Ter Meulen Bastiaan C, Maas Esther T, Vyas Amrita, van der Vegt Marinus, de Priester Koo, de Boer Michiel R, van Tulder Maurits W, Weinstein Henry C, Ostelo Raymond W J G
Department of Neurology, Zaans Medisch Centrum, Zaandam and Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Health Sciences and the EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 May 25;18(1):215. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1571-8.
Transforaminal epidural injections with steroids (TESI) are used increasingly for patients with sciatica. However there is much debate about their safety and effectiveness. It is important to identify patients that benefit most from TESI and only few trials have yet evaluated the effects in patients with acute sciatica.
We describe a prospective, randomized controlled trial (RCT), with the aim to evaluate the hypothesis that TESI plus Levobupivacaine (TESI-plus) added to oral pain medication is more effective compared to pain medication alone or compared to transforaminal injection with a local anesthetic of short duration among patients with acute sciatica. We will recruit a total of 264 patients with sciatica (<8 weeks) caused by a herniated disc, from two clinical sites. Participants are randomly assigned one of three study groups: 1) oral pain medication (control group), 2) oral pain medication and TESI-plus (intervention group one), 3) oral pain medication and transforaminal epidural injection (TEI) with Levobupivaine and saline solution (intervention group two). Primary outcomes are functional status (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire), pain intensity for both leg and back, (100 mm visual analogous scale (VAS)), and global perceived recovery (GPR, reported on a 7-point Likert scale, dichotomized into 'recovered' and 'not recovered'). The secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life (EQ5D-5 L) and patient satisfaction (7-point Likert scale). We will also collect information on healthcare utilization and costs, to perform an economic evaluation. All outcomes are measured at three and six weeks, three and six months after randomization. We defined a minimal clinically relevant difference between groups as a difference between both intervention groups and the control group of 20 points for pain (100-point VAS), four points for functional status (24-point RDQ) and a 20% difference on dichotomized GPR (recovered versus not recovered).
A clinically relevant outcome in favor of TESI-plus implies that future patients with acute sciatica should be recommended TESI-plus within the first few weeks rather than being treated with pain medication alone in order to relieve pain and improve their functioning. In case of a negative result (no relevant differences in outcome between the three study arms), pain medication will remain the mainstay of treatment in the acute stages of sciatica.
Dutch National trial register: NTR4457 (March, 6th, 2014).
经椎间孔硬膜外注射类固醇(TESI)越来越多地用于坐骨神经痛患者。然而,关于其安全性和有效性存在诸多争议。确定最能从TESI中获益的患者很重要,而仅有少数试验评估了其对急性坐骨神经痛患者的疗效。
我们描述了一项前瞻性随机对照试验(RCT),旨在评估以下假设:对于急性坐骨神经痛患者,在口服止痛药物基础上加用TESI联合左旋布比卡因(TESI-plus)比单纯使用止痛药物或使用短效局麻药进行经椎间孔注射更有效。我们将从两个临床地点招募总共264例因椎间盘突出导致坐骨神经痛(病程<8周)的患者。参与者被随机分配到三个研究组之一:1)口服止痛药物(对照组),2)口服止痛药物加TESI-plus(干预组一),3)口服止痛药物加用左旋布比卡因和盐溶液进行经椎间孔硬膜外注射(TEI)(干预组二)。主要结局指标为功能状态(罗兰-莫里斯残疾问卷)、腿部和背部的疼痛强度(100毫米视觉模拟量表(VAS))以及总体感觉恢复情况(GPR,采用7分李克特量表报告,分为“恢复”和“未恢复”)。次要结局指标为健康相关生活质量(EQ5D-5L)和患者满意度(7分李克特量表)。我们还将收集医疗保健利用和成本方面的信息,以进行经济学评估。所有结局指标在随机分组后的3周和6周、3个月和6个月进行测量。我们将两组干预组与对照组之间在疼痛方面(100分VAS)相差20分、功能状态方面(24分RDQ)相差4分以及二分法GPR(恢复与未恢复)相差20%定义为组间最小临床相关差异。
支持TESI-plus的具有临床意义的结局意味着,未来对于急性坐骨神经痛患者,应在最初几周内推荐使用TESI-plus,而非仅用止痛药物治疗,以便缓解疼痛并改善其功能。如果结果为阴性(三个研究组在结局方面无相关差异),止痛药物将仍然是坐骨神经痛急性期的主要治疗方法。
荷兰国家试验注册库:NTR4457(2014年3月6日)。