• Leonardo Kapural, Bruce Vrooman, Sheryar Sarwar, Ljiljana Krizanac-Bengez, Richard Rauck, Christopher Gilmore, James North, Girgis Girgis, and Nagy Mekhail.
• Carolinas Pain Institute and Center for Clinical Research, Winston-Salem, NC 27103, USA. lkapural@wakehealth.edu
• Pain Med. 2013 Mar 1; 14 (3): 362-73.

ObjectiveThe aim was to compare the efficacy of intradiscal biacuplasty (IDB) with that of placebo treatment for discogenic low back pain.DesignThis is a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Subjects were randomized on a 1:1 basis to IDB and sham groups. Follow-ups were conducted at 1, 3, and 6 months. Subjects and coordinators were blinded to randomization until 6 months. Of the 1,894 subjects screened, 64 subjects were enrolled, and 59 were treated: 29 randomized to IDB and 30 to sham. All subjects had a history of chronic low back pain for longer than 6 months.InterventionsTwo cooled radiofrequency (RF) electrodes placed in a bipolar manner in affected discs to lesion the nociceptive fibers of the annulus fibrosus. The sham procedure was identical to the active treatment except that probes were not directly inserted into the disc space, and RF energy was not actively delivered.ResultsThe principal outcome measures were physical function, pain, disability, and opioid usage. Patients in the IDB group exhibited statistically significant improvements in physical function (P = 0.029), pain (P = 0.006), and disability (P = 0.037) at 6-month follow-up as compared to patients who received sham treatment. Treatment patients reported a reduction of 16 mg daily intake of opioids at 6 months; however, the results were not statistically different from sham patients.ConclusionsThe results suggest that the clinical benefits observed in this study are the result of non-placebo treatment effects afforded by IDB. IDB should be recommended to select the patients with chronic discogenic low back pain. (Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT00750191.).Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

16 keywords...

hide…