Aims. The aim of the study was to determine if there was a direct correlation between the pain and disability experienced by patients and size of their disc prolapse, measured by the disc’s cross-sectional area on T2 axial MRI scans. Methods. Patients were asked to prospectively complete visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores on the day of their MRI scan. All patients with primary disc herniation were included. Exclusion criteria included recurrent disc herniation, cauda equina syndrome, or any other associated spinal pathology. T2 weighted MRI scans were reviewed on picture archiving and communications software. The T2 axial image showing the disc protrusion with the largest cross sectional area was used for measurements. The area of the disc and canal were measured at this level. The size of the disc was measured as a percentage of the cross-sectional area of the spinal canal on the chosen image. The VAS leg pain and ODI scores were each correlated with the size of the disc using the Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC). Intraobserver reliability for MRI measurement was assessed using the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). We assessed if the position of the disc prolapse (central, lateral recess, or foraminal) altered the symptoms described by the patient. The VAS and ODI scores from central and lateral recess disc prolapses were compared. Results. A total of 56 patients (mean age 41.1 years (22.8 to 70.3)) were included. A high degree of intraobserver reliability was observed for MRI measurement: single measure ICC was 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) from 0.97 to 0.99 (p < 0.001)). The PCC comparing VAS leg scores with canal occupancy for herniated disc was 0.056. The PCC comparing ODI for herniated disc was 0.070. We found 13 disc prolapses centrally and 43 lateral recess prolapses. There were no foraminal prolapses in this group. The position of the prolapse was not found to be related to the mean VAS score or ODI experienced by the patients (VAS, p = 0.251; ODI, p = 0.093). Conclusion. The results of the statistical analysis show that there is no direct correlation between the size or position of the disc prolapse and a patient’s symptoms. The symptoms experienced by patients should be the primary concern in deciding to perform discectomy. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):715–720

Aims. To study the associations of lumbar developmental spinal stenosis (DSS) with low back pain (LBP), radicular leg pain, and disability. Methods. This was a cross-sectional study of 2,206 subjects along with L1-S1 axial and sagittal MRI. Clinical and radiological information regarding their demographics, workload, smoking habits, anteroposterior (AP) vertebral canal diameter, spondylolisthesis, and MRI changes were evaluated. Mann-Whitney U tests and chi-squared tests were conducted to search for differences between subjects with and without DSS. Associations of LBP and radicular pain reported within one month (30 days) and one year (365 days) of the MRI, with clinical and radiological information, were also investigated by utilizing univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. Results. Subjects with DSS had higher prevalence of radicular leg pain, more pain-related disability, and lower quality of life (all p < 0.05). Subjects with DSS had 1.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0 to 2.1; p = 0.027) and 1.8 (95% CI 1.3 to 2.6; p = 0.001) times higher odds of having radicular leg pain in the past month and the past year, respectively. However, DSS was not associated with LBP. Although, subjects with a spondylolisthesis had 1.7 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.5; p = 0.011) and 2.0 (95% CI 1.2 to 3.2; p = 0.008) times greater odds to experience LBP in the past month and the past year, respectively. Conclusion. This large-scale study identified DSS as a risk factor of acute and chronic radicular leg pain. DSS was seen in 6.9% of the study cohort and these patients had narrower spinal canals. Subjects with DSS had earlier onset of symptoms, more severe radicular leg pain, which lasted for longer and were more likely to have worse disability and poorer quality of life. In these patients there is an increased likelihood of nerve root compression due to a pre-existing narrowed canal, which is important when planning surgery as patients are likely to require multi-level decompression surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):131–140

