Back Pain Visual Analog Scale Scores Research Articles

Effects of local intraoperative epidural use of triamcinolone acetonide-soaked Gelfoam on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion surgery: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial.

Prior evidence has supported the use of local intraoperative epidural steroids in lumbar discectomy for improvements in postoperative pain and outcomes. However, currently there is a paucity of data regarding the efficacy of local epidural steroids in spinal fusion procedures. The present investigation aimed to evaluate the impact of local epidural administration of triamcinolone acetonide-soaked Gelfoam on postoperative pain and patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing instrumented posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients were randomly divided into two groups (treatment and control). Patients in the treatment group received a Gelfoam carrier soaked in 1 ml of triamcinolone acetonide (40 mg), which was placed over the nerve roots in the epidural space before the closure. Patients in the control group received a Gelfoam carrier soaked in normal saline in a similar fashion to the treatment group. Patients were followed up during their hospital stay and at 4 and 12 weeks postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was early postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain both at rest and with movement. A total of 100 patients were recruited in this study and were randomly allocated to the treatment or control group. No significant difference was found in baseline demographic, clinical, and surgical characteristics between the two groups. Postoperative VAS scores for pain both at rest and with movement were comparable between the treatment and control groups. Cumulative morphine consumption, length of hospital stay, and incidence of postoperative complications such as surgical site infection were also similar between the two groups. There was no significant difference in patient-reported outcomes including VAS scores for back and leg pain as well as the Oswestry Disability Index at 4 and 12 weeks postoperatively. The proportion of patients who achieved a minimum clinically important difference for patient-reported outcomes were also similar between the two groups. In contrast to the existing literature on the beneficial use of local intraoperative epidural steroids in conventional lumbar discectomy, the present study did not demonstrate such significant efficacy for the use of local epidural steroids in instrumented posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion. However, there is still a lack of evidence in this regard and further high-quality clinical trials are required to evaluate the efficacy of local epidural steroids in this group of patients.

Comparative Analysis of Transforaminal Endoscopic Thoracic Discectomy and Microscopic Discectomy for Symptomatic Thoracic Disc Herniation.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical outcomes of transforaminal endoscopic thoracic discectomy (TETD) and microscopic discectomy (MD) for the treatment of symptomatic thoracic disc herniation (TDH). MethodsSeventy-seven patients (mean, 55.9 years; follow-up, 11.2 months) with symptomatic TDH were retrospectively reviewed (39 TETD and 38 MD). Radiological factors and perioperative outcomes were reviewed. Visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and American Spinal Injury Association impairment scale were used to evaluate clinical and functional outcomes. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using modified MacNab criteria. ResultsThe levels of surgery and the location of hernia were evenly distributed in the both groups. The operative time (70.6 minutes vs. 175.7 minutes), estimated blood loss (3.8 mL vs. 357.4 mL), and length of hospital stay (7.0 days vs. 13.0 days) were significantly different between the TETD and MD groups (p<0.05). VAS scores for dorsal back pain and ODI scores were significantly improved in both groups (p<0.05). Patients who underwent TETD tended to be more satisfied with the outcome in terms of the modified MacNab criteria (89.7% vs. 73.0%, p=0.059). Two patients in the MD group underwent revision surgery, whereas one patient in the TETD group underwent MD because of incomplete decompression. ConclusionTETD for the symptomatic TDH is a feasible and safe procedure that could be used for a wider range of surgical levels with a shorter operative time and hospital stay and less blood loss. While achieving similar outcomes, TETD achieved better patient satisfaction because of the use of local anesthesia and its minimal invasiveness.

Full Endoscopic Lumbar Stenosis Decompression: A Future Gold Standard in Managing Degenerative Lumbar Canal Stenosis.

Until recently, open decompression was considered the gold standard for the management of spinal stenosis, but the evolution of minimally invasive spine instruments has brought a new dimension to the management of spinal stenosis. Full endoscopic surgery has a lot of advantages in terms of minimal soft tissue damage, less bleeding, shorter hospital length of stay, and earlier return to work. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of full endoscopic lumbar decompression for degenerative lumbar canal stenosis compared with classic open decompression surgery. This is a retrospective cohort study of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis without instability, consisting of 132 open decompression and 163 full endoscopic decompression patients. We evaluated the clinical result of the pre- and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) of leg pain, back pain, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). We observed the patients until 1 year after the operation. The postoperative ODI scores and VAS scores for back pain and leg pain were better than the preoperative scores. The ODI scores and VAS scores for leg pain were significantly better in both groups (P = 0.033 and 0.04, respectively). The main difference between open and full endoscopic decompression was the VAS back pain and amount of bleeding. In the full endoscopic group, the mean VAS back pain was 1.6 and the amount of bleeding was minimal. In the open decompression surgery, the mean VAS back pain was 3.5 and the amount of bleeding was around 84 mL. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the full endoscopic group, which was 1.5 days compared with 3.4 days in open decompression (P = 0.034). Full endoscopic decompression showed better early results compared with the conventional group, but a long-term study is still needed for further evaluation of the clinical results. The use of the full endoscopic technique is very promising in the management of spinal stenosis. This study provides a comparison of the efficacy of open decompression and full endoscopic decompression in degenerative lumbar canal stenosis.

Comparative Study of the Outcomes of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy and Tubular Microdiscectomy Based on the Visual Analogue Scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and Short-form 36

Objective: Unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) discectomy and tubular microdiscectomy (TMD) are widely practiced methods for treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Good clinical outcomes of these methods are reported in many papers, but there are a few comparative studies. This study reports the clinical outcomes of UBE and TMD as minimally invasive surgery methods for lumbar disc herniations and discusses the effectiveness of UBE.Methods: Sixty-seven patients who had undergone single-level discectomy using one of two methods, UBE or TMD, underwent a prospective follow-up examination. Thirty-four of these patients underwent discectomy using UBE, and the remaining 33 patients underwent TMD. In addition to the traditional measures of outcome, the improvement of generic health-related quality of life and disease-specific measurements like Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, Short-form 36 (SF-36), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were evaluated and compared.Results: Sixty-seven patients with more than 6 months of post-operative follow-up evaluations were included. The mean improvements in the VAS scores for back pain and leg pain and ODI were 2.0, 3.7, and 26.5 for the UBE group and 1.6, 3.0, and 19.4 for the TMD group. The SF-36 physical health component subscale score improved from 35.4 pre-operatively to 54.8 at the last follow-up in the UBE group, and the mental health score improved from 43.5 to 55.1 (TMD group: from 34.9 to 54.3 and 44.2 to 57.1, respectively). Conclusion: The clinical outcomes of the UBE group are comparable to those of the TMD group. The results indicate that UBE for lumbar disc herniation can be performed safely and effectively as a treatment modality.

Treatment of Scoliosis with One-Stage Posterior Pedicle Screw System by Paraspinal Intermuscular Approach: A Minimum of Two Years of Follow-Up.

To evaluate the clinical efficacy of the treatment of scoliosis with a pedicle screw system through paraspinal intermuscular approach (PIA). This is a retrospective case series study. A total of 10 patients diagnosed with scoliosis had surgical indications and treated with a pedicle screw system in one-stage posterior surgery by PIA from March 2013 to April 2015 at the First Hospital of Jilin University were enrolled in this study. The average age of the patients was 14.9 years, including one male and nine females. The operative information and surgical results, including Cobb angle correction, correction loss, global balance (including Frontal Plane Balance [FPB] and Sagittal Plane Balance [SPB]), and fusion rate were reviewed. Functional outcomes including visual analog scale (VAS) back pain score, leg pain score, and Scoliosis Research Society-22 questionnaire (SRS-22) were used to evaluate the quality of life of patients preoperatively and at last follow-up. Each patient was followed up at least six times. The average follow-up time was 43.2 months. Mean scoliosis and kyphosis improved from 68.5° ± 18.1°to 18.7° ± 11.8° and from 34.4° ± 17.9°to 24.0° ± 6.7°, respectively (p < 0.05); at last follow-up, it was 20.1° and 24.7°, respectively (p > 0.05). During the follow-up, mean coronal and sagittal correction loss was 1.4° ± 1.2°and 0.7° ± 0.8°, respectively (p > 0.05). Mean FPB improved from 32.7 to 11.7 mm (p < 0.05); Mean SPB changed from 0.3 to -0.7 mm (p > 0.05). No dural tears were observed during the corrective surgery or wound infection or implant-related complications. No pseudoarthrosis was identified according to the last follow-up three-dimensional (3D) CT scan. All the domains in SRS-22 questionnaire show statistically significant improvement at the last follow-up (p < 0.05). The VAS back pain scores improved from a mean preoperative score of 1.7 to a mean postoperative score of 0.2 (p < 0.05). This original one-stage posterior PIA is safe and effective in the treatment of scoliosis, which is characterized with less blood loss, shorter operation time, and satisfactory bony fusion.

Does Simultaneous Fusion of Preexisting Spinal Canal Stenosis Adjacent to Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Achieve a Better Clinical Outcome? A Retrospective Study with More than 5-year Follow-Up.

