Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Symptoms and signs possibly indicating segmental, discogenic pain: A fusion study with 18 years of follow-up
Clinic of Spinal Surgery, Strängnäs, Sweden.
Department of Neurology, Ullevål Hospital, Norway.
Clinic of Spinal Surgery, Strängnäs, Sweden.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Statistics.
2017 (English)In: Scandinavian Journal of Pain, ISSN 1877-8860, E-ISSN 1877-8879, Vol. 16, p. 213-220Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND:

Only two out of the five existing randomized studies have reported better results from fusion surgery for chronic low back pain (CLBP) compared to conservative treatment. In these studies the back symptoms of the patients were described simply as "chronic low back pain". One possible reason for the modest results of surgery is the lack of a description of specified symptoms that might be related to a painful segment/disc, and patient selection may therefore be more or less a matter of chance. Previous prospective studies including facet joint injections and discography and eventually MRI have failed to identify patients with a painful segment/disc that will benefit from fusion surgery.

PURPOSE:

Our purpose was to analyse in detail the pre-operative symptoms and signs presented by patients who showed substantial relief from their back pain following spinal fusion surgery with the aim of possibly finding a pain pattern indicating segmental, discogenic pain.

METHODS:

We analysed 40 consecutive patients, mean age 41 years, with a history of disabling low back pain for a mean of 7.7 years. Before surgery the patients completed a detailed questionnaire concerning various aspects of their back pain, and findings at clinical examination were thoroughly noted. Monosegmental posterior lumbar interbody fusion without internal fixation was performed using microsurgical technique. Outcome was assessed at 1, 2 and 4 years after surgery and finally at 18 years, using self-reporting measures and assessment by an independent examiner. Assessment at 18 years applied the Balanced Inventory for Spinal Disorders Questionnaire and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire.

RESULTS:

According to the independent observer's assessment at two years 27 of the 40 patients were much improved. Analysis of the pre-operative depiction of the back symptoms of this group revealed a rather uniform pattern, the most important being: dominating back pain originating in the midline of the spine, with a dull, aching character and stabbing pain in the same area provoked by sudden movements. Most patients in this group also had diffuse pain radiation of various extension down one or both legs and often bladder dysfunction with frequency. At clinical examination, localized interspinal tenderness was observed within the spinal area in question and the patient's back pain was provoked by pressure in that area and by tapping a neighbouring spinous process. At 18 years after surgery 19 patients assessed themselves as much improved. At that time 5 of them had pension due to age, 7 early pension, one worked full time and six patients part time. Eleven patients were re-operated due to defect bony healing.

CONCLUSIONS:

The results may suggest that the use of a detailed symptom analysis and clinical examination may make it possible to select a subgroup of patients within the CLBP group likely to have better outcome following fusion surgery.

IMPLICATIONS:

The next step would be to execute prospective studies and if our findings concerning back pain details and signs among CLPB patients can be confirmed this can provide for more accurate selection of patients suitable for fusion surgery.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Walter de Gruyter, 2017. Vol. 16, p. 213-220
National Category
Surgery
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-338244DOI: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2016.10.007ISI: 000419850300039PubMedID: 28850405OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-338244DiVA, id: diva2:1171850
Available from: 2018-01-08 Created: 2018-01-08 Last updated: 2018-03-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(726 kB)3 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 726 kBChecksum SHA-512
aad1e17de77653787b2dc03d70d18737a05fa934768b9edd46c94844a78f462b66396abf447fc58bc09ce954e2a50adbfd08ea0635b3061aa159be232aede0e2
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Taube, Adam
By organisation
Department of Statistics
In the same journal
Scandinavian Journal of Pain
Surgery

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 3 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 4 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf