ABSTRACT
Methods@#We conducted a retrospective analysis of 288 patients (246 for final analysis) who underwent MSTS between 2005–2015. Data collected were demographics and peri/postoperative clinical and radiological features. Early and late radiological AsCF were defined as presentation before and after 3 months, respectively. We analyzed patients with AsCF for risk factors and survival duration by performing competing risk regression analyses where AsCF was the event of interest, with SF and death as competing events. @*Results@#We observed AsCF in 41/246 patients (16.7%). The mean time to onset of AsCF after MSTS was 2 months (range, 1–9 months). Median survival of patients with AsCF was 20 and 41 months for early and late failures, respectively. Early AsCF accounted for 80.5% of cases, while late AsCF accounted for 19.5%. The commonest radiologically detectable AsCF mechanism was angular deformity (increase in kyphus) in 29 patients. Increasing age (p<0.02) and primary breast (13/41, 31.7%) (p<0.01) tumors were associated with higher AsCF rates. There was a non-significant trend towards AsCF in patients with a spinal instability neoplastic score ≥7, instrumentation across junctional regions, and construct lengths of 6–9 levels. None of the patients with AsCF underwent revision surgery. @*Conclusions@#AsCF after MSTS is a distinct entity. Most patients with early AsCF did not require intervention. Patients who survived and maintained ambulation for longer periods had late failure. Increasing age and tumors with a better prognosis have a higher likelihood of developing AsCF. AsCF is not necessarily an indication for aggressive/urgent intervention.
ABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: A prospective observational study. PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of nucleoplasty in the management of discogenic axial back pain; to determine the influence of concordant pain during provocative discography, annular tear and loss of disc height on the outcome of nucleoplasty. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: The role of nucleoplasty in the management of radicular leg pain due to disc herniation is known. However, the data regarding its role in the management of discogenic axial back pain is scarce. METHODS: A prospective evaluation of 30 patients with discogenic axial back pain undergoing nucleoplasty was performed. Pain, functional disability and quality of life were assessed using the 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Short Form-36 (SF-36), respectively. RESULTS: The mean reduction in VAS was 31.03 and 29.03; mean reduction in ODI was 24.53 and 20.60; and mean increment in SF-36 was 13.58 and 12.30, at 6 months and at 12 months, respectively. The differences were statistically significant (p <0.05). Concordant pain during provocative discography, annular tear and loss of disc height did not affect a clinically significant improvement in any of the three outcomes (p =0.882, 0.213, and 0.170; respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Nucleoplasty produced statistically significant improvements in pain, functional disability and quality of life in patients with discogenic low back pain at 6 months and at 12 months. Concordant pain during provocative discography, annular tear and loss of disc height did not influence any of the outcomes after nucleoplasty in patients with discogenic axial back pain.