In this study, we investigate the effect of simultaneous fusion of preexisting adjacent spinal canal stenosis on the outcome of patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis. Patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) from August 2013 to March 2016 were included. The inclusion criteria were the following: single-level spondylolisthesis (L4 or L5) and mild to moderate spinal stenosis at cranial adjacent segment of the spondylolisthesis segment before operation. According to whether the adjacent stenotic segment was included in the scope of surgery, the patients were divided into two groups: group A, only the spondylolisthesis was treated with single-level TLIF, and the adjacent stenosis was not treated with any surgery; In group B, TLIF were performed in the spondylolisthesis segment and the adjacent stenotic level; no spinal stenosis was found in other levels. The patients were followed up for more than 5 years. The general information before operation, visual analog scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and leg pain, and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores before operation and at the last follow-up were recorded. A total of 23 patients were included in group A, and 24 patients were included in group B. There was no significant difference between the two groups in gender distribution, age, course of disease, level of slippage, length of stay, degree of spondylolisthesis, stenotic grade of adjacent segment, and intervertebral disk degeneration grade (p> 0.05). The blood loss during surgery in group B was significantly higher than that in group A (p< 0.05). The operation time of group B was longer than that of group A, but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.245). There was no significant difference in preoperative VAS and ODI scores between the two groups. At the last follow-up, the VAS scores of low back pain in the two groups were almost the same. However, the VAS scores of leg pain and ODI scores in group B were slightly higher than those in group A at the last follow-up, but the difference was not statistically significant (p> 0.05). If relatives and friends have the similar disease, all the patients of group A and 87.5% of patients in group B would recommend that type of surgery. The satisfaction of group A (100%) was higher than that of group B (79.17%), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.068). For single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis with mild to moderate spinal stenosis in adjacent segment before operation, decompression and fusion on the level of spondylolisthesis only is a safe, less invasive, and economical surgical option, with good long-term clinical efficacy and high satisfaction rates.

Efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopy versus other spine surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BackgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) versus other forms of spine surgery.MethodsElectronic databases were systematically searched up to February 2022. The authors used Review Manager 5.3 to manage the data and perform the review.ResultsAfter the preliminary selection of 239 studies from electronic databases, the full inclusion criteria were applied; 16 studies were found to be eligible for inclusion. These 16 studies enrolled 1,488 patients: 653 patients in the UBE group, 570 in the microendoscopic discectomy group, 153 in the percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy group, and 70 in the posterior lumbar interbody fusion group. UBE was superior to microendoscopic discectomy regarding 1-day Visual Analog Scale(VAS) back pain scores (P < 0.00001). No difference was found between UBE and microendoscopic discectomy regarding 1-day Visual Analog Scale leg pain scores (P = 0.25), long-term VAS back pain scores (P = 0.06), long-term VAS leg pain scores (P = 0.05), Oswestry Disability Index scores (P = 0.09) or complications (P = 0.19). Pooled analysis indicated that UBE was similar to percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy regarding 1-day VAS back pain scores (P = 0.71), 1-day VAS leg pain scores (P = 0.37), long-term VAS back pain scores (P = 0.75), long-term VAS leg pain scores (P = 0.41), Oswestry Disability Index scores (P = 0.07) and complications (P = 0.88). One study reported no difference between UBE and posterior lumbar interbody fusion regarding long-term VAS back pain, long-term VAS leg pain, or Oswestry Disability Index scores.ConclusionsUBE is superior to microendoscopic discectomy to relieve back pain 1 day postoperatively. However, these two procedures are similar regarding 1-day leg pain relief, long-term effects, and safety. UBE and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy are similar regarding 1-day pain relief, long-term effects and safety. More evidence is needed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of UBE versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Robot-Assisted Kyphoplasty Improves Clinical and Radiological Features Better Than Fluoroscopy-Assisted Kyphoplasty in the Treatment of Vertebral Compression Fractures: A Meta-Analysis

PurposeThis meta-analysis aimed to determine whether patients treated with robot-assisted kyphoplasty for vertebral compression fractures have superior clinical and radiographic improvement than those treated with fluoroscopy.MethodsA comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, and CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) databases was conducted to find randomized control trials (RCTs) or observational cohort studies that compared robotic-assisted kyphoplasty (RA-kyphoplasty) with fluoroscopy-assisted kyphoplasty (FA-kyphoplasty) in treating vertebral compression fractures. Preoperative, postoperative, and final follow-up data on vertebral height (VH), vertebral kyphosis angle (VKA), visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain, and cement leakage rate were collected from eligible studies for meta-analysis. Patients were divided into RA and FA groups depending on whether the operation was robotically or fluoroscopically guided.ResultsWe included 6 cohort studies with 491 patients and 633 vertebrae. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the RA group had a higher VH than the FA group at both postoperation (p < 0.001) and final follow-up (p < 0.001); the VKA in the RA group was lower than that in the FA group at postoperation (p < 0.001) and final follow-up (p < 0.001); the back pain VAS score was lower in the RA group than in the FA group at postoperation (p = 0.01) and final follow-up (p = 0.03); and the cement leakage rate in the RA group was lower than those in the FA group (p < 0.001).ConclusionThis meta-analysis demonstrated that RA-kyphoplasty outperformed FA-kyphoplasty in vertebral height restoration, kyphosis angle correction, VAS score reduction for back pain, and lower cement leakage rate in the treatment of vertebral compression fractures.