Aims. Closed suction subfascial drainage is widely used after instrumented posterior spinal fusion in patients with a spinal deformity. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of this wound drainage on the outcomes in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). This was a further analysis of a randomized, multicentre clinical trial reporting on patients after posterior spinal fusion using segmental pedicle screw instrumentation. In this study the incidence of deep surgical site infection (SSI) and chronic postoperative pain at two years’ follow-up are reported. Methods. We conducted a randomized, multicentre clinical trial on adolescents undergoing posterior spinal fusion for AIS using segmental pedicle screw instrumentation. A total of 90 consecutive patients were randomized into a ‘drain’ or ‘no drain’ group at the time of wound closure, using the sealed envelope technique (1:1). The primary outcomes in the initial study were the change in the level of haemoglobin in the blood postoperatively and total blood loss. A secondary outcome was the opioid consumption immediately after surgery. The aim of this further study was to report the rate of deep SSI and persistent postoperative pain, at two years' follow-up. Results. As previously reported, the mean 48-hour opioid consumption was significantly higher in the no drain group (2.0 mg/kg (SD 0.8) vs 1.4 mg/kg (SD 0.7); p = 0.005). There were no delayed deep SSIs. At two years’ follow-up, the mean Scoliosis Research Society 24-item questionnaire (SRS-24) total score did not differ between the groups (4.11 (SD 0.47) vs 4.16 (SD 0.33); p = 0.910). The mean SRS-24 pain score was 4.28 (SD 0.48) in the no drain group compared with 4.33 (SD 0.66) in the drain group (p = 0.245). Seven patients (19%) in the no drain group and six in the drain group (14%) reported moderate to severe pain (numerical rating scale ≥ 4) at two years’ follow-up (p = 0.484). The general self-image domain score was significantly higher in the no drain group compared with the drain group (4.02 (SD 0.74) vs 4.59 (SD 0.54); p < 0.001). Conclusion. The main finding in this study was that more severe pain immediately after surgery did not result in a higher incidence of chronic pain in the no drain group compared with the drain group. Back pain and health-related quality of life at two years’ follow-up did not differ between the groups. The patient-reported self-image domain was significantly better in the no drain group compared with the drain group. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1176–1181

Aims. Chronic low back pain due to degenerative disc disease is sometimes treated with fusion. We compared the outcome of three different fusion techniques in the Swedish Spine Register: noninstrumented posterolateral fusion (PLF), instrumented posterolateral fusion (IPLF), and interbody fusion (IBF). Patients and Methods. A total of 2874 patients who were operated on at one or two lumbar levels were followed for a mean of 9.2 years (3.6 to 19.1) for any additional lumbar spine surgery. Patient-reported outcome data were available preoperatively (n = 2874) and at one year (n = 2274), two years (n = 1958), and a mean of 6.9 years (n = 1518) postoperatively and consisted of global assessment and visual analogue scales of leg and back pain, Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQol five-dimensional index, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, and satisfaction with treatment. Statistical analyses were performed with competing-risks proportional hazards regression or analysis of covariance, adjusted for baseline variables. Results. The number of patients with additional surgery were 32/183 (17%) in the PLF group, 229/1256 (18%) in the IPLF group, and 439/1435 (31%) in the IBF group. With the PLF group as a reference, the hazard ratio for additional lumbar surgery was 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.72) for the IPLF group and 2.13 (95% CI 1.45 to 3.12) for the IBF group. All patient-reported outcomes improved after surgery (p < 0.001) but were without statistically significant differences between the groups at the one-, two- and 6.9-year follow-ups (all p ≥ 0.12). Conclusion. The addition of interbody fusion to posterolateral fusion was associated with a higher risk for additional surgery and showed no advantages in patient-reported outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1526–1533

