Northumbria Healthcare NHS Trust, Ashington, UK

To assess if a pain diary is useful in assessment and management of patients who undergo diagnostic nerve root block (NRB) for lumbar radicular pain.

Prospective study

23 patients who underwent diagnostic NRB for lumbar radicular pain were given a pain diary. They recorded their response to one of four options from Day 0 to Day 14 (good relief, partial satisfactory, partial unsatisfactory, and no relief of leg pain) and could also add additional comments. A Consultant Spinal Surgeon reviewed the diary with the patient at 6-week follow up appointment to formulate a management plan.

Patient response, completion of the pain diary and final clinical outcome (surgical or non surgical treatment).

The response rate was 91% (21/23). The pain diary was very useful in 43% (9/21), useful in 33% (7/21) and not useful in 24% (5/21) of patients in formulating further management. There was a tendency for patients with complex problems and poor response to add descriptive notes and comments (9/ 23).

Patient compliance with pain diary was good and it has been valuable in making further management decisions. We found the pain diary to be a useful and inexpensive adjunct in the assessment of patients who underwent diagnostic NRB.

Generally, it is considered to be safe in preventing iatrogenic instability if half of the facet joint is left intact during decompression surgeries.

By removing half of the facets can we get adequate decompression of the nerve roots? Is there a difference at different levels in the lower lumbar spine? What is the inclination of the facet joint at each level and how does it affect the stability?

Retrospective study

We analysed 200 consecutive magnetic reasonance imaging (MRI) scans of the lumbosacral spine at L3/4, L4/5, and L5/S1 levels. We measured the difference in the distance from midline to the lateral border of the foramen and from midline to the middle of the facet joint at each level on either sides. The angle of the facet joint was also noted.

The distance to the foramen from the level of the middle of the facet joints seem to be between 5-6mm lateral at every level. The angle of the facet joints at L3/4 is 35.9°+/−7.4°, while at L4/5 it is 43.2°+/−8.0°, and at L5/S1 it is 49.4°+/−10.1°.

In lumbar spine decompression surgeries, after the midline decompression extending up to half of the facet joints, a further undercutting of the facet joints to 5-6mm is therefore required to completely decompress the nerve root in the foramen. The more coronal orientation of the facet joint at L5/S1 conforms better stability than that at L3/4level. Therefore, stabilisation of the spine should be considered if more than 2cm of the posterior elements are removed from midline at L3/4 level.

Background

Percutaneous K-wire fixation is a well-recognised and often performed method of stabilisation for distal radius fractures. However, there is paucity in the literature regarding the infection rate after percutaneous K-wire fixation for distal radius fractures.

Background: Iatrogenic instability can be produced by lumbar spine decompression surgery not only if decompression extends beyond the lateral border of pars but also if there is insufficient pars left at the end of the procedure resulting in its fracture and hence instability on weight bearing. Generally, it is considered to be safe in preventing iatrogenic instability if half of the facet joint is left intact during decompression surgeries.

Purpose: We aimed to answer the following questions. By removing half of the facets can we get adequate decompression of the nerve roots? Is there a difference at different levels in the lower lumbar spine? What is the inclination of the facet joint at each level and how does it affect the stability?

Material and Methods: We analysed 200 consecutive magnetic reasonance imaging (MRI) scans of the lumbosacral spine at L3/4, L4/5, and L5/S1 levels. We measured the difference in the distance from midline to the lateral border of the foramen and from midline to the middle of the facet joint at each level on either sides. The angle of the facet joint was also noted. The vertebral body diameters in both the sagittal and coronal plane were noted.

Results: At L3/4, the mean distance from the midline to the middle of facet joint was 15.5 +/−1.9 mm (11–23mm), while the mean distance from the midline to the foramen was 21.2 +/− 2.6 mm (13–28mm). At L4/5, the mean distance from the midline to the middle of facet joint was 18.1 +/−2.3 mm (13–25mm), while the mean distance from the midline to the foramen was 23.6 +/− 2.9 mm (16–34mm). At L5/S1, the mean distance from the mid-line to the middle of facet joint was 15.5 +/−1.9 mm (11–23mm), while the mean distance from the midline to the foramen was 26.8 +/− 2.9 mm (20–34mm). The angle of the facet joints at L3/4 is 35.90 +/− 7.40, while at L4/5 it is 43.20 +/− 8.00, and at L5/S1 it is 49.40 +/− 10.10.

Conclusion: The distance to the foramen from the level of the middle of the facet joints seem to be between 5–6mm at every level with the lateral border of the foramen being lateral to the middle of the facet joint. Hence, in lumbar spine decompression surgeries, after the mid-line decompression extending up to half of the facet joints, a further undercutting of the facet joints to 5–6mm is therefore required to completely decompress the nerve root in the foramen. The more coronal orientation of the facet joint at L5/S1 conforms better stability than that at L3/4level. Therefore, stabilisation of the spine should be considered if more than 2cm of the posterior elements are removed from midline at L3/4 level.

Background: The usefulness of the Nottingham Health Profile as a generic quality of health outcome measure has been described in a number of Orthopaedic conditions. This study was done to compare two quality of life questionnaires, the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) regarding the internal consistency, validity and responsiveness as outcome measures in patients undergoing surgery for lumbar nerve root decompression. We also assessed the effects of smoking, type of lesion, clinical presentation, number of levels involved, operating surgeon and duration of symptoms.

Methods: 37 patients with clinical nerve root entrapment, confirmed radiologically were treated with decompression surgery by two surgeons. We used the NHP and the ODI to assess the severity of symptoms prior to and at 3 and 8 months following surgery

Results: We were unable to detect factors predictive of better healthcare outcome scores after surgery for sciatica. There was a statistically significant improvement in the total ODI score and all NHP domain scores within the whole cohort, after treatment. NHP had a greater responsiveness in detecting improvement for pain and physical ability as measured by the effect size. Cronbach’s alpha for reliability of scores was consistently above the acceptable threshold of 0.90 for NHP scores and consistently below 0.90 for ODI scores. A “floor and ceiling” analysis revealed that the NHP consistently skewed scores at 3 months post op towards a better outcome compared to the ODI.

Conclusion: The generic Nottingham Health Profile appears to be a more sensitive health questionnaire than the Oswestry Disability Index in assessing the outcome of nerve root decompression surgery. We were unable to identify factors predictive of better outcomes using these scores as outcome measures.

To determine whether resection of osteophyte at TKR improves movement, 139 TKRs were performed on knees with pre-operative posterior osteophyte. Randomisation was to have either resection of distal femoral osteophyte guided by a custom made ruler or no resection. After preparation of the femoral bone cuts the ruler measuring 19 mm was placed just proximal to the posterior chamfer cut. The proximal end of this ruler marked the bone to be resected and this was performed using an osteotome at 45 degrees. Knees randomised to no resection had no further femoral bony cuts. Three months after implantation the patients had range of motion assessed.

One hundred and fourteen suitable knees were assessed, with 59 knees (57 patients) in the resection group and 55 knees (54 patients) in the no resection group. Full extension was more likely in the resection group (62%) than the group without resection (41%)(p=0.08). Flexion to at least 110 degrees was, however, less in the resection group (37%) than the no resection group (54%) (p=0.09).

Our study failed to show a statistically significant difference if the bony osteophyte is removed. There were however sharp trends, with statistically a one in ten chance these results would be different if the trial was repeated. Although there is no indication as to the cause of improved extension this could be explained by the release of the posterior capsular structures allowing full extension. The reduction in flexion is harder to explain and this may be due to increase in perioperative trauma and resultant swelling, possibly with fibrosis. Range of movement, particularly flexion, is known to improve up to 1 year post-operatively and assessment of these groups at that stage would be beneficial.

Aim: To prospectively determine whether social deprivation has an effect on the level of disability at presentation and the outcome from total knee replacement (TKR).

Method: A prospective outcome study was carried out between 1992 and 1996, recruiting over 2500 total knee replacements. All patients were assessed preoperatively and at 3 and 12 months postop using the Knee Society (KS) scores for clinical evaluation and the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) to measure general health status. The Townsend Score was used as the index of social deprivation and was calculated for each patient on the basis of their address.

Results: There was no significant difference between either the Knee Society or NHP scores at baseline and the Townsend Score. This indicated that social deprivation has no effect on the level of the knee arthritis immediately prior to joint replacement, both in terms of patient disability and health status.

There was also no significant difference between either the Knee Society or NHP scores postoperatively and the Townsend Score. This indicated that social deprivation has no effect on the outcome from knee replacement.

Conclusion: This study shows that social deprivation has no significant effect on the level of disability at presentation and the outcome from total knee replacement. This is contrary to previously published reports which have shown worse outcomes in more deprived patients.