Literature DB >> 8783418

The lack of prognostic value of computerized tomography imaging examinations in patients with chronic non-progressive back pain.

O Elkayam1, E Avrahami, M Yaron.   

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic value of computerized tomography (CT) in the conservative treatment of patients with chronic non-progressive back pain. The study included 73 patients with chronic non-progressive back pain in the lumbar region of at least 3-months duration who were referred to the back clinic because of pain that was non-responsive to physical therapy and analgesics. All patients underwent clinical examination and spinal CT scan. The clinical examination and imaging procedures were followed by a 4-week rehabilitation programme based on a multidisciplinary approach that included a rheumatologist, a pain specialist, back school. "Alexander" technique, acupuncture, manipulation and psychological intervention. Patients were evaluated by the same physician at the end of the 4-week programme and after 6 months follow-up using parameters of pain rating, pain frequency and analgesic drug consumption. CT examinations were evaluated separately by two radiologists. The patients were divided into three groups according to the CT findings: group 1-normal imaging: 26 patients: group 2 -spinal stenosis: 20 patients; group 3 -posterior bulging, protrusion, extrusion or sequestration of disc: 27 patients. The clinical improvement was almost the same (approximately 50%) in the three different groups. In spite of the small number of cases, the results were statistically significant. We concluded that, in contrast to the importance of modern spinal-imaging procedures before the performance of surgery, the role of these procedures in the prognosis of the conservative treatment of patients with chronic non-progressive back pain does not seem to be important.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8783418     DOI: 10.1007/bf01419950

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rheumatol Int        ISSN: 0172-8172            Impact factor:   2.631


  6 in total

Review 1.  What can the history and physical examination tell us about low back pain?

Authors:  R A Deyo; J Rainville; D L Kent
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1992-08-12       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Descriptive epidemiology of low-back pain and its related medical care in the United States.

Authors:  R A Deyo; Y J Tsui-Wu
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Anterior interbody lumbar spine fusion. Analysis of Mayo Clinic series.

Authors:  R N Stauffer; M B Coventry
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1972-06       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Synopsis: workshop on idiopathic low-back pain.

Authors:  A A White; S L Gordon
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1982 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Use of lumbar spine films. Statistical evaluation at a university teaching hospital.

Authors:  J G Scavone; R F Latshaw; G V Rohrer
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1981-09-04       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  A study of computer-assisted tomography. I. The incidence of positive CAT scans in an asymptomatic group of patients.

Authors:  S W Wiesel; N Tsourmas; H L Feffer; C M Citrin; N Patronas
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 3.468

  6 in total
  1 in total

1.  Prognostic factors of sciatica in the Canon of Avicenna.

Authors:  Bagher Minaee; Alireza Abbassian; Alireza Nikbakht Nasrabadi; Abdorrahman Rostamian
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 2.631

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.