Literature DB >> 11725230

2001 Volvo Award Winner in Clinical Studies: Lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain: a multicenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group.

P Fritzell1, O Hägg, P Wessberg, A Nordwall.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A randomized controlled multicenter study with a 2-year follow-up by an independent observer.
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether fusion of the lower lumbar spine could reduce pain and diminish disability more effectively when compared with nonsurgical treatment in patients with severe chronic low back pain (CLBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The reported results after fusion surgery on patients with CLBP vary considerably, and the evidence of treatment efficacy is weak in the absence of randomized controlled studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 294 patients referred to 19 spinal centers from 1992 through 1998 were randomized blindly into four treatment groups. Patients aged 25-65 years with CLBP for at least 2 years and with radiologic evidence of disc degeneration at L4-L5, L5-S1, or both were eligible to participate in the study. The surgical group (n=222) included three different fusion techniques, not analyzed separately in this study. Patients in the nonsurgical group (n=72) were treated with different kinds of physical therapy. The surgical group comprised 49.5% men, and the mean age was 43 years. The corresponding figures for the nonsurgical group were 48.6% and 44 years. The patients had suffered from low back pain for a mean of 7.8 and 8.5 years and been on sick leave due to back pain for a mean of 3.2 and 2.9 years, respectively. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used to measure pain. The Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire, the Million Score and the General Function Score (GFS) were used to measure disability. The Zung Depression Scale was used to measure depressive symptoms. The overall result was assessed by the patient and by an independent observer. Records from the Swedish Social Insurance were used to evaluate work disability. Patients who changed groups were included in the analyses of significance according to the intention-to-treat principle.
RESULTS: At the 2-year follow-up 289 of 294 (98%) patients, including 25 who had changed groups, were examined. Back pain was reduced in the surgical group by 33% (64 to 43), compared with 7% (63 to 58) in the nonsurgical group (P=0.0002). Pain improved most during the first 6 months and then gradually deteriorated. Disability according to Oswestry was reduced by 25% (47 to 36) compared with 6% (48 to 46) among nonsurgical patients (P=0.015), according to Million by 28% (64 to 46) compared with 8% (66 to 60) (P=0.004), and accordingtoGFS by 31% (49 to 34) compared with 4% (48 to 46) (P=0.005). The depressive symptoms, according to Zung, were reduced by 20% (39 to 31) in the surgical group compared with 7% (39 to 36) in the nonsurgical group (P=0.123). In the surgical group 63% (122/195) rated themselves as "much better" or "better" compared with 29% (18/62) in the nonsurgical group (P<0.0001). The "net back to work rate" was significantly in favor of surgical treatment, or 36% vs. 13% (P=0.002). The early complication rate in the surgical group was 17%.
CONCLUSION: Lumbar fusion in a well-informed and selected group of patients with severe CLBP can diminish pain and decrease disability more efficiently than commonly used nonsurgical treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11725230     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200112010-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  197 in total

1.  Predicting clinical outcome and length of sick leave after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Sweden: a multi-register evaluation.

Authors:  Hanna Iderberg; Carl Willers; Fredrik Borgström; Rune Hedlund; Olle Hägg; Hans Möller; Ewald Ornstein; Bengt Sandén; Holger Stalberg; Hans Torevall-Larsson; Tycho Tullberg; Peter Fritzell
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Diagnostic discography: what is the clinical utility?

Authors:  David A Provenzano
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2012-02

Review 3.  Cervical and lumbar spinal arthroplasty: clinical review.

Authors:  T D Uschold; D Fusco; R Germain; L M Tumialan; S W Chang
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2011-10-27       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Biomechanical evaluation of a posterior non-fusion instrumentation of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Werner Schmoelz; Stefanie Erhart; Stefan Unger; Alexander C Disch
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  No difference in 9-year outcome in CLBP patients randomized to lumbar fusion versus cognitive intervention and exercises.

Authors:  Anne Froholdt; Olav Reikeraas; Inger Holm; Anne Keller; Jens Ivar Brox
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  New model to explain the EQ-5D VAS in patients who have undergone spinal fusion.

Authors:  Jorge Cortés; Juan F Blanco; David Pescador; Nuria Asensio; Claudio Castro; Juan Moncada Herrera
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-08-09       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  [Long-term results, status of studies and differential indication regarding the DIAM implant].

Authors:  F A Krappel
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  What comprises a good outcome in spinal surgery? A preliminary survey among spine surgeons of the SSE and European spine patients.

Authors:  M Haefeli; A Elfering; M Aebi; B J C Freeman; P Fritzell; J Guimaraes Consciencia; C Lamartina; M Mayer; T Lund; N Boos
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-11-08       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Injection of human umbilical tissue-derived cells into the nucleus pulposus alters the course of intervertebral disc degeneration in vivo.

Authors:  Steven K Leckie; Gwendolyn A Sowa; Bernard P Bechara; Robert A Hartman; Joao Paulo Coelho; William T Witt; Qing D Dong; Brent W Bowman; Kevin M Bell; Nam V Vo; Brian C Kramer; James D Kang
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 4.166

10.  Results after anterior-posterior lumbar spinal fusion: 2-5 years follow-up.

Authors:  Thomas Niemeyer; Albert Schulze Bövingloh; Henry Halm; Ulf Liljenqvist
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2004-07-27       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.