Back Pain: Shah RV

Boswell MV, Trescot AM, Datta S, Schultz DM, Hansen HC, Abdi S, Sehgal N, Shah RV, Singh V, Benyamin RM, Patel VB, Buenaventura RM, Colson JD, Cordner HJ, Epter RS, Jasper JF, Dunbar EE, Atluri SL, Bowman RC, Deer TR, Swicegood JR, Staats PS, Smith HS, Burton AW, Kloth DS, Giordano J, Manchikanti L, Anonymous00089. · American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians, Paducah, KY 42001, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #17256025 links to  free full text

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

Singh V, Manchikanti L, Shah RV, Dunbar EE, Glaser SE. · Pain Diagnostics Associates, Niagara, WI 54151, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #18850027 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Even though the prevalence of thoracic pain has been reported to be 15% of the general population and up to 22% of the population in interventional pain management settings, the role of thoracic discs as a cause of chronic thoracic and extrathoracic pain has not been well researched. The intervertebral discs, zygapophysial or facet joints, and other structures including the costovertebral and costotransverse joints have been identified as a source of thoracic pain. OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess the quality of clinical studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of provocation thoracic discography. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of provocation thoracic discography. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of thoracic discography with respect to chronic, function limiting, thoracic or extrathoracic pain. Studies meeting the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) methodologic quality criteria with scores of 50 or higher were included for the assessment of the level of evidence. Level of evidence was based on the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria for the assessment of accuracy of diagnostic studies. Based on the level of evidence, recommendations were made according to Guyatt et al's criteria. RESULTS: The clinical value of thoracic provocation discography is limited (Level II-3) with 2C/weak recommendation derived from low quality or very low quality evidence indicating that other alternatives may be equally reasonable. CONCLUSION: Based on the available evidence for this systematic review, thoracic provocation discography is provided with a weak recommendation for the diagnosis of discogenic pain in the thoracic spine, if conservative management has failed. This is qualified by the need to appropriately evaluate and diagnose other causes of chronic thoracic pain including pain originating from thoracic facet joints.

Sehgal N, Dunbar EE, Shah RV, Colson J. · University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53595, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #17256031 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: A 2-year review of literature from October 2004 to December 2006 was completed to update current scientific evidence on diagnostic utility of facet joint injections. Diagnostic injections are employed to diagnose facet joint pain because available techniques cannot identify the pain generating structure in patients with chronic spinal pain. There is no physical examination technique, laboratory test, or imaging modality that can precisely identify the spinal structure causing pain, distinguish the culprit from a variety of potential targets, and predict response to a therapeutic intervention. Zygapophysial joint injections, commonly called facet injections (intraarticular joint injections and medial branch blocks) are local anesthetic injections of the facet joint or its nerve supply. These are diagnostic procedures used to determine if pain is arising from facet joints, distinguish painful from nonpainful joints and prognosticate response to therapeutic facet joint interventions. Diagnostic injections must meet the cardinal features of a diagnostic test i.e., accuracy, safety, and reproducibility. Accuracy is based on comparison with a "gold standard" to confirm presence or absence of a disease. There is, however, no available gold standard to measure presence or absence of pain. Hence, there is a degree of uncertainty concerning the accuracy of diagnostic facet joint injections. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate and update available evidence (2004 to 2006) relating to clinical utility of facet joint injections (intraarticular and medial branch blocks) in diagnosing chronic spinal pain of facet joint origin. STUDY DESIGN: Review of the literature for clinical studies on efficacy and utility of facet joint/nerve injections in diagnosing facet joint pain according to Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and Quality Assessment Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS) criteria. The level of evidence was classified as conclusive (Level I), strong (Level II), moderate (Level III), or limited (Level IV). METHODS: Computerized database search (2004 to 2006) of PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Knowledge was conducted to identify studies on facet joint pain and diagnostic interventions. Abstracts, reviews, book chapters, case reports, studies based on single blocks or blocks without radiologic control, and studies describing techniques were excluded. Prospective studies were given priority over retrospective studies. RESULTS: There is no change in the strength of evidence for facet joint diagnostic injections. There is strong evidence for controlled comparative local anesthetic facet joint injections or medial branch blocks in the diagnosis of neck and low back pain and moderate evidence in the diagnosis of pain arising from thoracic facet joints. CONCLUSION: The evidence obtained from literature review suggests that controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks of facet joints (medial branch or dorsal ramus) are reproducible, reasonably accurate and safe. The sensitivity, specificity, false-positive rates, and predictive values of these diagnostic tests for neck and low back pain have been validated and reproduced in multiple studies.

