Lora L Brown1. 1. Coastal Orthopedics and Sports Medicine, Bradenton, FL, USA. painmedicinedoctor@hotmail.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are commonly used to treat low back pain, including symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Reports on LSS treatment with ESIs have not differentiated between neurogenic claudication, which is believed to result from nerve root compression, and lumbar radicular pain, thought to be caused by inflammation. While there is overlap between these groups, the clinical relevance of ESI treatment cannot be generalized between these 2 distinct diseases with completely different pathophysiological causes. METHODS: This was a double-blind, randomized, prospective study of ESI vs. the mild procedure in patients with symptomatic LSS, conducted at a single pain management center. Patient reported outcome measures included Visual Analog Scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) patient satisfaction. RESULTS:Thirty-eight patients were randomized into 2 treatment groups, 21 in mild and 17 in ESI. At 6- and 12-week follow-up, patients treated with mild reported significantly greater pain decrease over time (P < 0.0001), and significantly greater functional mobility improvement over time (P < 0.0018) than ESI patients. At week 6, mild ZCQ patient satisfaction score of 2.2 indicated a higher level of satisfaction than for ESI with a score of 2.8. In addition, 12-week ZCQ satisfaction score was 1.8, demonstrating sustained near-term satisfaction in the mild group. No major mild or ESI device or procedure-related complications were reported. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that in LSS patients suffering with neurogenic claudication, mild provides statistically significantly better pain reduction and improved functional mobility vs. treatment with ESI.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are commonly used to treat low back pain, including symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Reports on LSS treatment with ESIs have not differentiated between neurogenic claudication, which is believed to result from nerve root compression, and lumbar radicular pain, thought to be caused by inflammation. While there is overlap between these groups, the clinical relevance of ESI treatment cannot be generalized between these 2 distinct diseases with completely different pathophysiological causes. METHODS: This was a double-blind, randomized, prospective study of ESI vs. the mild procedure in patients with symptomatic LSS, conducted at a single pain management center. Patient reported outcome measures included Visual Analog Scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were randomized into 2 treatment groups, 21 in mild and 17 in ESI. At 6- and 12-week follow-up, patients treated with mild reported significantly greater pain decrease over time (P < 0.0001), and significantly greater functional mobility improvement over time (P < 0.0018) than ESI patients. At week 6, mild ZCQpatient satisfaction score of 2.2 indicated a higher level of satisfaction than for ESI with a score of 2.8. In addition, 12-week ZCQ satisfaction score was 1.8, demonstrating sustained near-term satisfaction in the mild group. No major mild or ESI device or procedure-related complications were reported. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that in LSS patients suffering with neurogenic claudication, mild provides statistically significantly better pain reduction and improved functional mobility vs. treatment with ESI.
Authors: Nagy A Mekhail; Shrif J Costandi; Sherif Armanyous; Ricardo Vallejo; Lawrence R Poree; Lora L Brown; Stanley Golovac; Timothy R Deer Journal: Med Devices (Auckl) Date: 2020-06-04
Authors: Massimiliano Carassiti; Giuseppe Pascarella; Alessandro Strumia; Fabrizio Russo; Giuseppe Francesco Papalia; Rita Cataldo; Francesca Gargano; Fabio Costa; Michelangelo Pierri; Francesca De Tommasi; Carlo Massaroni; Emiliano Schena; Felice Eugenio Agrò Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-26 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Carlo Ammendolia; Corey Hofkirchner; Joshua Plener; André Bussières; Michael J Schneider; James J Young; Andrea D Furlan; Kent Stuber; Aksa Ahmed; Carol Cancelliere; Aleisha Adeboyejo; Joseph Ornelas Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-01-19 Impact factor: 2.692