visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at rest and activity on the first day post-surgery, and frequency of nausea and vomiting within 24 h post-surgery were analysed.ResultsThere was no significant difference in intraoperative HR between the two groups (F = 0.889, P = 0.347); however, there was significant difference in intraoperative MAP (F = 16.709, P < 0.001), which was lower in SOA patients than in OFA patients. The frequency of vasoactive drug use and amount of infusion was less in OFA patients (P = 0.001). The consumption of morphine used by the PCIA 24 h post-surgery was significantly lower in OFA patients (OFA, 1.8 [0, 4.8] mg vs. SOA, 3.6 [0.6, 23] mg, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in VAS scores at rest (P = 0.745) or during activity (P = 0.792) on the first day post-surgery. There was also no statistically significant difference in nausea and vomiting within 24 h post-surgery (P = 0.651).ConclusionsThis case-control study demonstrated that compared with SOA, OFA can effectively maintain the stability of intraoperative MAP, reduce the incidence of hypotension. Although OFA reduced morphine consumption via the PCIA pump 24 h post-surgery, postoperative pain scores and nausea and vomiting within 24 h post-surgery were similar between the groups.But this study was only a preliminary study and needed to confirm in a larger, more robust trial.

Effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Robot-assisted (RA) technology has been widely used in spine surgery. This analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of RA minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and fluoroscopy-assisted (FA) MIS-TLIF for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases (DLSD). PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were systematically searched, and the outcomes included surgical parameters [operation time, blood loss, number of fluoroscopic, accuracy of pedicle screw position, superior facet joint violation (FJV)], and clinical indexes (Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, clinical efficacy, hospital stays, complications). Eleven articles involving 1066 patients were included. RA group produced better results than the FA group in operation time (WMD = -6.59; 95% CI -12.79 to -0.40; P = 0.04), blood loss (WMD = -34.81; 95% CI -50.55 to -19.08; P < 0.0001), number of fluoroscopic (WMD = -18.24; 95% CI -30.63 to -5.85; P = 0.004), accuracy of pedicle screw position: Grade A (OR = 3.16; 95% CI 2.36-4.23; P < 0.00001), Grade B (OR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.28-0.54; P < 0.00001), Grade C (OR = 0.27; 95% CI 0.13-0.54; P = 0.0002), and Grade D (OR = 0.17; 95% CI 0.03-0.98; P = 0.05), FJV: Grade 0 (OR = 3.27; 95% CI 1.34-8.02; P = 0.010), Grade 1 (OR = 0.24; 95% CI 0.16-0.38; P < 0.00001), Grade 2 (OR = 0.24; 95% CI 0.12-0.51; P = 0.0002), and Grade 3 (OR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.07-0.93; P = 0.04). But no significant differences in VAS score, ODI, JOA score, clinical efficacy, hospital stays, and complications. These results demonstrate a significant improvement in the intraoperative course of the RA technique. However, RA-MIS-TLIF has not yet demonstrated significant advantages in terms of postoperative symptom relief and functional improvement. Future research and clinical practice should further explore the efficacy of this technique to optimize outcomes and quality of life for patients with DLSD. The study was registered in the PROSPERO (CRD42023454405).

Clinical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion and modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease

