Relationship of Modic Changes, Disk Herniation Morphology, and Axial Location to Outcomes in Symptomatic Cervical Disk Herniation Patients Treated With High-Velocity, Low-Amplitude Spinal Manipulation: A Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether cervical disk herniation (CDH) location, morphology, or Modic changes (MCs) are related to treatment outcomes. METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and outcome data from 44 patients with CDH treated with spinal manipulative therapy were evaluated. MRI scans were assessed for CDH axial location, morphology, and MCs. Pain (0-10 for neck and arm) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) data were collected at baseline; 2 weeks; 1, 3, and 6 months; and 1 year. The Patient's Global Impression of Change data were collected at all time points and dichotomized into "improved," yes or no. Fischer's exact test compared the proportion improved with MRI abnormalities. Numerical rating scale and NDI scores were compared with MRI abnormalities at baseline and change scores at all time points using the t test or Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Patients who were Modic positive had higher baseline NDI scores (P = .02); 77.8% of patients who were Modic positive and 53.3% of patients who were Modic negative reported improvement at 2 weeks (P = .21). Fifty percent of Modic I and 83.3% of Modic II patients were improved at 2 weeks (P = .07). At 3 months and 1 year, all patients with MCs were improved. Patients who were Modic positive had higher NRS and NDI change scores. Patients with central herniations were more likely to improve only at the 2-week time point (P = .022). CONCLUSIONS: Although patients who were Modic positive had higher baseline NDI scores, the proportion of these patients improved was higher for all time points up to 6 months. Patients with Modic I changes did worse than patients with Modic II changes at only 2 weeks.

Comparison of Outcomes in MRI Confirmed Lumbar Disc Herniation Patients With and Without Modic Changes Treated With High Velocity, Low Amplitude Spinal Manipulation.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a difference in outcomes between Modic positive and negative lumbar disc herniation (LDH) patients treated with spinal manipulative therapy (SMT). METHODS: This prospective outcomes study includes 72 MRI confirmed symptomatic LDH patients treated with SMT. Numerical rating scale (NRS) pain and Oswestry disability data were collected at baseline. NRS, patient global impression of change to assess overall improvement, and Oswestry data were collected at 2 weeks, 1, 3, 6 months and 1 year. MRI scans were analyzed for Modic change present/absent and classified as Modic I or II when present. Chi-squared test compared the proportion of patients reporting relevant 'improvement' between patients with and without Modic changes and those with Modic I vs. II. NRS and Oswestry scores were compared at baseline and change scores at all follow-up time points using the unpaired Student t test. RESULTS: 76.5% of Modic positive patients reported 'improvement' compared to 53.3% of Modic negative patients (P = .09) at 2 weeks. Modic positive patients had larger decreases in leg pain (P = .02) and disability scores (P = .012) at 2 weeks. Modic positive patients had larger reductions in disability levels at 3 (P = .049) and 6 months (P = .001). A significant difference (P = .001) between patients with Modic I vs. Modic II was found at 1 year, where Modic II patients did significantly better. CONCLUSION: Modic positive patients reported higher levels of clinically relevant improvement 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months compared to Modic negative patients. However, at 1 year Modic I patients were significantly less likely to report 'improvement', suggesting they may be prone to relapse.

Symptomatic, Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Confirmed Cervical Disk Herniation Patients: A Comparative-Effectiveness Prospective Observational Study of 2 Age- and Sex-Matched Cohorts Treated With Either Imaging-Guided Indirect Cervical Nerve Root Injections or Spinal Manipulative Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of overall improvement, pain reduction, and treatment costs in matched patients with symptomatic, magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed cervical disk herniations treated with either spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) or imaging-guided cervical nerve root injection blocks (CNRI). METHODS: This prospective cohort comparative-effectiveness study included 104 patients with magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed symptomatic cervical disk herniation. Fifty-two patients treated with CNRI were age and sex matched with 52 patients treated with SMT. Baseline numerical rating scale (NRS) pain data were collected. Three months after treatment, NRS pain levels were recorded and overall "improvement" was assessed using the Patient Global Impression of Change scale. Only responses "much better" or "better" were considered "improved." The proportion of patients "improved" was calculated for each treatment method and compared using the χ(2) test. The NRS and NRS change scores for the 2 groups were compared at baseline and 3 months using the unpaired t test. Acute and subacute/chronic patients in the 2 groups were compared for "improvement" using the χ(2) test. RESULTS: "Improvement" was reported in 86.5% of SMT patients and 49.0% of CNRI patients (P = .0001). Significantly more CNRI patients were in the subacute/chronic category (77%) compared with SMT patients (46%). A significant difference between the proportion of subacute/chronic CNRI patients (37.5%) and SMT patients (78.3%) reporting "improvement" was noted (P = .002). CONCLUSION: Subacute/chronic patients treated with SMT were significantly more likely to report relevant "improvement" compared with CNRI patients. There was no difference in outcomes when comparing acute patients only.