Buenaventura RM, Shah RV, Patel V, Benyamin R, Singh V. · Dayton Pain Med, Kettering, OH, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #17256028 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The intervertebral disc has been implicated as an etiology of chronic spine pain based on clinical, basic science, and epidemiological research. There is currently no way to determine with absolute certainty whether or not the disc is a spinal pain generator. At our current level of understanding, discography is thought of as the best tool to evaluate disc-related pain. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess the diagnostic accuracy of discography with respect to chronic spinal pain. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of discography with respect to chronic spinal pain. Study inclusion/exclusion criteria were based on the modern practice of discography. Selected studies were then subjected to two rating instruments for diagnostic accuracy studies (AHRQ and QUADAS). Specific data were then culled from these studies and tabulated. Evidence was then classified into five levels: conclusive, strong, moderate, limited, or indeterminate. RESULTS: Evidence is strong for the diagnostic accuracy of discography as an imaging tool. Evidence is also strong for the ability of discography to evoke pain. There is strong evidence supporting the role of discography in identifying that subset of patients with lumbar discogenic pain. There is moderate evidence supporting the role of discography in identifying a subset of patients with cervical discogenic pain. There is limited evidence supporting the role of discography in identifying a subset of patients with thoracic discogenic pain. CONCLUSION: Discography is a useful imaging and pain evaluation tool in identifying a subset of patients with chronic spinal pain secondary to intervertebral disc disorders.

Datta S, Everett CR, Trescot AM, Schultz DM, Adlaka R, Abdi S, Atluri SL, Smith HS, Shah RV. · Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #17256026 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Selective nerve root blocks or transforaminal epidural injections are used for diagnosis and treatment of different spinal disorders. A clear consensus on the use of selective nerve root injections as a diagnostic tool does not currently exist. Additionally, the effectiveness of this procedure as a diagnostic tool is not clear. A systematic review of diagnostic utility of selective nerve root blocks was performed and published in January 2005, which concluded that selective nerve root injections may be helpful as a diagnostic tool in evaluating spinal pain with radicular features, but its role needs to be further clarified. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and update the accuracy of selective nerve root injections in diagnosing spinal disorders. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of selective nerve root blocks for the diagnosis of spinal pain. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature for clinical studies was performed to assess the accuracy of selective nerve root injections in diagnosing spinal pain. Methodologic quality evaluation was performed utilizing Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and Quality Assessment Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS) criteria. Studies were graded and evidence classified into 5 levels: conclusive, strong, moderate, limited, or indeterminate. An extensive literature search was performed utilizing resources from the library at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, PubMed, EMBASE, BioMed, and Cochrane Reviews. Manual searches of bibliographies of known primary and review articles, and abstracts from scientific meetings within the last 2 years were also reviewed. RESULTS: There is limited evidence on the effectiveness of selective nerve root injections as a diagnostic tool for spinal pain. There is insufficient research for stronger support, but the available literature is supportive of selective nerve root injections as a diagnostic test for equivocal radicular pain. There is moderate evidence for use in the preoperative evaluation of patients with negative or inconclusive imaging studies. The positive predictive value of diagnostic selective nerve root blocks is low, but they have a useful negative predictive value. CONCLUSION: Selective nerve root injections may be helpful as a diagnostic tool in evaluating spinal pain with radicular features. However, their role needs to be further clarified by additional research and consensus.