We studied 27 patients with low back pain and unilateral L5 or S1 spinal nerve root pain. Significant radiological changes were restricted to the symptomatic root level, when compared with controls. Low back and leg pain were graded on a visual analogue scale. Dermatomal quantitative sensory tests revealed significant elevations of warm, cool and touch perception thresholds in the affected dermatome, compared with controls. These elevations correlated with root pain (warm v L5 root pain; r = 0.88, p < 0.0001), but not with back pain. Low back pain correlated with restriction of anteroposterior spinal flexion (p = 0.02), but not with leg pain. A subset of 16 patients underwent decompressive surgery with improvement of pain scores, sensory thresholds and spinal mobility. A further 14 patients with back pain, multilevel nerve root symptoms and radiological changes were also studied. The only correlation found was of low back pain with spinal movement (p < 0.002). We conclude that, in patients with single level disease, dermatomal sensory threshold elevation and restriction of spinal movement are independent correlates of sciatica and low back pain

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of repeat epidural steroid injections as a form of treatment for patients with insufficiently controlled or recurrent radicular pain due to a lumbar or cervical disc herniation. Patients and Methods. A cohort of 102 patients was prospectively followed, after an epidural steroid injection for radicular symptoms due to lumbar disc herniation, in 57 patients, and cervical disc herniation, in 45 patients. Those patients with persistent pain who requested a second injection were prospectively followed for one year. Radicular and local pain were assessed on a visual analogue scale (VAS), functional outcome with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) or the Neck Pain and Disability Index (NPAD), as well as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-12). Results. A second injection was performed in 17 patients (29.8%) with lumbar herniation and seven (15.6%) with cervical herniation at a mean of 65.3 days . (sd. 46.5) and 47 days . (sd. 37.2), respectively, after the initial injection. All but one patient, who underwent lumbar microdiscectomy, responded satisfactorily with a mean VAS for leg pain of 8.8 mm . (sd. 10.3) and a mean VAS for arm pain of 6.3 mm . (. sd. 9) one year after the second injection, respectively. Similarly, functional outcome and HRQoL were improved significantly from the baseline scores: mean ODI, 12.3 (. sd. 12.4; p < 0.001); mean NPAD, 19.3 (. sd. 24.3; p = 0.041); mean SF-12 physical component summary (PCS) in lumbar herniation, 46.8 (. sd. 7.7; p < 0.001); mean SF-12 PCS in cervical herniation, 43 (. sd. 6.8; p = 0.103). Conclusion. Repeat steroid injections are a justifiable form of treatment in symptomatic patients with lumbar or cervical disc herniation whose symptoms are not satisfactorily relieved after the first injection. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1364–71

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has issued guidelines that state fusion for non-specific low back pain should only be performed as part of a randomised controlled trial, and that lumbar disc replacement should not be performed. Thus, spinal fusion and disc replacement will no longer be routine forms of treatment for patients with low back pain. This annotation considers the evidence upon which these guidelines are based. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1003–1005

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of a percutaneous radiofrequency heat lesion at the medial branch of the primary dorsal ramus with a sham procedure, for the treatment of lumbar facet joint pain. Patients and Methods. A randomised sham-controlled double blind multicentre trial was carried out at the multidisciplinary pain centres of two hospitals. A total of 60 patients aged > 18 years with a history and physical examination suggestive of facet joint pain and a decrease of ≥ 2 on a numerical rating scale (NRS 0 to 10) after a diagnostic facet joint test block were included. In the treatment group, a percutaneous radiofrequency heat lesion (80. o. C during 60 seconds per level) was applied to the medial branch of the primary dorsal ramus. In the sham group, the same procedure was undertaken without for the radiofrequency lesion. Both groups also received a graded activity physiotherapy programme. The primary outcome measure was decrease in pain. A secondary outcome measure was the Global Perceived Effect scale (GPE). Results. There was a statistically significant effect on the level of pain in the factor Period (T0-T1). However, there was no statistically significant difference with the passage of time between the groups (Group × Period) or in the factor Group. In the crossover group, 11 of 19 patients had a decrease in NRS of ≥ 2 at one month crossover (p = 0.65). There was no statistically significant difference in satisfaction with the passage of time between the groups (Group × Period). The independent factors Group and Period also showed no statistically significant difference. There was no statistically significant Group × Period effect for recovery, neither an effect of Group or of Period. Conclusion. The null hypothesis of no difference in the decrease in pain and in GPE between the treatment and sham groups cannot be rejected. Post hoc analysis revealed that the age of the patients and the severity of the initial pain significantly predicted a positive outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1526–33