A Retrospective Comparative Study of Modified Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Discectomy and Open Lumbar Discectomy for Gluteal Pain Caused by Lumbar Disc Herniation

IntroductionThis study aimed to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of modified percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) in the surgical management of single-segment lumbar disc herniation (LDH) gluteal pain and to determine whether it provides a better clinical outcome than open lumbar discectomy (OD).MethodsA retrospective analysis of patients treated with modified PETD and OD for gluteal pain in LDH from January 2015 to December 2020 was conducted. Sample size was determined using a priori power analysis. Demographic information, surgical outcomes including procedure time (minutes), intraoperative blood loss (mL), hospital days, costs (RMB), fluoroscopy shots, recurrence and complications, etc., were recorded and analyzed. Prognostic outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Japanese Orthopedic Association Score (JOA) and modified MacNab criteria. The preoperative and postoperative VAS, ODI and JOA scores were recorded by two assistants. When the results were inconsistent, the scores were recorded again by the lead professor until all scores were consistently recorded in the data. MRI was used to assess radiological improvement and all patients received follow-ups for at least one year.ResultsThe sample size required for the study was calculated by a priori analysis, and a total of 72 participants were required for the study to achieve 95% statistical test power. A total of 93 patients were included, 47 of whom underwent modified PETD, and 46 of whom underwent OD. In the modified PETD intragroup comparison, VAS scores ranged from 7.14 ± 0.89 preoperatively to 2.00 ± 0.58, 2.68 ± 0.70, 2.55 ± 0.69, 2.23 ± 0.81, and 1.85 ± 0.72 at 7 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively. Patients showed significant pain relief postoperatively (P < 0.01). According to the modified MacNab score, the excellent rate in the PETD group was 89.36%. There was no significant difference compared to the OD group (89.13%, P > 0.05). Complication rates were lower (P > 0.05) but recurrence rates were higher (P > 0.05) in the modified PETD group than in the OD group. The modified PETD group had a faster operative time (P < 0.01), shorter hospital stay (P < 0.01), less intraoperative bleeding (P < 0.01), and less financial burden to the patient (P < 0.01) than the OD group. At 7 days postoperatively, the VAS score for low back pain was higher in the OD group than in the modified PETD group (P < 0.01). The VAS and JOA scores at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively were not significantly different between the modified PETD and OD groups (P > 0.05), and the ODI was significantly different at 3 months postoperatively (P < 0.05).ConclusionModified PETD treatment is safe and effective for gluteal pain due to L4/5 disc herniation and has the advantages of a lower complication rate, faster postoperative recovery, shorter length of stay, fewer anesthesia risks and lower cost of the procedure compared with OD. However, modified PETD has a higher recurrence rate.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression Vs. Open Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

BackgroundEndoscopic lumbar interbody fusion is a new technology that is mostly used for single-segment and unilateral lumbar spine surgery. The purpose of this study is to introduce percutaneous endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PE-PLIF) with unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) for lumbar spondylolisthesis and evaluate the efficacy by comparing it with open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).MethodsTwenty-eight patients were enrolled in PE-PLIF with the ULBD group and the open PLIF group. The perioperative data of the two groups were compared to evaluate the safety of PE-PLIF with ULBD. The visual analog scale (VAS) back pain, VAS leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores of the two groups preoperatively and postoperatively were compared to evaluate clinical efficacy. Preoperative and postoperative imaging data were collected to evaluate the effectiveness of the operation.ResultsNo differences in baseline data were found between the two groups (p > 0.05). The operation time in PE-PLIF with the ULBD group (221.2 ± 32.9 min) was significantly longer than that in the PLIF group (138.4 ± 25.7 min) (p < 0.05), and the estimated blood loss and postoperative hospitalization were lower than those of the PLIF group (p < 0.05). The postoperative VAS and ODI scores were significantly improved in both groups (p < 0.05), but the postoperative VAS back pain score in the PE-PLIF group was significantly lower than that in the PLIF group (p < 0.05). The excellent and good rates in both groups were 96.4% according to MacNab’s criteria. The disc height and cross-sectional area of the spinal canal were significantly improved in the two groups after surgery (p < 0.05), with no difference between the groups (p > 0.05). The fusion rates in PE-PLIF with the ULBD group and the PLIF group were 89.3% and 92.9% (p > 0.05), respectively, the cage subsidence rates were 14.3% and 17.9% (p > 0.05), respectively, and the lumbar spondylolisthesis reduction rates were 92.72 ± 6.39% and 93.54 ± 5.21%, respectively (p > 0.05).ConclusionThe results from this study indicate that ULBD can be successfully performed during PE-PLIF, and the combined procedure is a safe and reliable treatment method for lumbar spondylolisthesis.

The effect of the sequence of intermediate instrumentation and distraction-reduction of the fractured vertebrae on the surgical treatment of mild to moderate thoracolumbar burst fractures

To investigate the effect of the sequence of intermediate instrumentation with long screws and distraction-reduction on mild to moderate thoracolumbar fractures treated by posterior open and short-segmental fixation. The clinical data of 68 patients with mild to moderate thoracolumbar burst fractures who met the selection criteria between January 2016 and June 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into group ISDRF (intermediate screws then distraction-reduction fixation, 32 cases) and group DRISF (distraction-reduction then intermediate screws fixation, 36 cases) according to the different operation methods. There was no significant difference between the two groups in age, gender, body mass index, fracture segment, cause of injury, and preoperative load-sharing classification score, thoracolumbar injury classification and severity score, vertebral canal occupational rate, back pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score, anterior height of fractured vertebra, and Cobb angle ( P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, complications, and fracture healing time were recorded and compared between the two groups. The vertebral canal occupational rate, anterior height of fractured vertebra, kyphosis Cobb angle, and back pain VAS score before and after operation were used to evaluate the effectiveness. There was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss and operation time between the two groups ( P>0.05). No vascular or spinal nerve injury and deep infections or skin infections occurred in both groups. At 1 week after operation, the vertebral canal occupational rate in the two groups was significantly improved when compared with that before operation ( P<0.05), no significant difference was found in the difference of vertebral canal occupational rate before and after operation and improvement between the two groups ( P>0.05). The patients in both groups were followed up 18-24 months, with an average of 22.3 months. All vertebral fractures reached bone union at 6 months postoperatively. At last follow-up, there was no internal fixation failures such as broken screws, broken rods or loose screws, but there were 2 cases of mild back pain in the ISDRF group. The intra-group comparison showed that the back pain VAS score, the anterior height of fractured vertebra, and the Cobb angle of the two groups were significantly improved at each time point postoperatively ( P<0.05); the VAS scores at 12 months postoperatively and last follow-up were also improved when compared with that at 1 week postoperatively ( P<0.05). At last follow-up, the anterior height of fractured vertebra in the ISDRF group was significantly lost when compared with that at 1 week and 12 months postoperatively ( P<0.05), the Cobb angle had a significant loss when compared with that at 1 week postoperatively ( P<0.05); the anterior height of fractured vertebra and Cobb angle in DRISF group were not significantly lost when compared with that at 1 week and 12 months postoperatively ( P>0.05). The comparison between groups showed that there was no significant difference in the remission rate of VAS score between the two groups at 1 week postoperatively ( P>0.05), the recovery value of the anterior height of fractured vertebra in ISDRF group was significantly higher than that in DRISF group ( P<0.05), the loss rate at last follow-up was also significantly higher ( P<0.05); the correction rate of Cobb angle in ISDRF group was significantly higher than that in DRISF group at 1 week postoperatively ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in the loss rate of Cobb angle between the two groups at last follow-up ( P>0.05). In the treatment of mild to moderate thoracolumbar burst fractures with posterior short-segment fixation, the instrumentation of long screws in the injured vertebrae does not affect the reduction of the fracture fragments in the spinal canal. DRISF can better maintain the restored anterior height of the fractured vertebra and reduce the loss of kyphosis Cobb angle during the follow-up, indicating a better long-term effectiveness.

Application of cortical bone trajectory screw and sacral alar screw internal fixation for surgical treatment of lumbar adjacent segment degeneration

Objective: To explore the application of cortical bone trajectory screw (CBTS) and sacral alar screw (SAS) internal fixation in the treatment of lumbar adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) and evaluate its clinical effect. Methods: Data of 24 patients who were diagnosed with ASD and treated by CBTS or SAS in Beijing Chaoyang Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. There were 14 males and 10 females with a mean age of (67.9±8.2) years. The patients were followed-up for (2.6±0.4) years. Perioperative parameters including operation time, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative time on the ground were counted. All patients were followed-up for at least 2 years. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were compared between pre-operation and at the last follow-up. The internal fixation-related complications, pseudarthrosis and adjacent re-degeneration were evaluated in the follow-up. Results: There were 14 proximal ASD patients, 8 distal ASD patients, 1 both ends ASD patient and 1 ASD patient in between the fusion surgeries. Bone mineral density (BMD) T score of the adjacent vertebrae was -1.98±0.91 on average. The ASD patients were re-operated with CBTS and SAS internal fixation technique. A small incision was made in the revision surgery and the original fixation was not completely cut open and removed. The mean operation time was (125±36) min, mean blood loss was (85±33) ml. The postoperative ambulation time was (3.1±1.9) days, and the hospitalization time was (9.0±2.6) days. Before the operation, the average VAS (back pain) score was 5.2±1.0, the average of VAS (leg pain) score was 6.8±1.9 and ODI was 56.6%±12.8%. VAS score was reduced to 1.4±0.6 (waist pain) and 0.9±0.4 (leg pain). ODI was improved to 13.8%±6.3%. All the difference between preoperative and the last follow-up was statically significant (all P<0.01). No internal fixation failure, pseudarthrosis and adjacent re-degeneration were observed in the final follow-up. Conclusion: The application of CBTS and SAS internal fixation techniques in the surgical treatment of lumbar ASD has the advantages of less trauma, faster postoperative recovery, reliable internal fixation, and fewer complications, especially in patients with low bone mineral density.