Shah RV, Lutz GE. · Physiatry Service, The Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY 10021, USA. · Spine J. · Pubmed #14609693 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Lumbar intraspinal synovial cysts are an important cause of axial and radicular spine pain. Controversy about nonsurgical versus surgical treatment persists. PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of nonsurgical management of symptomatic lumbar intraspinal synovial cysts (LISCs). STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review set in outpatient physiatry office. PATIENT SAMPLE: Ten patients (8 women, 2 men; average age, 60 years) with LISCs and average symptom duration of 7.9 months. OUTCOME MEASURES: Numerical pain rating scale (NRS-11), Roland-Morris disability outcome measure, patient satisfaction, and surgery. METHODS: Patients with LISCs were identified and their charts were reviewed. Those patients whose symptoms correlated with the level of LISC-induced extradural compression were eligible. All patients received conservative care and a fluoroscopic-guided lumbar spine injection. The primary author conducted telephone follow-up. RESULTS: All 10 patients had unilateral radicular pain. Seven had stable neurologic deficits. Magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography/myelography, respectively, identified a LISC in 8 and 2 patients. Five patients had cyst aspiration followed by steroid instillation; 5 patients had cyst aspiration followed by a transforaminal epidural steroid injection. Average length of follow-up was 50.4 weeks. Only 1 patient had sustained benefit. One patient had no benefit and refused surgery. Eight patients underwent surgery and had a good result. CONCLUSION: In our opinion, nonsurgical management in patients with LISC-induced radicular pain does not appear to be as successful as surgery.

Braverman DL, Ericken JJ, Shah RV, Franklin DJ. · Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Arch Phys Med Rehabil. · Pubmed #12708558 No free full text.

Abstract: This self-directed learning module highlights complementary and alternative therapies that are often used by patients seen in the typical physiatric practice. This article contains information on acupuncture and its use to treat low back pain, recent therapeutic approaches to lateral epicondylitis, movement therapies appropriate for the osteoporotic patient, and spa therapies. Scientific literature and standards of clinical practice in these areas have been reviewed to put forth the most recent recommendations regarding these diagnoses and therapeutic interventions. OVERALL ARTICLE OBJECTIVES: (a) To familiarize the physiatrist with complementary techniques that are increasingly popular in the United States and (b) to identify when therapies, such as acupuncture, movement therapies, bodywork, and the like, may be integrated into a comprehensive treatment approach for common physiatric clinical scenarios.

Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Kershaw T, Shah RV, Pfeiffer F, Fenk-Mayer A, Nanieva R, Karg A, Husted DS, Emerson JW. · Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Center, St. Elizabeth Klinikum, Straubing, Germany. · Spine (Phila Pa 1976). · Pubmed #16641775 No free full text.

Abstract: STUDY DESIGN: Prospective nonrandomized clinical series. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of ProDisc lumbar artificial disc replacement (ADR) in smokers versus nonsmokers. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Smoking is a negative predictor in fusion surgery. To date, a prospective study of the treatment of incapacitating discogenic low back pain using ADR in smokers versus nonsmokers has not been described. METHODS: A prospective analysis was performed on 104 patients with disabling discogenic low back pain treated with single-level lumbar ProDisc total disc arthroplasty. Smokers and nonsmokers were assessed before surgery and after surgery using patient satisfaction, Oswestry, and Visual Analog Scores. Additionally, preoperative and postoperative neurologic, radiographic, and pain medication assessments were performed at similar postoperative intervals. RESULTS: Oswestry, Visual Analog Scores, and patient satisfaction scores revealed statistical improvement beginning 3 months after surgery and were maintained at minimum 2-year follow-up. Patient satisfaction scores were higher in smokers (94%) than in nonsmokers (87%) at 2-year follow-up (P = 0.07). Radiographic analysis revealed an affected disc height increase from 4 mm to 13 mm (P < 0.05) and an affected disc motion from 3 degrees to 7 degrees (P < 0.05). No cases of loosening, dislodgment, mechanical failure, infection, or fusion of the affected segment occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study indicate that smokers do equally well compared with nonsmokers when ProDisc ADR is used in the treatment of debilitating lumbar spondylosis. Patient outcome and radiographic scores showed significant improvement compared with preoperative levels. Although not evident in our series, additional surveillance for intraoperative and postoperative vascular spasm and occlusion may be warranted in smokers.

Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Nanieva R, Fenk-Mayer A, Husted DS, Shah RV, Emerson JW. · Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Center, St. Elizabeth Klinikum, Straubing, Germany. · J Neurosurg Spine. · Pubmed #16506473 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECT: The authors conducted a prospective longitudinal study to obtain outcome (minimum follow-up period 2 years) regarding the safety and efficacy of single-level lumbar disc (ProDisc prosthesis) replacement in patients 60 years of age or older. METHODS: This prospective analysis involved 22 patients treated in whom the lumbar ProDisc prosthesis was used for total disc arthroplasty. All patients presented with disabling discogenic low-back pain (LBP) with or without radicular pain. The involved segments ranged from L-2 to S-1. Patients in whom there was no evidence of radiographic circumferential spinal stenosis and with minimal or no facet joint degeneration were included. Patients were assessed preoperatively and outcome was evaluated postoperatively at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months by administration of standardized tests (the visual analog scale [VAS], Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], and patient satisfaction). Secondary parameters included analysis of pre- and postoperative radiographic results of disc height at the affected level, adjacent-level disc height and motion, and complications. Twenty-two (100%) fulfilled all follow-up criteria. The median age of all patients was 63 years (range 61-71 years). There were 17 single-level cases, four two-level cases, and one three-level case. Statistical improvements in VAS, ODI, and patient satisfaction scores were observed at 3 months postoperatively. These improvements were maintained at 24-month follow-up examination. Patient satisfaction rates were 94% at 24 months (compared with 95% reported in a previously reported ProDisc study). Radicular pain also decreased significantly. Patients in whom bone mineral density was decreased underwent same-session vertebroplasty following implantation of the ProDisc device(s). There were two cases involving neurological deterioration: unilateral foot drop and loss of proprioception and vibration in one patient and unilateral foot drop in another patient. Both deficits occurred in patients in whom there was evidence preoperatively of circumferential spinal stenosis. There were two cases of implant subsidence and no thromboembolic phenomena. CONCLUSIONS: Significant improvements in patient satisfaction and ODI scores were observed by 3 months postoperatively and these improvements were maintained at the 2-year follow-up examination. Although the authors' early results indicate that the use of ProDisc lumbar total disc arthroplasty in patients older than 60 years of age reduces chronic LBP and improves clinical functional outcomes, they recommend the judicious use of artificial disc replacement in this age group. Until further findings are reported, the authors cautiously recommend the use of artificial disc replacement in the treatment of chronic discogenic LBP in patients older than age 60 years in whom bone quality is adequate in the absence of circumferential spinal stenosis.

