Aims. We aimed to establish the short- and long-term efficacy of corticosteroid injection for coccydynia, and to determine if betamethasone or triamcinolone has the best effect. Methods. During 2009 to 2016, we treated 277 patients with chronic coccydynia with either one 6 mg betamethasone or one 20 mg triamcinolone cortisone injection. A susequent injection was given to 62 (26%) of the patients. All were reviewed three to four months after injection, and 241 replied to a questionnaire a mean of 36 months (12 to 88) after the last injection. No pain at the early review was considered early success. When the patient had not been subsequently operated on, and indicated on the questionnaire that they were either well or much better, it was considered a long-term success. Results. At the three- to four-month review, 22 (9%) reported that they had no pain. The long-term success of one injection was 15% and rose to 29% after a second injection. Logistic regression tests showed that both early success (odds ratio (OR) 5.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1 to 14.4; p = 0.001) and late success (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.7 to 8.3; p = 0.001) was greater with triamcinolone than with betamethasone. Late success was greater for patients with symptoms for less than 12 months (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.4 to 6.7; p = 0.006). We saw no complications of the injections. Conclusion. We conclude that the effect of corticosteroid injection for coccygodynia is moderate, possibly because we used modest doses of the drugs. Even so, they seem worthwhile as they are easily and quickly performed, and complications are rare. If the choice is between injections of betamethasone or triamcinolone, the latter should be selected. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-11:709–714

Aims

People with severe, persistent low back pain (LBP) may be offered lumbar spine fusion surgery if they have had insufficient benefit from recommended non-surgical treatments. However, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2016 guidelines recommended not offering spinal fusion surgery for adults with LBP, except as part of a randomized clinical trial. This survey aims to describe UK clinicians’ views about the suitability of patients for such a future trial, along with their views regarding equipoise for randomizing patients in a future clinical trial comparing lumbar spine fusion surgery to best conservative care (BCC; the FORENSIC-UK trial).

This review provides a concise outline of the advances made in the care of patients and to the quality of life after a traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) over the last century. Despite these improvements reversal of the neurological injury is not yet possible. Instead, current treatment is limited to providing symptomatic relief, avoiding secondary insults and preventing additional sequelae. However, with an ever-advancing technology and deeper understanding of the damaged spinal cord, this appears increasingly conceivable. A brief synopsis of the most prominent challenges facing both clinicians and research scientists in developing functional treatments for a progressively complex injury are presented. Moreover, the multiple mechanisms by which damage propagates many months after the original injury requires a multifaceted approach to ameliorate the human spinal cord. We discuss potential methods to protect the spinal cord from damage, and to manipulate the inherent inhibition of the spinal cord to regeneration and repair. Although acute and chronic SCI share common final pathways resulting in cell death and neurological deficits, the underlying putative mechanisms of chronic SCI and the treatments are not covered in this review.

Aims

With resumption of elective spine surgery services in the UK following the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a multicentre British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) collaborative study to examine the complications and deaths due to COVID-19 at the recovery phase of the pandemic. The aim was to analyze the safety of elective spinal surgery during the pandemic.

Aims

The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with poor outcome following coccygectomy on patients with chronic coccydynia and instability of the coccyx.