Whether Out-of-Bed Activity Restriction in the Early Postoperative Period of PELD Is Beneficial to Therapeutic Efficacy or Reduce Recurrence.

ObjectiveTo detect the influences of postoperative out-of-bed activity restriction on recurrence rate, low back and leg pain, functional rehabilitation after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD).MethodsIn this research, 213 patients with lumbar intervertebral disc herniation (LDH) who underwent PELD were divided into the out-of-bed activity restriction group and out-of-bed activity non-restriction group. The visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were used to evaluate postoperative clinical efficacy at 1 and 3 months after the operation, and to count the recurrence rates. All of these operations were performed between August 2017 and July 2020, and they were followed in the outpatient department for 12 months at least.ResultsBoth of the groups showed significantly lower VAS and higher ODI scores at 1 month and 3 months post-operation, respectively, when compared with pre-operation. At 1 month after the operation, the restriction group performed lower VAS scores of low back pain compared with the non-restriction group, but this advantage disappeared at 3months post-operation. However, there was no statistical difference in the VAS scores of leg pain and ODI scores between the two groups, neither at 1 nor 3 months after the surgery. The recurrence rate is significantly lower in the restriction group than in the non-restriction group at a 12-month follow-up after the surgery.ConclusionOut-of-bed activity restriction in the early postoperative period of PELD could reduce LDH recurrence effectively, and it may relieve the low back pain to some extent. It has no benefit in the recovery of leg pain and functional rehabilitation.

Severe Comorbidity Burden Does Not Influence Postoperative Clinical Outcomes and Trajectory for Back Pain, Leg Pain, Physical Function, or Disability in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Cohort-Matched Analysis

To compare perioperative outcomes, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and minimum clinically important difference achievement after single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in patients stratified by preoperative comorbidity burden. PROMs were administered preoperatively/postoperatively and included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and 12-Item Short-Form Physical Composite Score (SF-12 PCS). Patients were grouped according to preoperative Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) <5 (mild to moderate comorbidity) or preoperative CCI ≥5 (severe preoperative comorbidity). A 3:1 propensity score match for age, gender, insurance status, smoking status, and preoperative spinal disease was used to control for significant demographic differences between cohorts. After propensity score matching, 255 patients were included (135 in the CCI <5 cohort; 120 in the CCI ≥5 cohort). The CCI ≥5 cohort showed significantly reduced postoperative VAS back pain score on the day of surgery (P< 0.001, all). Mean PROM differences were noted for postoperative PROMs: VAS back and ODI 6 months, both instances favoring the CCI ≥5 cohort (P < 0.038). The CCI <5cohort improved from baseline to 1 year for all postoperative PROMs except SF-12 PCS 6 weeks and 12 weeks and SF-12 Mental Composite Score 6 weeks (P < 0.034, all). The CCI ≥5 cohort reported significant improvement from preoperative baseline to 1 year for all postoperative PROMs except ODI 6 weeks, SF-12 Mental Composite Score 6 weeks and 1 year, SF-12 PCS 6 weeks, and PROMIS-PF 6 weeks (P < 0.017, all). Both cohorts reported >50% overall minimum clinically important difference achievement rate for VAS leg, VAS back, ODI, SF-12 PCS, and PROMIS-PF. The results suggest that patients undergoing MIS TLIF with severe comorbidities can expect a similar postoperative trajectory for disability, leg and back pain, and physical function. However, long-term (1 year) mental health improvement from preoperative baseline was noted only in the mild to moderate comorbidity group.

Decompression and Interlaminar Stabilization for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Cohort Study and Two-Dimensional Operative Video.

Background and Objectives: Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the most common causes of disability in the elderly and often necessitates surgical intervention in patients over the age of 65. Our study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of interlaminar stabilization following decompressive laminectomy in patients with lumbar stenosis without instability. Materials and Methods: Twenty patients with lumbar stenosis underwent decompressive laminectomy and interlaminar stabilization at our academic institution. Clinical outcomes were measured using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) at the 2-month, 6-month, and 1-year postoperative visits, and these outcomes were compared to the preoperative scores. Results: The average VAS scores for low back pain significantly improved from 8.8 preoperatively to 4.0, 3.7, and 3.9 at 2 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively, respectively (p < 0.001). The average VAS scores for lower extremity pain significantly improved from 9.0 preoperatively to 2.7, 2.5, and 2.5 at 2 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively, respectively (p < 0.001). The average ODI scores significantly improved from 66.6 preoperatively to 23.8, 23.3, and 24.5 at 2 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively, respectively (p < 0.001). There was no statistical significance for difference in VAS or ODI scores between 2 months, 6 months, and 1 year. One patient had an intraoperative durotomy that was successfully treated with local repair and lumbar drainage. Another patient had progression of stenosis and had to undergo bilateral facetectomy and fusion. Conclusions: Decompressive laminectomy and interlaminar stabilization in patients with spinal claudication and low back pain is a good surgical option in the absence of instability and may provide significant clinical improvement of pain and functional disability.

Full-endoscopic foraminoplasty for highly down-migrated lumbar disc herniation

Background and study aimsMultiple surgical approaches have been studied and accepted for the removal of highly downward migrated lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Here, we investigated the efficacy and safety of full-endoscopic foraminoplasty for highly downward migrated LDH.Patients and methodsThirty-seven patients with highly down-migrated LDH treated by the full-endoscopic foraminoplasty between January 2018 and January 2020 were retrospectively investigated. Clinical parameters were evaluated preoperatively and 1, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, using pre- and post-operative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores for functional improvement, visual analog scale (VAS) for leg and back pain, and modified MacNab criteria for patients satisfactory.ResultsThirty-seven patients with highly downward migrated LDH were successfully removed via the transforaminal full-endoscopic discectomy. The average VAS back and leg pain scores were significantly reduced from 7.41 ± 1.17 and 8.68 ± 1.06 before operation to 3.14 ± 0.89 and 2.70 ± 0.46 at postoperative 1 month, and 1.76 ± 0.59 and 0.92 ± 0.28 at postoperative 12 months, respectively (P < 0.05). The average ODI scores were reduced from 92.86 ± 6.41 to 15.30 ± 4.43 at postoperative 1 month, and 9.81 ± 3.24 at postoperative 12 months (P < 0.05). Based on the modifed MacNab criteria, 36 out of 37 patients (97.30%) were rated as excellent or good outcomes.ConclusionThe full-endoscopic foraminoplasty can be used successfully for surgical removal of high grade down-migrated LDH, and it could serve as an efficient alternative technique for patients with highly downward migrated LDH.

Efficacy comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and extended interlaminar fenestration for lumbar lateral recess stenosis

Objective: To analyze and compare the clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic(UBE) decompression and extended interlaminar fenestration for lumbar lateral recess stenosis. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 103 patients treated with UBE decompression or extended interlaminar fenestration for lumbar lateral recess stenosis from July 2017 to June 2020 in the Second Hospital of Anhui Medical University was performed. Eighty patients aged 40 to 86 (63.2±9.8) years were included in this study, including 42 males and 38 females. Forty patients received UBE decompression (UBE group) and 40 patients received extended interlaminar fenestration (fenestration group). Operative time, length of incision, hospital stay and complications were recorded. The visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and leg pain and Oswestry dysfunction index (ODI) scores were recorded preoperatively and at 1, 3 and 6 months after the operation and at the final follow-up, and the modified Macnab scale was used to evaluate the clinical efficacy at the final follow-up. Results: Patients in both groups successfully received lumbar lateral recess decompression and were followed up for (12.9±5.4) months in the UBE group and (14.9±3.5) months in the fenestration group, respectively. The operation time in the UBE group was (63.9±11.6) min, it was higher than that in the fenestration group ((54.1±9.2) min, P<0.001). The average incision length in the UBE group was (18.2±1.7) mm, it was lower than that in the fenestration group ((73.5±11.6) mm, P<0.001). Postoperative hospital stay in the UBE group was (4.1±2.2) d, it was lower than that in the fenestration group ((7.6±3.1) d, P<0.001). VAS scores of low back pain were improved after operation in both groups. Low back pain VAS scores of UBE group were lower than those in fenestration group at 1 and 3 months post operation (both P<0.05). The VAS scores of lower limb pain were improved after operation in both groups and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at postoperative 1, 3, 6 months after the operation and at the last follow-up (all P>0.05). ODI scores were improved after operation in both groups. ODI scores of UBE group were lower than those in fenestration group at postoperative 1 month and 3 months(both P<0.05). Intraoperative dural tear occurred in 2 cases(5.0%) in the UBE group and 1 case(2.5%) in the fenestration group, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P=0.556). According to the modified Macnab scale at the last follow-up, 35 cases were excellent, 3 cases were good, and 2 cases were fair in the UBE group, and 37 cases were excellent, 2 cases were good, and 1 case was fair in the open group. The difference was not statistically significant between the two groups (P=0.745). Conclusion: Compared with the extended interlaminar fenestration, UBE technique can not only reduce the early postoperative low back pain, shorten hospital stay, but also achieve the same long-term clinical efficacy with less trauma.