Ruan X, Couch JP, Shah RV, Liu H, Wang F, Chiravuri S. · 'Physicians', Pain Specialists of Alabama, Mobile, AL 36607, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #17876369 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Intraspinal drug delivery (IDD) therapy has been increasingly used in patients with intractable, nonmalignant pain who fail to respond to conventional treatment or can not tolerate systemic opioid therapy due to side effects. By infusing a small amount of analgesics directly into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in close proximity to the receptor sites in the spinal cord, one is able to achieve the spinally mediated analgesia, sparing side effects ffrom systemic opioids. Prior to permanent intraspinal pump implantation, an intraspinal opioid screening trial is required to document the efficacy of intraspinal opioid for analgesia. Although there are a few approaches in conducting such screening trials, a patient-controlled continuous epidural morphine infusion trial, performed in an outpatient setting, is widely accepted by many interventional pain specialists. The major advantage of conducting an outpatient functional opioid infusion trial versus an inpatient trial is that it more closely mimics what the patient does in his or her usual activities of daily living, therefore minimizing the false positive rate of the inpatient screening trial. OBJECTIVE: To describe a rare complication, priapism, observed during an outpatient continuous epidural morphine and bupivacaine infusion trial. CASE REPORT: A 49-year-old male with intractable, chronic low back pain due to diffuse lumbar degenerative disc disease, lumbar spondylosis referred to our clinic for consideration of IDD therapy, after failing to respond to multi-modality pain management including medications, physical therapy with modality, transcutaneous nerve stimulation (TENS), and various interventional procedures. Following a pre-implant psychological evaluation, he was scheduled for the outpatient epidural morphine and bupivacaine infusion trial. A tunneled lumbar epidural a catheter was placed at L3-L4 with the catheter tip advanced to L1 under fluoroscopic guidance. The proximal tip of the catheter was then tunneled, subcutaneously, and connected to a Microject PCEA pump (Codman, Raynham, MA, USA) and reservoir bag containing preservative-free morphine 0.4 mg/mL and bupivacaine 0.016%. The pump was programmed to deliver a basal rate of 0.5 mL/h. The bolus dose was 0.2 mL with a 60-minute lock out interval. The patient was instructed how to use the pump properly before discharging home. Two hours following the initiation of infusion trial, the patient started to experience penile erection. It was initially painless, but became progressively painful and intensified. The unremitting priapism lasted 8 hours, finally resolving 2 to 3 hours after discontinuing the infusion. The patient recovered fully without any sequelae. CONCLUSION: Priapism may occur as a rare complication following epidural morphine administration. This report represents the third case report thus far in the literature revealing priapism induced by epidural morphine administration, yet, it is the only report, to our knowledge, describing priapism occurring in a patient undergoing an outpatient epidural morphine and bupivacaine infusion trial. We believe that epidural morphine, rather than bupivacaine, is responsible for causing priapism in this patient, through a yet to be defined spinal mechanism.

Shah RV, Merritt W, Collins D, Racz GB. · Department of Anesthesiology, Pain Division, Texas Tech University Health Sciences, Center / International Pain Institute, 4430 South Loop 289, Lubbock, Texas 79414, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #16868618 links to  free full text

Abstract: Spinal surgery, particularly spinal fusion surgery, alters the anatomy of the spine and hence, may increase the difficulty of performing an interventional spine procedure. Transforaminal epidural procedures have gained popularity as an alternative to interlaminar epidural steroids in the management of radicular pain syndromes. Patients with failed back surgery syndrome are often excluded or represent a minor subset in many clinical studies evaluating the efficacy of transforaminal procedures. When included, however, patients with FBSS have typically undergone laminectomies or microdiscectomies: these procedures are less likely to violate the foraminal space in the spine compared to fusion surgery. We describe the specific details of a transforaminal approach to the epidural space/spinal nerve in a patient with a posterolateral and posterior interbody fusion.

Sehgal N, Shah RV, McKenzie-Brown AM, Everett CR. · UW Interventional Pain Program, University of Wisconsin Medical School, Dept, of Orthopedics and Rehabillitation, 600 Highland Avenue, #2424, Madison, WI 53792, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #16850075 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Chronic refractory spinal pain poses a peculiar diagnostic challenge because of multiple putative pain sources, overlapping clinical features, and nonspecific radiologic findings. Diagnostic injection techniques are employed to isolate the source(s) of pain. Facet or zygapophysial joint pain is an example of spinal pain diagnosed by local anesthetic injections of the facet joint or its nerve supply. Diagnostic facet joint injections are expected to meet the cardinal features of a diagnostic test (i.e., accuracy, safety and reproducibility). Accuracy must be compared with a "gold" or criterion standard that can confirm presence or absence of a disease. There is, however, no available gold standard, such as biopsy, to measure presence or absence of pain. Hence, there is a degree of uncertainty concerning the accuracy of diagnostic facet joint injections. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate accuracy, safety and reproducibility of facet or zygapophysial joint injections in diagnosing chronic spinal pain of facet joint origin. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature for clinical studies on efficacy and utility of facet joint/nerve injections in diagnosing spinal pain from facet joints. METHODS: Relevant literature on diagnostic facet injections was identified through database searches. Excluded were abstracts, reviews, book chapters, case reports and studies based on single blocks or blocks without radiologic control. Prospective studies with placebo control, or controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks, were given priority over retrospective studies. Each study was graded using AHRQ and QUADAS criteria. The level of evidence was classified as conclusive, strong, moderate, limited, or inconclusive. RESULTS: Available literature pointed to strong evidence for controlled comparative local anesthetic facet joint medial branch blocks in the diagnosis of neck and low back pain. There was moderate evidence in the diagnosis of pain arising from thoracic facet joints. CONCLUSION: The evidence obtained from literature review suggests that controlled comparative local anesthetic blocks of facet joint nerves (medial branch or dorsal ramus) are reproducible, reasonably accurate, and safe. The sensitivity, specificity, false-positive rates, and predictive values of these diagnostic tests for neck and low back pain have been validated and reproduced in multiple studies.