Discogenic low back pain is a common cause of disability, but its pathogenesis is poorly understood. We collected 19 specimens of lumbar intervertebral discs from 17 patients with discogenic low back pain during posterior lumbar interbody fusion, 12 from physiologically ageing discs and ten from normal control discs. We investigated the histological features and assessed the immunoreactive activity of neurofilament (NF200) and neuropeptides such as substance P (SP) and vasoactive-intestinal peptide (VIP) in the nerve fibres. The distinct histological characteristic of the painful disc was the formation of a zone of vascularised granulation tissue from the nucleus pulposus to the outer part of the annulus fibrosus along the edges of the fissures. SP-, NF- and VIP-immunoreactive nerve fibres in the painful discs were more extensive than in the control discs. Growth of nerves deep into the annulus fibrosus and nucleus pulposus was observed mainly along the zone of granulation tissue in the painful discs. This suggests that the zone of granulation tissue with extensive innervation along the tears in the posterior part of the painful disc may be responsible for causing the pain of discography and of discogenic low back pain

Back pain is a common symptom in children and adolescents. Here we review the important causes, of which defects and stress reactions of the pars interarticularis are the most common identifiable problems. More serious pathology, including malignancy and infection, needs to be excluded when there is associated systemic illness. Clinical evaluation and management may be difficult and always requires a thorough history and physical examination. Diagnostic imaging is obtained when symptoms are persistent or severe. Imaging is used to reassure the patient, relatives and carers, and to guide management. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:717–23

The afferent pathways of discogenic low-back pain have not been fully investigated. We hypothesised that this pain was transmitted mainly by sympathetic afferent fibres in the L2 nerve root, and in 33 patients we used selective local anaesthesia of this nerve. Low-back pain disappeared or significantly decreased in all patients after the injection. Needle insertion provoked pain which radiated to the low back in 23 patients and the area of skin hypoalgesia produced included the area of pre-existing pain in all but one. None of the nine patients with related sciatica had relief of that component of their symptoms. Our findings show that the main afferent pathways of pain from the lower intervertebral discs are through the L2 spinal nerve root, presumably via sympathetic afferents from the sinuvertebral nerves. Discogenic low-back pain should be regarded as a visceral pain in respect of its neural pathways. Infiltration of the L2 nerve is a useful diagnostic test and also has some therapeutic value

We have studied 58 patients with pain from osteoporotic vertebral fractures which did not respond to conservative treatment. These were 53 women and five men with a mean age of 72.5 years. They received a nerve-root injection with lidocaine, bupivicaine and DepoMedrol. The mean follow-up period was 13.5 months. The mean pain scores before treatment, at one and six months after treatment and at the final follow-up were 85, 24.9, 14.1, and 17.4, respectively. According to our modified criteria for grading results, six patients were considered to have an excellent result, 42 good and ten fair. A newly developed compression fracture was noted in three patients. There were no complications related to the injection. Our study suggests that nerve-root injections are effective in reducing pain in patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures and that these patients should be considered for this treatment before percutaneous vertebroplasty or operative intervention is attempted

Between January 1990 and December 2000 we carried out 226 SB Charité III disc replacements for lumbar disc degeneration in 160 patients. They were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 79 months (31 to 161) to determine the clinical and radiological outcome. The clinical results were collected by an independent observer, who was not involved in patient selection, treatment or follow-up, using a combination of outcome measures, including the Oswestry Disability Index. Pain was recorded using a visual analogue score, and the most recent radiographs were reviewed. Survival of the device was analysed by the Kaplan-Meier method and showed a cumulative survival of 35% at 156 months when radiological failure was taken as the endpoint. The mean improvement in the Oswestry disability index scores after disc replacement was 14% (6% to 21%) and the mean improvement in the pain score was 1.6 (0.46 to 2.73), both falling below the clinically significant threshold. Removal of the implant was required in 12 patients, four because of implant failure. These poor results indicate that further use of this implant is not justified

This article reviews the current knowledge of the intervertebral disc (IVD) and its association with low back pain (LBP). The normal IVD is a largely avascular and aneural structure with a high water content, its nutrients mainly diffusing through the end plates. IVD degeneration occurs when its cells die or become dysfunctional, notably in an acidic environment. In the process of degeneration, the IVD becomes dehydrated and vascularised, and there is an ingrowth of nerves. Although not universally the case, the altered physiology of the IVD is believed to precede or be associated with many clinical symptoms or conditions including low back and/or lower limb pain, paraesthesia, spinal stenosis and disc herniation. New treatment options have been developed in recent years. These include biological therapies and novel surgical techniques (such as total disc replacement), although many of these are still in their experimental phase. Central to developing further methods of treatment is the need for effective ways in which to assess patients and measure their outcomes. However, significant difficulties remain and it is therefore an appropriate time to be further investigating the scientific basis of and treatment of LBP

We have assessed the influence of somatisation on the outcome of treatment in 81 patients with chronic low back pain. All, irrespective of whether treatment was surgical or conservative, had a significantly better (p < 0.001) health-related quality of life at follow-up on all but one scale of the SF-36. Lower health-related quality of life at follow-up correlated significantly with a higher tendency to somatise before treatment and at follow-up. A logistic regression analysis yielded two factors which predicted the outcome; somatisation (p < 0.001) and ‘doctor shopping’ (the number of physicians consulted before the present inpatient treatment, p < 0.001). These factors accurately distinguished between patients with good and those with poor outcomes in 82%. Patients with somatisation and ‘doctor shopping’ were at a higher risk for a poor outcome. The results show the relevance of somatisation in the outcome of treatment in patients with low back pain

Herniated intervertebral disc tissue has been shown to produce a number of proinflammatory mediators and cytokines, but there have been no similar studies using discs from patients with discogenic low back pain. We have compared the levels of production of interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8) and prostaglandin E. 2. (PGE. 2. ) in disc tissue from patients undergoing discectomy for sciatica (63) with that from patients undergoing fusion for discogenic low back pain (20) using an enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assay. There was a statistically significant difference between levels of production of IL-6 and IL-8 in the sciatica and low back pain groups (p < 0.006 and p < 0.003, respectively). The high levels of proinflammatory mediator found in disc tissue from patients undergoing fusion suggest that production of proinflammatory mediators within the nucleus pulposus may be a major factor in the genesis of a painful lumbar disc

We performed intercostal nerve transfer in 19 patients to relieve pain from preganglionic injury to the brachial plexus. The procedure was successful in 16 patients at a mean of 28.6 months (12 to 68) after the injury

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the type of cervical disc herniation influences the severity of symptoms at the time of presentation, and the outcome after surgical treatment. Methods. The type and extent of disc herniation at the time of presentation in 108 patients who underwent anterior discectomy for cervical radiculopathy were analyzed on MRI, using a four-point scale. These were dichotomized into disc bulge and disc herniation groups. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Neck Disability Index (NDI), 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain in the neck and arm at baseline and two years postoperatively. The perceived recovery was also assessed at this time. Results. At baseline, 46 patients had a disc bulge and 62 had a herniation. There was no significant difference in the mean NDI and SF-36 between the two groups at baseline. Those in the disc bulge group had a mean NDI of 44.6 (SD 15.2) compared with 43.8 (SD 16.0) in the herniation group (p = 0.799), and a mean SF-36 of 59.2 (SD 6.9) compared with 59.4 (SD 7.7) (p = 0.895). Likewise, there was no significant difference in the incidence of disabling arm pain in the disc bulge and herniation groups (84% vs 73%; p = 0.163), and no significant difference in the incidence of disabling neck pain in the two groups (70.5% (n = 31) vs 63% (n = 39); p = 0.491). At two years after surgery, no significant difference was found in any of the clinical parameters between the two groups. Conclusion. In patients with cervical radiculopathy, the type and extent of disc herniation measured on MRI prior to surgery correlated neither to the severity of the symptoms at presentation, nor to clinical outcomes at two years postoperatively. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(11):1242–1248

Aims. We compared decompression alone to decompression with fusion surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). The aim was to evaluate if five-year outcomes differed between the groups. The two-year results from the same trial revealed no differences. Methods. The Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study was a multicentre randomized controlled trial with recruitment from September 2006 to February 2012. A total of 247 patients with one- or two-level central lumbar spinal stenosis, stratified by the presence of DS, were randomized to decompression alone or decompression with fusion. The five-year Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), visual analogue scales for back and leg pain, and patient-reported satisfaction, decreased pain, and increased walking distance. The reoperation rate was recorded. Results. Five-year follow-up was completed by 213 (95%) of the eligible patients (mean age 67 years; 155 female (67%)). After five years, ODI was similar irrespective of treatment, with a mean of 25 (SD 18) for decompression alone and 28 (SD 22) for decompression with fusion (p = 0.226). Mean EQ-5D was higher for decompression alone than for fusion (0.69 (SD 0.28) vs 0.59 (SD 0.34); p = 0.027). In the no-DS subset, fewer patients reported decreased leg pain after fusion (58%) than with decompression alone (80%) (relative risk (RR) 0.71 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.97). The frequency of subsequent spinal surgery was 24% for decompression with fusion and 22% for decompression alone (RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.8)). Conclusion. Adding fusion to decompression in spinal stenosis surgery, with or without spondylolisthesis, does not improve the five-year ODI, which is consistent with our two-year report. Three secondary outcomes that did not differ at two years favoured decompression alone at five years. Our results support decompression alone as the preferred method for operating on spinal stenosis. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):705–712

Aims. The aim of this study was to report the long-term prognosis of patients with multiple Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) involving the spine, and to analyze the risk factors for progression-free survival (PFS). Methods. We included 28 patients with multiple LCH involving the spine treated between January 2009 and August 2021. Kaplan-Meier methods were applied to estimate overall survival (OS) and PFS. Univariate Cox regression analysis was used to identify variables associated with PFS. Results. Patients with multiple LCH involving the spine accounted for 15.4% (28/182 cases) of all cases of spinal LCH: their lesions primarily involved the thoracic and lumbar spines. The most common symptom was pain, followed by neurological dysfunction. All patients presented with osteolytic bone destruction, and 23 cases were accompanied by a paravertebral soft-tissue mass. The incidence of vertebra plana was low, whereas the oversleeve-like sign was a more common finding. The alkaline phosphatase was significantly higher in patients with single-system multifocal bone LCH than in patients with multisystem LCH. At final follow-up, one patient had been lost to follow-up, two patients had died, three patients had local recurrence, six patients had distant involvement, and 17 patients were alive with disease. The median PFS and OS were 50.5 months (interquartile range (IQR) 23.5 to 63.1) and 60.5 months (IQR 38.0 to 73.3), respectively. Stage (hazard ratio (HR) 4.324; p < 0.001) and chemotherapy (HR 0.203; p < 0.001) were prognostic factors for PFS. Conclusion. Pain is primarily due to segmental instability of the spine from its destruction by LCH. Chemotherapy can significantly improve PFS, and radiotherapy has achieved good results in local control. The LCH lesions in some patients will continue to progress. It may initially appear as an isolated or single-system LCH, but will gradually involve multiple sites or systems. Therefore, long-term follow-up and timely intervention are important for patients with spinal LCH. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(6):679–687