S J Atlas1, R B Keller, Y Chang, R A Deyo, D E Singer. 1. General Medicine Division and the Medical Practices Evaluation Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston 02114, USA. satlas@partners.org
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To assess 5-year outcomes for patients with sciatica caused by a lumbar disc herniation treated surgically or nonsurgically. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is limited knowledge about long-term treatment outcomes of sciatica caused by a lumbar disc herniation, particularly the relative benefits of surgical and conservative therapy in contemporary clinical practice. METHODS: Eligible, consenting patients recruited from the practices of orthopedic surgeons, neurosurgeons, and occupational medicine physicians throughout Maine had baseline interviews with mailed follow-up questionnaires at 3, 6, and 12 months and annually thereafter. Clinical data were obtained at baseline from a physician questionnaire. Outcomes included patient-reported symptoms of leg and back pain, functional status, satisfaction, and employment and compensation status. RESULTS: Of 507 patients initially enrolled, 5-year outcomes were available for 402 (79.3%) patients: 220 (80%) treated surgically and 182 (78.4%) treated nonsurgically. Surgically treated patients had worse baseline symptoms and functional status than those initially treated nonsurgically. By 5 years 19% of surgical patients had undergone at least one additional lumbar spine operation, and 16% of nonsurgical patients had opted for at least one lumbar spine operation. Overall, patients treated initially with surgery reported better outcomes. At the 5-year follow-up, 70% of patients initially treated surgically reported improvement in their predominant symptom (back or leg pain) versus 56% of those initially treated nonsurgically (P < 0.001). Similarly, a larger proportion of surgical patients reported satisfaction with their current status (63% vs. 46%, P < 0.001). These differences persisted after adjustment for other determinants of outcome. The relative advantage of surgery was greatest early in follow-up and narrowed over 5 years. There was no difference in the proportion of patients receiving disability compensation at the 5-year follow-up. The least symptomatic patients at baseline did well regardless of initial treatment, although function improved more in the surgical group. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with moderate or severe sciatica, surgical treatment was associated with greater improvement than nonsurgical treatment at 5 years. However, patients treated surgically were as likely to be receiving disability compensation, and the relative benefit of surgery decreased over time.
STUDY DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: To assess 5-year outcomes for patients with sciatica caused by a lumbar disc herniation treated surgically or nonsurgically. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is limited knowledge about long-term treatment outcomes of sciatica caused by a lumbar disc herniation, particularly the relative benefits of surgical and conservative therapy in contemporary clinical practice. METHODS: Eligible, consenting patients recruited from the practices of orthopedic surgeons, neurosurgeons, and occupational medicine physicians throughout Maine had baseline interviews with mailed follow-up questionnaires at 3, 6, and 12 months and annually thereafter. Clinical data were obtained at baseline from a physician questionnaire. Outcomes included patient-reported symptoms of leg and back pain, functional status, satisfaction, and employment and compensation status. RESULTS: Of 507 patients initially enrolled, 5-year outcomes were available for 402 (79.3%) patients: 220 (80%) treated surgically and 182 (78.4%) treated nonsurgically. Surgically treated patients had worse baseline symptoms and functional status than those initially treated nonsurgically. By 5 years 19% of surgical patients had undergone at least one additional lumbar spine operation, and 16% of nonsurgical patients had opted for at least one lumbar spine operation. Overall, patients treated initially with surgery reported better outcomes. At the 5-year follow-up, 70% of patients initially treated surgically reported improvement in their predominant symptom (back or leg pain) versus 56% of those initially treated nonsurgically (P < 0.001). Similarly, a larger proportion of surgical patients reported satisfaction with their current status (63% vs. 46%, P < 0.001). These differences persisted after adjustment for other determinants of outcome. The relative advantage of surgery was greatest early in follow-up and narrowed over 5 years. There was no difference in the proportion of patients receiving disability compensation at the 5-year follow-up. The least symptomatic patients at baseline did well regardless of initial treatment, although function improved more in the surgical group. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with moderate or severe sciatica, surgical treatment was associated with greater improvement than nonsurgical treatment at 5 years. However, patients treated surgically were as likely to be receiving disability compensation, and the relative benefit of surgery decreased over time.
Authors: Michael Costigan; Inna Belfer; Robert S Griffin; Feng Dai; Lee B Barrett; Giovanni Coppola; Tianxia Wu; Carly Kiselycznyk; Minakshi Poddar; Yan Lu; Luda Diatchenko; Shad Smith; Enrique J Cobos; Dmitri Zaykin; Andrew Allchorne; Edith Gershon; Jessica Livneh; Pei-Hong Shen; Lone Nikolajsen; Jaro Karppinen; Minna Männikkö; Anthi Kelempisioti; David Goldman; William Maixner; Daniel H Geschwind; Mitchell B Max; Ze'ev Seltzer; Clifford J Woolf Journal: Brain Date: 2010-08-18 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: G Gregory Neely; Andreas Hess; Michael Costigan; Alex C Keene; Spyros Goulas; Michiel Langeslag; Robert S Griffin; Inna Belfer; Feng Dai; Shad B Smith; Luda Diatchenko; Vaijayanti Gupta; Cui-Ping Xia; Sabina Amann; Silke Kreitz; Cornelia Heindl-Erdmann; Susanne Wolz; Cindy V Ly; Suchir Arora; Rinku Sarangi; Debasis Dan; Maria Novatchkova; Mark Rosenzweig; Dustin G Gibson; Darwin Truong; Daniel Schramek; Tamara Zoranovic; Shane J F Cronin; Belinda Angjeli; Kay Brune; Georg Dietzl; William Maixner; Arabella Meixner; Winston Thomas; J Andrew Pospisilik; Mattias Alenius; Michaela Kress; Sai Subramaniam; Paul A Garrity; Hugo J Bellen; Clifford J Woolf; Josef M Penninger Journal: Cell Date: 2010-11-12 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Svenja Illien-Jünger; Young Lu; Devina Purmessur; Jillian E Mayer; Benjamin A Walter; Peter J Roughley; Sheeraz A Qureshi; Andrew C Hecht; James C Iatridis Journal: Spine J Date: 2014-04-24 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Justin Cummins; Jon D Lurie; Tor D Tosteson; Brett Hanscom; William A Abdu; Nancy J O Birkmeyer; Harry Herkowitz; James Weinstein Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2006-04-01 Impact factor: 3.468