McKenzie-Brown AM, Shah RV, Sehgal N, Everett CR. · Division of Pain Medicine Emory Department of Anesthesiology, Emory Center for Pain Medicine, 550 Peachtree Street, NE Atlanta GA 30308, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #16850049 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The sacroiliac joint is an accepted source of low back pain with or without associated lower extremity symptoms. The diagnosis and management of sacroiliac joint pain and the role of interventional techniques have been controversial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical usefulness of sacroiliac joint interventions in the diagnosis and management of sacroiliac joint pain. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review using the criteria as outlined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Cochrane Review Group Criteria, and QUADAS criteria for diagnostic studies. METHODS: The databases of EMBASE and MEDLINE (1966 to November 2004), and Cochrane Review were searched. The searches included systematic reviews, narrative reviews, prospective and retrospective studies, and cross-references from articles reviewed. The search strategy included sacroiliac joint pain and dysfunction, sacroiliac joint injections, interventions, and radiofrequency. RESULTS: The results of this systematic evaluation showed that for diagnostic purposes, there is moderate evidence showing the accuracy of comparative, controlled local anesthetic blocks. Prevalence of sacroiliac joint pain was demonstrated to be 10% to 19% by a double block paradigm. The false-positive rate of single, uncontrolled, sacroiliac joint injections was reported as 20%.For therapeutic purposes intraarticular sacroiliac joint injections with steroid and radiofrequency neurotomy were evaluated. Based on this review, there was moderate evidence for short-term and limited evidence for long-term relief with intraarticular sacroiliac joint injections. Evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy in managing sacroiliac joint pain was limited or inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for the specificity and validity of diagnostic sacroiliac joint injections was moderate.The evidence for therapeutic intraarticular sacroiliac joint injections was limited to moderate. The evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy in managing chronic sacroiliac joint pain was limited.

Boswell MV, Shah RV, Everett CR, Sehgal N, McKenzie Brown AM, Abdi S, Bowman RC, Deer TR, Datta S, Colson JD, Spillane WF, Smith HS, Lucas LF, Burton AW, Chopra P, Staats PS, Wasserman RA, Manchikanti L. · Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospitals of Cleveland Case School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio 44106, USA. · Pain Physician. · Pubmed #16850041 links to  free full text

