Objectives. In order to elucidate the influence of sympathetic nerves on lumbar radiculopathy, we investigated whether sympathectomy attenuated pain behaviour and altered the electrical properties of the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons in a rat model of lumbar root constriction. Methods. Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into three experimental groups. In the root constriction group, the left L5 spinal nerve root was ligated proximal to the DRG as a lumbar radiculopathy model. In the root constriction + sympathectomy group, sympathectomy was performed after the root constriction procedure. In the control group, no procedures were performed. In order to evaluate the pain relief effect of sympathectomy, behavioural analysis using mechanical and thermal stimulation was performed. In order to evaluate the excitability of the DRG neurons, we recorded action potentials of the isolated single DRG neuron by the whole-cell patch-clamp method. Results. In behavioural analysis, sympathectomy attenuated the mechanical allodynia and thermal hyperalgesia caused by lumbar root constriction. In electrophysiological analysis, single isolated DRG neurons with root constriction exhibited lower threshold current, more depolarised resting membrane potential, prolonged action potential duration, and more depolarisation frequency. These hyperexcitable alterations caused by root constriction were significantly attenuated in rats treated with surgical sympathectomy. Conclusion. The present results suggest that sympathectomy attenuates lumbar radicular pain resulting from root constriction by altering the electrical property of the DRG neuron itself. Thus, the sympathetic nervous system was closely associated with lumbar radicular pain, and suppressing the activity of the sympathetic nervous system may therefore lead to pain relief

This short contribution aims to explain how intervertebral disc ‘degeneration’ differs from normal ageing, and to suggest how mechanical loading and constitutional factors interact to cause disc degeneration and prolapse. We suggest that disagreement on these matters in medico-legal practice often arises from a misunderstanding of the nature of ‘soft-tissue injuries’.