Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Room R-171, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Spine J. 2011 Aug;11(8):756-65. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2011.07.021. Epub 2011 Aug 24.
There is mounting evidence that the currently available techniques for the diagnosis of discogenic low back pain are insufficiently accurate-this may explain some of the variability in outcomes of surgery for this important clinical problem. New diagnostic methods are needed to address this diagnostic issue; improvements here may do as much to improve overall patient outcomes as improvements in surgical treatment methods.
To compare the results of standard pressure-controlled provocative discography (PD) to those of the functional anesthetic discogram (FAD) in a series of patients presenting with chronic low back pain and considering surgical treatment.
Prospective clinical series in an academic spinal surgical practice.
Fifty-two patients presenting with chronic low back pain; mean age 45 years (range, 24-70 years); 28 women, 24 men; and 25% in workman's compensation program.
Oswestry, visual analog scale for back pain, distress and risk assessment method psychometric analysis, demographic data, magnetic resonance imaging scan of lumbar spine. During provocative discogram: pressurization at pain, pain level, and concordancy. During FAD: position or activity used to elicit typical pain, baseline pain level before injection, during injection, at 5, 10, and 20 minutes after the injection, and substance injected.
Standard pressure-controlled PD was performed, followed by (in positive cases or in patients with clinical features and imaging studies felt to be highly suggestive of symptomatic disc degeneration) the FAD test-an assessment of the response to injection of a low dose of local anesthetic into the disc during a position productive of the patient's typical pain.
Discordant results of the two tests were noted in 46% of the patients in the series. Of them, 26% of patients with positive PD had negative findings on the FAD test; 16% had positive findings at a single level only, whereas the provocative discogram had been positive at two or more levels; 4% had new positive findings on the FAD test.
We have presented the results of a new diagnostic technique in 52 patients with chronic low back pain presumed discogenic in origin that was designed to help differentiate between symptomatic and asymptomatic disc degeneration. The findings of the test differed from those of standard pressure-controlled PD in 46% of the cases reported on here. Further studies are needed to demonstrate the clinical utility of the test.
目前用于诊断椎间盘源性腰痛的技术证据不足,这可能解释了手术治疗这一重要临床问题的结果存在差异的部分原因。需要新的诊断方法来解决这个诊断问题;这里的改进可能与手术治疗方法的改进一样,对改善整体患者预后有帮助。
在一系列患有慢性腰痛并考虑手术治疗的患者中,比较标准压力控制激发性椎间盘造影术(PD)与功能性麻醉椎间盘造影术(FAD)的结果。
学术脊柱外科实践中的前瞻性临床系列。
52 例慢性腰痛患者;平均年龄 45 岁(范围,24-70 岁);28 名女性,24 名男性;25%在工人赔偿计划中。
Oswestry 腰痛评分、视觉模拟评分法(VAS)、背部疼痛、不适和风险评估方法心理测量分析、人口统计学数据、腰椎磁共振成像扫描。在激发性椎间盘造影术中:疼痛时的压力、疼痛程度和一致性。在 FAD 中:诱发典型疼痛时使用的位置或活动、注射前的基线疼痛水平、注射期间、注射后 5、10 和 20 分钟、注射的物质。
进行标准压力控制 PD,然后(在阳性病例或具有临床特征和影像学研究高度提示症状性椎间盘退变的患者中)进行 FAD 测试-评估在产生患者典型疼痛的位置将低剂量局部麻醉注入椎间盘时的反应。
该系列中 46%的患者出现两种测试结果不一致。其中,26%的 PD 阳性患者 FAD 测试结果为阴性;16%仅在一个节段呈阳性,而激发性椎间盘造影术在两个或更多节段呈阳性;4%在 FAD 测试中出现新的阳性发现。
我们介绍了一种新的诊断技术在 52 例慢性腰痛患者中的结果,这些患者被认为是椎间盘源性的,旨在帮助区分有症状和无症状的椎间盘退变。这里报告的病例中,46%的病例的测试结果与标准压力控制 PD 不同。需要进一步的研究来证明该测试的临床实用性。