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The lifetime prevalence of spinal pain has been reported as 54% to 80%, with as many as 60% of patients continuing to have chronic pain five years or longer after the initial episode. Spinal pain is associated with significant economic, societal, and health impact. Available evidence documents a wide degree of variance in the definition and the practice of interventional pain management. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain, with utilization of all types of evidence, applying an evidence-based approach, with broad representation of specialists from academic and clinical practices. DESIGN: A systematic review of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions applied in managing chronic spinal pain by a policy committee. Design consisted of formulation of essentials of guidelines and a series of potential evidence linkages representing conclusions, and statements about relationships between clinical interventions and outcomes. METHODS: The elements of the guideline preparation process included literature searches, literature synthesis, systematic review, consensus evaluation, open forum presentation, formal endorsement by the Board of Directors of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP), and blinded peer review. Methodologic quality evaluation criteria utilized included AHRQ criteria, QUADAS criteria, and Cochrane review criteria. The designation of levels of evidence was from Level I (conclusive), Level II (strong), Level III (moderate), Level IV (limited), to Level V (indeterminate). RESULTS: The accuracy of facet joint nerve blocks was strong in the diagnosis of lumbar and cervical facet joint pain, whereas, it was moderate in the diagnosis of thoracic facet joint pain. The evidence was strong for lumbar discography, whereas, the evidence was limited for cervical and thoracic discography. The evidence was moderate for transforaminal epidural injections or selective nerve root blocks in the preoperative evaluation of patients with negative or inconclusive imaging studies. The evidence was moderate for sacroiliac joint injections in the diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain. The evidence for therapeutic lumbar intraarticular facet injections of local anesthetics and steroids was moderate for short-term improvement and limited for long-term improvement, whereas, it was negative for cervical facet joint injections. The evidence for lumbar and cervical medial branch blocks was moderate. The evidence for medial branch neurotomy was moderate to strong for relief of chronic low back and neck pain. The evidence for caudal epidural steroid injections was strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief in managing chronic low back and radicular pain, and limited in managing pain of postlumbar laminectomy syndrome. The evidence for interlaminar epidural steroid injections was strong for short-term relief and limited for long-term relief in managing lumbar radiculopathy, whereas, for cervical radiculopathy the evidence was moderate. The evidence for transforaminal epidural steroid injections was strong for short-term and moderate for long-term improvement in managing lumbar nerve root pain, whereas, it was moderate for cervical nerve root pain and limited for lumbar post laminectomy syndrome and spinal stenosis. The evidence for percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis was strong. For spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis, the evidence was strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. For sacroiliac intraarticular injections, the evidence was moderate for short-term relief and limited for long-term relief. The evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy for sacroiliac joint pain was indeterminate. The evidence for intradiscal electrothermal therapy was strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief in managing chronic discogenic low back pain, whereas, for nucleoplasty, the evidence was limited. The evidence for spinal cord stimulation in failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome was strong for short-term relief and moderate for long-term relief. The evidence for implantable intrathecal infusion systems was moderate to strong. CONCLUSION: These guidelines included the evaluation of evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in managing chronic spinal pain and recommendations for managing spinal pain. However, these guidelines do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. These guidelines do not represent "a standard of care".

Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Shah RV, Nanieva R, Pfeiffer F, Fenk-Mayer A, Kershaw T, Husted DS. · St. Elizabeth Klinikum, Spine Center, Straubing, Germany. · Spine (Phila Pa 1976). · Pubmed #16205353 No free full text.

Abstract: STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal minimum 2-year follow-up. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of the Prodisc implant in patients with disabling single-level discogenic low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The treatment of debilitating discogenic LBP has been controversial and varied. To date, a longitudinal prospective study of the treatment of single-level incapacitating discogenic LBP using the Prodisc total disc arthroplasty technique has not been described. METHODS: A prospective analysis was performed on 118 patients treated with single-level lumbar Prodisc total disc arthroplasty. Patients 18 to 60 years of age with disabling and recalcitrant discogenic LBP with or without radicular pain secondary to single-level discogenic LBP from L3 to S1 were included. Patients were assessed before surgery, and outcome measurements were after surgery administered at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients (88%) fulfilled all follow-up criteria. The median age of all patients was 47 years (range, 36-60 years). Statistical improvements in VAS, Oswestry, and patient satisfaction scores occurred 3 months postoperatively. These improvements were maintained at the 24-month follow-up. Radicular pain also decreased significantly. Full-time and part-time work rates increased from 10% to 35% and 3% to 24%, respectively. No additional fusion surgeries were necessary either at the affected or unaffected levels. Radiographic analysis revealed an affected disc height increase from 4 mm to 13 mm (P < 0.001) and an affected disc motion from 3 degrees to 7 degrees (P < 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Single-level Prodisc lumbar total disc arthroplasty is a safe and efficacious treatment method for debilitating lumbar discogenic LBP. Significant improvements in patient satisfaction and disability scores occurred after surgery by 3 months and were maintained at the 2-year follow-up. No device-related complications occurred. Patients with severe to moderate disc height loss as well as those with symptomatic posterior anular defects with minimal disc height loss achieve functional gains and significant pain relief. Careful and appropriate patient selection is essential in ensuring optimal surgical outcomes.

