Andersen Thomas, Christensen Finn B, Hansen Ebbe S, Bünger Cody
Spine Unit, Department of Orthopaedics E, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Eur Spine J. 2003 Aug;12(4):393-9. doi: 10.1007/s00586-003-0547-6. Epub 2003 May 20.
Pain drawings have been used in spine surgery for diagnostic use and psychological evaluation of fusion candidates; they have rarely been used to evaluate pain status after spinal fusion. This study is a 5-year follow-up on a randomised clinical trial assigning patients to posterolateral spinal fusion with or without pedicle screw instrumentation. Patients were mailed a pain drawing and questionnaires including questions regarding work, social status, smoking status, the Dallas Pain Questionnaire (DPQ), and the Low Back Pain Rating Scale (LBPRS). Pain drawings were scored using a visual inspection method and a surface-based point scoring and evaluated for the presence of donor site pain. Pain drawings from 109 patients (87% of the initially included patients), 56 men and 53 women, mean age at follow-up 51 years, were analysed. Fifty-three patients had undergone an instrumented fusion and 56 a non-instrumented fusion. Some presence of low back pain was marked by 79% and leg pain by 69%. Sixty-two percent of the pain drawings were classified as "organic" and 38% as "non-organic". There was no difference between the instrumented and the uninstrumented group. DPQ and LBPRS scores were higher in the non-organic group ( P=0.007). Using the point scoring, no difference between the instrumented and the uninstrumented group was seen. The results of the point scoring were found to correlate with the DPQ and LBPRS scores ( P=0.001). Working patients (39%) had significantly better scores than the rest. Ten percent of the patients had donor site pain. Twenty percent of spinal fusion patients are totally pain free at 5-year follow-up. Ten percent still experience donor site pain. In general, instrumentation does not affect the amount and localisation of pain 5 years after lumbar spinal fusion surgery. The pain drawing seems to be a valuable tool when following spinal fusion patients, but its use as prognostic marker in connection with fusion surgery needs further investigation.
疼痛图已被用于脊柱手术中,以辅助诊断和对融合手术候选人进行心理评估;但很少用于评估脊柱融合术后的疼痛状况。本研究是一项为期5年的随访研究,该随访基于一项随机临床试验,该试验将患者分为接受或不接受椎弓根螺钉内固定的后外侧脊柱融合术组。研究人员给患者邮寄了疼痛图和问卷,问卷包括有关工作、社会状况、吸烟状况、达拉斯疼痛问卷(DPQ)和下腰痛评分量表(LBPRS)的问题。疼痛图采用视觉检查法和基于表面的点数评分法进行评分,并评估供体部位疼痛的存在情况。对109例患者(占最初纳入患者的87%)的疼痛图进行了分析,其中男性56例,女性53例,随访时平均年龄51岁。53例患者接受了内固定融合术,56例接受了非内固定融合术。79%的患者有下腰痛,69%的患者有腿痛。62%的疼痛图被归类为“器质性”,38%为“非器质性”。内固定组和非内固定组之间没有差异。非器质性组的DPQ和LBPRS评分更高(P=0.007)。使用点数评分法,未发现内固定组和非内固定组之间存在差异。发现点数评分结果与DPQ和LBPRS评分相关(P=0.001)。在职患者(39%)的评分明显高于其他患者。10%的患者有供体部位疼痛。20%的脊柱融合患者在5年随访时完全无痛。10%的患者仍有供体部位疼痛。一般来说,内固定不影响腰椎融合术后5年疼痛的程度和部位。疼痛图似乎是随访脊柱融合患者时的一个有价值的工具,但其作为融合手术预后标志物的用途需要进一步研究。