BackgroundTo compare the early clinical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PE-PLIF) and modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion (MPLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease (LDD).MethodsA total of 37 patients who underwent PE-PLIF and 58 patients who underwent MPLIF from March 2019 to January 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, post-operative hospitalization time, and post-operative bedrest time were recorded. The visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of leg pain and low back pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were evaluated and compared before the operation, 3 days after the operation, 1 week after the operation, 1 month after the operation, 6 months after the operation and at the last follow-up. The modified MacNab’s criteria were applied at the last follow-up. The fusion rate and surgical-related complications during follow-up were recorded.ResultsThe average operation time in the PE-PLIF group was highly significant longer than that in the MPLIF group (P < 0.01). The intraoperative blood loss, post-operative hospitalization time, and post-operative bedrest time were significantly less in the PE-PLIF group than those in the MPLIF group (P < 0.01). There were highly significant differences in VAS scores of leg pain, VAS scores of low back pain, JOA scores, ODI scores at the last follow-up compared with those before the operation in the two groups (P < 0.01). Three days after the operation and 1 week after the operation, the VAS scores for low back pain and ODI were highly significant less in the PE-PLIF group than that in the MPLIF group (P < 0.01). Three days after the operation, the JOA scores were highly significant higher in the PE-PLIF group than that in the MPLIF group (P < 0.01). All patients showed intervertebral fusion at 6 months after the operation. Two patients (5.4%) in the PE-PLIF group experienced complications.ConclusionBoth PE-PLIF and MPLIF surgery were clinically effective and safe for patients with single-segment LDD. PE-PLIF surgery is a promising technique that can be used as an alternative treatment for single-segment LDD.

Evaluation of early effectiveness of local infiltration anesthesia with compound betamethasone in total knee arthroplasty

To evaluate the early effectiveness of local infiltration anesthesia (LIA) with compound betamethasone in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The clinical data of 102 patients with knee osteoarthritis who were treated by TKA and met the selection criteria between May 2022 and March 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into control group and study group according to whether LIA preparation was added with compound betamethasone, with 51 cases in each group. There was no significant difference of baseline data, such as age, gender, body mass index, operative side, preoperative range of motion (ROM), Knee Society Score (KSS), white blood cell (WBC), and hematocrit between the two groups ( P>0.05). The intraoperative total blood loss and hidden blood loss were recorded, and WBC was recorded on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd days after operation. Pain was assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS) score on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd days after operation and morphine intake milligrames equivalent within 48 hours after operation. Passive ROM, maximum extension and flexion angles of knee joint were measured on the 3rd day after operation; the early postoperative complications were recorded. There was no significant difference in total blood loss and hidden blood loss between the two groups ( P>0.05). The postoperative pain levels in both groups were relatively mild, and there was no significant difference in VAS scores in the first 3 days after operation and in morphine intake milligrams equivalent within 48 hours after operation between the two groups ( P>0.05). The WBC in the first 3 days after operation was significantly improved in both groups ( P<0.05). The WBC in the study group was significantly higher than that in the control group on the 1st and 2nd days after operation ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups on the 3rd day after operation ( P>0.05). On the 3rd day after operation, the maximum extension angle of knee joint in the study group was smaller than that in the control group, while the maximum flexion angle and passive ROM of knee joint in the study group were larger than those in the control group, and the differences were significant ( P<0.05). There were 6 cases of fever and 17 cases of deep venous thrombosis in the control group, and 1 case and 14 cases in the study group, respectively. There was no poor wound healing and periprosthetic joint infection in the two groups, and there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups ( P>0.05). The application of compound betamethasone in LIA during TKA is a safe and optimal strategy to promote the early postoperative rehabilitation of patients.

Comparative study of orthopaedic robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery and open surgery for limb osteoid osteoma

To compare the accuracy and effectiveness of orthopaedic robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for limb osteoid osteoma. A clinical data of 36 patients with limb osteoid osteomas admitted between June 2016 and June 2023 was retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 16 patients underwent orthopaedic robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery (robot-assisted surgery group), and 20 patients underwent tumor resection after lotcated by C-arm X-ray fluoroscopy (open surgery group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the gender, age, lesion site, tumor nidus diameter, and preoperative pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores ( P>0.05). The operation time, lesion resection time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative fluoroscopy frequency, lesion resection accuracy, and postoperative analgesic use frequency were recorded and compared between the two groups. The VAS scores for pain severity were compared preoperatively and at 3 days and 3 months postoperatively. Compared with the open surgery group, the robot-assisted surgery group had a longer operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, less fluoroscopy frequency, less postoperative analgesic use frequency, and higher lesion resection accuracy ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference in lesion resection time ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up after surgery, with a follow-up period of 3-24 months (median, 12 months) in the two groups. No postoperative complication such as wound infection or fracture occurred in either group during follow-up. No tumor recurrence was observed during follow-up. The VAS scores significantly improved in both groups at 3 days and 3 months after surgery when compared with preoperative value ( P<0.05). The VAS score at 3 days after surgery was significantly lower in robot-assisted surgery group than that in open surgery group ( P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in VAS scores at 3 months between the two groups ( P>0.05). Compared with open surgery, robot-assisted resection of limb osteoid osteomas has longer operation time, but the accuracy of lesion resection improve, intraoperative blood loss reduce, and early postoperative pain is lighter. It has the advantages of precision and minimally invasive surgery.

Preoperative application of CT and MRI registration in lumbar disc herniation endoscopic surgery could improve the postoperative rehabilitation of patients.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy (PELD) has emerged as routine treatment for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) due to its minimal invasiveness and quick recovery. However, PELD demands high precision from the surgeon, as the risk of intraoperative complications is substantial, including potential damage to the nerve root and dura, and a higher likelihood of recurrence post-surgery. Thus, preoperative planning utilizing CT and MRI imaging is essential. In this study, the clinical data of 140 patients treated with PELD for LDH from January 2021 to December 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were categorized into two groups based on whether CT and MRI registration (CMR) was employed for surgical planning: a CMR group (n=68) and a control group (n=72). Data collected included surgery time, hospital stay duration, and scores from the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for low back and leg pain, as well as the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Lumbar Spine Score (JOA). Differences between the two groups were assessed using the Student's t-test. No significant difference was found in hospital stay length between the groups (P=0.277). Surgery time was significantly shorter in the CMR group (P<0.001). Prior to surgery, no significant differences in VAS scores for leg and low back pain were observed between the groups (P=0.341 and P=0.131, respectively); however, at 2 months postoperatively, both scores were significantly lower in the CMR group (P<0.001 and P=0.002, respectively). Similarly, no difference in preoperative JOA scores was noted (P=0.750), but at 2 months postoperative, the CMR group exhibited significantly higher scores (P<0.001). Compared with the traditional PELD, the preoperative use of CMR has shown to reduce surgery time, alleviate leg and low back pain, and increase the lumbar JOA score at 2 months after surgery, underscoring its efficacy in enhancing surgical outcomes.

Effectiveness of ultrasound guided interfascial hydrodissection with the use of saline anesthetic solution for myofascial pain syndrome of the upper trapezius: a single blind randomized controlled trial.

Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is described as pain that arise from myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) which is a hyperirritable spot within a taut band of skeletal muscle. A newer needling technique called the interfascial hydrodissection (IH), wherein anesthetic saline solution (ASS) is injected between the fascia of the muscles using ultrasound as guide. It is theorized that this technique blocks the nerve branches and improve gliding in between the muscle and fascia. To determine the short and long-term effects of interfascial hydrodissection using 2% Lidocaine and saline solution compared to dry needling with MPS of the upper trapezius on pain and quality of life using. This study is a single-blind randomized controlled trial where ultrasound guided IH with ASS was compared to dry needling (DN) of the MTrPs. Both groups were taught self-stretch exercises (SSE) to be done everyday after the procedure. Outcome measures were pain using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and quality of life assessment with EQ-5D-5l questionnaire. All participants were assessed by a blinded assessor before the intervention, immediately after, 10 and 30 min, one week, two weeks, four weeks, three months, and six months after the procedure. Data Analysis: Two-way mixed ANOVA and follow-up independent T-test were conducted for the outcome measures across several time points between the 2 groups. A total of 46 participants with two dropouts were all included during the final analysis. Both groups demonstrated significant differences in VAS scores between baseline and the different time points, the IH + SSE group demonstrated the more significant effect size at as compared to the DN + SSE group. For EQ-5D-5l, no statistical differences were seen in all dimensions but there was a larger effect size for usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Interfascial hydrodissection is a technique that can manage both short and long term symptoms of MPS. This could be utilized as an alternative management for those with chronic MPS of the upper trapezius. PHRR221003-005034.