Symptomatic, MRI Confirmed, Lumbar Disc Herniations: A Comparison of Outcomes Depending on the Type and Anatomical Axial Location of the Hernia in Patients Treated With High-Velocity, Low-Amplitude Spinal Manipulation.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether specific MRI features, such as axial location and type of herniation, are associated with outcomes of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation patients treated with spinal manipulation therapy (SMT). METHODS: MRI and treatment outcome data from 68 patients were included in this prospective outcomes study. Pain numerical rating scale (NRS) and Oswestry physical disability questionnaire (OPDQ) levels were measured at baseline. The Patients Global Impression of Change scale, the NRS and the OPDQ were collected at 2 weeks, 1, 3, 6 months and 1 year. One radiologist and 2 chiropractic medicine master's degree students analyzed the MRI scans blinded to treatment outcomes. κ statistics assessed inter-rater reliability of MRI diagnosis. The proportion of patients reporting relevant improvement at each time point was compared based on MRI findings using the chi-square test. The t test and ANOVA compared the NRS and OPDQ change scores between patients with various MRI abnormalities. RESULTS: A higher proportion of patients with disc sequestration reported relevant improvement at each time point but this did not quite reach statistical significance. Patients with disc sequestration had significantly higher reduction in leg pain at 1 month compared to those with extrusion (P = .02). Reliability of MRI diagnosis ranged from substantial to perfect (K = .733-1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sequestered herniations treated with SMT to the level of herniation reported significantly higher levels of leg pain reduction at 1 month and a higher proportion reported improvement at all data collection time points but this did not reach statistical significance.

Outcomes of acute and chronic patients with magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed symptomatic lumbar disc herniations receiving high-velocity, low-amplitude, spinal manipulative therapy: a prospective observational cohort study with one-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were to evaluate patients with low-back pain (LBP) and leg pain due to magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed disc herniation who are treated with high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulation in terms of their short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes of self-reported global impression of change and pain levels at various time points up to 1 year and to determine if outcomes differ between acute and chronic patients using a prospective, cohort design. METHODS: This prospective cohort outcomes study includes 148 patients (between ages of 18 and 65 years) with LBP, leg pain, and physical examination abnormalities with concordant lumbar disc herniations. Baseline numerical rating scale (NRS) data for LBP, leg pain, and the Oswestry questionnaire were obtained. The specific lumbar spinal manipulation was dependent upon whether the disc herniation was intraforaminal or paramedian as seen on the magnetic resonance images and was performed by a doctor of chiropractic. Outcomes included the patient's global impression of change scale for overall improvement, the NRS for LBP, leg pain, and the Oswestry questionnaire at 2 weeks, 1, 3, and 6 months, and 1 year after the first treatment. The proportion of patients reporting "improvement" on the patient's global impression of change scale was calculated for all patients and acute vs chronic patients. Pretreatment and posttreatment NRS scores were compared using the paired t test. Baseline and follow-up Oswestry scores were compared using the Wilcoxon test. Numerical rating scale and Oswestry scores for acute vs chronic patients were compared using the unpaired t test for NRS scores and the Mann-Whitney U test for Oswestry scores. Logistic regression analysis compared baseline variables with "improvement." RESULTS: Significant improvement for all outcomes at all time points was reported (P < .0001). At 3 months, 90.5% of patients were "improved" with 88.0% "improved" at 1 year. Although acute patients improved faster by 3 months, 81.8% of chronic patients reported "improvement" with 89.2% "improved" at 1 year. There were no adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: A large percentage of acute and importantly chronic lumbar disc herniation patients treated with chiropractic spinal manipulation reported clinically relevant improvement.

Outcomes from magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed symptomatic cervical disk herniation patients treated with high-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulative therapy: a prospective cohort study with 3-month follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate outcomes of patients with cervical radiculopathy from cervical disk herniation (CDH) who are treated with spinal manipulative therapy. METHODS: Adult Swiss patients with neck pain and dermatomal arm pain; sensory, motor, or reflex changes corresponding to the involved nerve root; and at least 1 positive orthopaedic test for cervical radiculopathy were included. Magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed CDH linked with symptoms was required. Baseline data included 2 pain numeric rating scales (NRSs), for neck and arm, and the Neck Disability Index (NDI). At 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months after initial consultation, patients were contacted by telephone, and the NDI, NRSs, and patient's global impression of change data were collected. High-velocity, low-amplitude spinal manipulations were administered by experienced doctors of chiropractic. The proportion of patients responding "better" or "much better" on the patient's global impression of change scale was calculated. Pretreatment and posttreatment NRSs and NDIs were compared using the Wilcoxon test. Acute vs subacute/chronic patients' NRSs and NDIs were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included. At 2 weeks, 55.3% were "improved," 68.9% at 1 month and 85.7% at 3 months. Statistically significant decreases in neck pain, arm pain, and NDI scores were noted at 1 and 3 months compared with baseline scores (P < .0001). Of the subacute/chronic patients, 76.2% were improved at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients in this study, including subacute/chronic patients, with symptomatic magnetic resonance imaging-confirmed CDH treated with spinal manipulative therapy, reported significant improvement with no adverse events.