Manchikanti Laxmaiah, Derby Richard, Benyamin Ramsin M, Helm Standiford, Hirsch Joshua A
Pain Management Center of Paducah, Paducah, KY, USA.
Pain Physician. 2009 May-Jun;12(3):561-72.
Lumbar disc prolapse, protrusion, or extrusion account for less than 5% of all low back problems, but are the most common causes of nerve root pain and surgical interventions. The primary rationale for any form of surgery for disc prolapse is to relieve nerve root irritation or compression due to herniated disc material. The primary modality of treatment continues to be either open or microdiscectomy, but several alternative techniques including nucleoplasty, automated percutaneous discectomy, and laser discectomy have been described. There is a paucity of evidence for all decompression techniques, specifically alternative techniques including nucleoplasty.
A systematic review of the literature.
To determine the effectiveness of mechanical lumbar disc decompression with nucleoplasty.
A comprehensive evaluation of the literature relating to mechanical lumbar disc decompression with nucleoplasty was performed. The literature was evaluated according to Cochrane review criteria for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria was utilized for observational studies. The level of evidence was classified as Level I, II, or III with 3 subcategories in Level II based on the quality of evidence developed by the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). A literature search was conducted using only English language literature through PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, systematic reviews, and cross-references from reviews and systematic reviews.
Pain relief was the primary outcome measure. Other outcome measures were functional improvement, improvement of psychological status, opioid intake, and return to work. Short-term effectiveness was defined as one year or less, whereas, long-term effectiveness was defined as greater than one year.
Based on USPSTF criteria the level of evidence for nucleoplasty is Level II-3 in managing predominantly lower extremity pain due to contained disc herniation.
Paucity of literature, both observational and randomized.
This systematic review illustrates Level II-3 evidence for mechanical lumbar percutaneous disc decompression with nucleoplasty in treatment of leg pain. However, there is no evidence available in managing axial low back pain.
腰椎间盘脱垂、突出或脱出在所有下背部问题中占比不到5%,但却是神经根性疼痛和手术干预的最常见原因。椎间盘脱垂任何形式手术的主要理论依据是缓解因椎间盘材料突出导致的神经根刺激或压迫。治疗的主要方式仍然是开放手术或显微椎间盘切除术,但也描述了几种替代技术,包括髓核成形术、自动经皮椎间盘切除术和激光椎间盘切除术。所有减压技术,特别是包括髓核成形术在内的替代技术,证据都很少。
对文献进行系统综述。
确定髓核成形术治疗腰椎间盘减压的有效性。
对与髓核成形术治疗腰椎间盘减压相关的文献进行全面评估。根据Cochrane随机对照试验(RCT)综述标准对文献进行评估,并采用医疗保健研究与质量机构(AHRQ)标准对观察性研究进行评估。证据水平根据美国预防服务工作组(USPSTF)制定的证据质量分为I级、II级或III级,II级有3个亚类。仅通过PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆、系统综述以及综述和系统综述的交叉引用,使用英语文献进行文献检索。
疼痛缓解是主要结果指标。其他结果指标包括功能改善、心理状态改善、阿片类药物摄入量和重返工作岗位。短期有效性定义为一年或更短时间,而长期有效性定义为超过一年。
根据USPSTF标准,髓核成形术治疗因包容性椎间盘突出导致的主要下肢疼痛的证据水平为II - 3级。
观察性和随机性文献都很少。
本系统综述表明,髓核成形术治疗腿部疼痛的机械性经皮腰椎间盘减压有II - 3级证据。然而,在治疗轴性下腰痛方面尚无可用证据。