Pain physician
-
Multicenter Study Clinical Trial
Paresthesia-Independence: An Assessment of Technical Factors Related to 10 kHz Paresthesia-Free Spinal Cord Stimulation.
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been successfully used to treat chronic intractable pain for over 40 years. Successful clinical application of SCS is presumed to be generally dependent on maximizing paresthesia-pain overlap; critical to achieving this is positioning of the stimulation field at the physiologic midline. Recently, the necessity of paresthesia for achieving effective relief in SCS has been challenged by the introduction of 10 kHz paresthesia-free stimulation. In a large, prospective, randomized controlled pivotal trial, HF10 therapy was demonstrated to be statistically and clinically superior to paresthesia-based SCS in the treatment of severe chronic low back and leg pain. HF10 therapy, unlike traditional paresthesia-based SCS, requires no paresthesia to be experienced by the patient, nor does it require paresthesia mapping at any point during lead implant or post-operative programming. ⋯ Both paresthesia concordance with pain and precise midline positioning of the stimulation contacts appear to be inconsequential technical factors for successful HF10 therapy application. These results suggest that HF10 therapy is not only paresthesia-free, but may be paresthesia-independent.
-
Cost utility or cost effective analysis continues to take center stage in the United States for defining and measuring the value of treatments in interventional pain management. Appropriate cost utility analysis has been performed for caudal epidural injections, percutaneous adhesiolysis, and spinal cord stimulation. However, the literature pertaining to lumbar interlaminar epidural injections is lacking, specifically in reference to cost utility analysis derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a pragmatic approach in a practical setting. ⋯ This cost utility analysis of lumbar interlaminar epidural injections in patients nonresponsive to conservative management in the treatment of disc herniation, central spinal stenosis, and axial or discogenic low back pain in the lumbar spine shows the clinical effectiveness and cost utility of these injections of $1,976.58 for direct costs with a total cost of $3,301 per QALY.
-
Treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation with Modic type I endplate changes is complex and challenging, requiring systemic and local therapies which include conservative therapy, epidural infiltrations, percutaneous therapeutic techniques, and surgical options. The clinical management of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation involving Modic type I endplate changes is uniquely challenging because it requires alleviating pain caused by both the herniated disc and the endplate osteochondritis. Through different approaches, percutaneous lumbar discectomy (PLD) and percutaneous cementoplasty (PCP) have been introduced into clinical practice as alternatives to traditional surgical and radiotherapy treatments of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation and other spine diseases. ⋯ PLD plus PCP is a feasible technique for symptomatic lumbar disc herniation with Modic type I endplate changes.
-
Percutaneous full-endoscopic discectomy (PED) is being increasingly used because of its potential to minimalize soft-tissue damage and decrease hospital stay. PED using the interlaminar approach (PED-IL) at L4-L5 is performed by only a few surgeons. To the best of our knowledge, the safety and efficacy of PED-IL at L4-L5, without experience in PED via a transforaminal approach (PED-TF) has not been previously reported. ⋯ The clinical outcomes of PED-IL at L4-L5 were equal to those at L5-S1. Therefore, PED-IL is suitable to be a standard method for any type of intracanalicular disc herniation.
-
Comparative Study
The Effectiveness and Safety of Selective Lumbar Decompression in Diagnostic Doubt Patients: A Retrospective Control Study.
Our previous study demonstrated that selective nerve root block (SNRB) can influence decision-making in lumbar surgery by guiding the selection of nerve roots targeted for decompression in diagnostic doubt patients (DDPs). However, further studies were needed to determine whether this selective decompression (SD) procedure would result in similar clinical outcomes and reduce the perioperative parameters and postoperative complications as compared to the non-selective decompression (NSD) procedure. ⋯ On the basis of the 5-year follow-up data, we suggest that the SD procedure guided by SNRB is an effective and safe method for the surgical treatment of DDPs. This procedure produces superior perioperative parameters when compared with the conventional NSD procedure, but has a comparable clinical outcome. Moreover, the benefits of SD surgery include fewer perioperative and postoperative complications.