Bertagnoli R, Yue JJ, Shah RV, Nanieva R, Pfeiffer F, Fenk-Mayer A, Kershaw T, Husted DS. · St. Elizabeth Klinikum, Spine Center, Straubing, Germany. · Spine (Phila Pa 1976). · Pubmed #16205346 No free full text.

Abstract: STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal minimum 2-year follow-up. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of the Prodisc implant in patients with disabling multilevel discogenic low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Few, if any, alternatives have been proposed to treat recalcitrant and debilitating multilevel lumbar discogenic low back pain. To date, a prospective study specifically examining the use of multilevel Prodisc total disc arthroplasty has not been described. METHODS: A prospective analysis was performed on 25 patients (63 prostheses) treated with multilevel lumbar ProDisc total disc arthroplasty. Minimum follow-up was 2 years. Patients 18 to 60 years of age with disabling discogenic low back pain and minimal radicular pain secondary to multiple level lumbar spondylosis from L1 to S1 were included. Preoperative and postoperative disability and pain scores were measured using Oswestry and visual analog scores. Preoperative and postoperative neurologic, radiographic, and pain medication assessments were also performed at similar postoperative intervals. RESULTS: A total of 29 patients (72 prostheses) were enrolled in the prospective analysis. Twenty-five patients (63 prostheses) fulfilled all follow-up criteria and are included for final analysis. Fifteen bisegmental and 10 trisegmental level cases were performed. Visual analog pain, Oswestry, and patient satisfaction scores were significantly reduced at the 3-month as well as at 48-month follow-up. Radiographic analysis revealed an affected disc height increases from 5 mm to 12 mm (P < 0.05) and affected disc motions from 3 degrees to 7 degrees (P < 0.05). No change in adjacent level disc heights was seen. Complications included a single case of subsidence of the inferior endplate of the L4-L5 segment in a bisegmental L4-L5/L5-S1 case. We also report a delayed case of anterior extrusion of a polyethylene component in a patient who had sustained a fall of a bicycle. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary data on multisegmental ProDisc lumbar total disc arthroplasty appear to be a safe and efficacious treatment method for debilitating lumbar spondylosis without significant facet arthropathy. In our select (non-Workers Compensation and/or medical legal) cohort of patients, we demonstrate a patient satisfaction rate of 93%. Careful and appropriate patient selection is essential in ensuring optimal surgical outcomes.

Shah RV, Lutz GE, Lee J, Doty SB, Rodeo S. · Physiatry Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY 10021, USA. · Arch Phys Med Rehabil. · Pubmed #11552196 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To characterize descriptively the histologic and temperature effects of intradiskal electrothermal annuloplasty on human cadaveric lumbar disks. DESIGN: In vitro histologic study. SETTING: Hospital-based soft-tissue research laboratory. CADAVERS: Six human cadaveric lumbar disks, from 5 cadavers aged 39 to 79 who died from nonspine-related causes. INTERVENTIONS: Intradiskal electrothermal therapy (IDET) by using a standard high-temperature heating protocol with the temperature of the probe gradually increased from 65 degrees C to 90 degrees C over 16.5 minutes. Disks were stained and examined by light microscopy and electron microscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Temperatures in outer annulus, gross macroscopic changes, and histologic damage. RESULTS: Gross inspection showed a small circumferential area of tissue alteration localized to the posterior annulus but not extending to the endplates. Light microscopy of the posterior aspect of the lumbar disks showed denaturation, shrinkage, and coalescence of annular collagen; the anterior portions, which served as internal controls, showed no evidence of damage. The endplates were structurally preserved and showed no evidence of damage. Electron microscopy showed extensive collagen disorganization, decreased quantity of collagen, collagen fibril shrinkage, and chondrocyte damage when compared with a control portion. The temperature curves showed parallel changes in temperature at the level of the probe and at the posterior portion of the disk. CONCLUSIONS: IDET raises temperatures sufficiently to induce collagen denaturation and coalescence. These histologic changes may play a substantial role in the clinical efficacy of IDET.