Factors Contributing to Residual Low Back Pain after Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures.

Although osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVFs) are the most common type of osteoporotic fracture, few reports have investigated the factors contributing to residual low back pain in the chronic phase after OVFs by using radiographic evaluation. We examined the contribution of nonunion, vertebral deformity, and thoracolumbar alignment to the severity of residual low back pain post-OVF. This post hoc analysis of a prospective randomized study included 195 patients with a 48-week follow-up period. We investigated the associations between radiographic variables with the visual analog scale (VAS) scores for low back pain at 48 weeks post-OVF using a multiple linear regression model. Univariate analysis revealed that analgesic use, the local angle on magnetic resonance imaging, anterior vertebral body compression percentage on X-ray, and nonunion showed a significant association with VAS scores for low back pain. Multiple regression analysis produced the following equation: VAS for low back pain at 48 weeks = 15.49 + 0.29 × VAS for low back pain at 0 weeks + (with analgesics: +8.84, without analgesics: −8.84) + (union: −5.72, nonunion: −5.72). Among local alignment, thoracolumbar alignment, and nonunion, nonunion independently contributed to residual low back pain at 48 weeks post-OVF. A treatment strategy that reduces the occurrence of nonunion is desirable.

Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy with versus without Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Objective Transforaminal endoscopic lumbar discectomy (TELD) is an effective treatment for patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH) with failure of conservative treatment. However, defects in the annulus fibrosus after TELD usually lead to a recurrence of LDH. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection has shown promising potential for the repair of injured tissues. The combination of TELD and PRP injection has rarely been reported. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, disc remodeling, and recurrence rate of LDH in TELD with or without PRP in LDH treatment. Methods A total of 108 consecutive patients who underwent TELD were prospectively registered between July 2018 and December 2019 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/ChiCTR1800017228). Fifty-one and fifty-seven patients underwent TELD with PRP injections and TELD only, respectively. The visual analog scale (VAS) score for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and MacNab criteria were evaluated, and perioperative complications were documented. The disc protrusion, spinal cross-sectional area (SCSA), and disc height were measured on MRI and evaluated preoperatively, postoperatively, and at regular follow-up. Results All patients were followed up. Clinical improvement was noted in both groups. There were statistical differences in the VAS scores of back and leg pain and ODI between the two groups at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year follow-up (P < 0.05); the improvement in the PRP group was significant. The disc protrusion and SCSA on MRI in the PRP group showed better improvement, with lower recurrence rate, than that in the control group at the final follow-up (P < 0.05). No adverse events were reported in our study following PRP injection. Conclusion Our study showed that TELD with PRP injection was a safe and effective treatment for patients with LDH in the medium and long-term follow-up. PRP injection was beneficial for disc remodeling after endoscopic discectomy and decreased the recurrence of LDH.

Predictors of long-term clinical outcomes in adult patients after lumbar total disc replacement: development and validation of a prediction model.

Long-term outcomes of single-level lumbar arthroplasty are understood to be very good, with the most recent Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) trial showing a < 5% reoperation rate at the close of the 7-year study. This post hoc analysis was conducted to determine whether specific patients from the activL IDE data set had better outcomes than the mean good outcome of the IDE trial, as well as to identify contributing factors that could be optimized in real-world use. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were developed using the randomized patient set (n = 283) from the activL trial and used to identify predictive factors and to derive risk equations. The models were internally validated using the randomized patient set and externally validated using the nonrandomized patient set (n = 52) from the activL trial. Predictive power was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Two factors were significantly associated with achievement of better than the mean outcomes at 7 years. Randomization to receive the activL device was positively associated with better than the mean visual analog scale (VAS)-back pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, whereas preoperative narcotics use was negatively associated with better than the mean ODI score. Preoperative narcotics use was also negatively associated with return to unrestricted full-time work. Other preoperative factors associated with positive outcomes included unrestricted full-time work, working manual labor after index back injury, and decreasing disc height. Older age, greater VAS-leg pain score, greater ODI score, female sex, and working manual labor before back injury were identified as preoperative factors associated with negative outcomes. Preoperative BMI, VAS-back pain score, back pain duration ≥ 1 year, SF-36 physical component summary score, and recreational activity had no effect on outcomes. Lumbar total disc replacement for symptomatic single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease is a well-established option for improving long-term patient outcomes. Discontinuing narcotics use may further improve patient outcomes, as this analysis identified associations between no preoperative narcotics use and better ODI score relative to the mean score of the activL trial at 7 years and increased likelihood of return to work within 7 years. Other preoperative factors that may further improve outcomes included unrestricted full-time work, working manual labor despite back injury, sedentary work status before back injury, and randomization to receive the activL device. Tailoring patient care before total disc replacement may further improve patient outcomes.