Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Severity by CT or MRI Does Not Predict Response to Epidural Corticosteroid versus Lidocaine Injections.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Epidural steroid injections may offer little-to-no short-term benefit in the overall population of patients with symptomatic spinal stenosis compared with lidocaine alone. We investigated whether imaging could identify subgroups of patients who might benefit most. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A secondary analysis of the Lumbar Epidural Steroid Injections for Spinal Stenosis prospective, double-blind trial was performed, and patients were randomized to receive an epidural injection of lidocaine with or without corticosteroids. Patients (n = 350) were evaluated for qualitative and quantitative MR imaging or CT measures of lumbar spinal stenosis. The primary clinical end points were the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the leg pain numeric rating scale at 3 weeks following injection. ANCOVA was used to assess the significance of interaction terms between imaging measures of spinal stenosis and injectate type on clinical improvement. RESULTS: There was no difference in the improvement of disability or leg pain scores at 3 weeks between patients injected with epidural lidocaine alone compared with corticosteroid and lidocaine when accounting for the primary imaging measures of qualitative spinal stenosis assessment (interaction coefficients for disability score, -0.1; 95% CI, -1.3 to 1.2; P = .90; and for the leg pain score, 0.1; 95% CI, -0.6 to 0.8; P = .81) or the quantitative minimum thecal sac cross-sectional area (interaction coefficients for disability score, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.03; P = .40; and for the leg pain score, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.03; P = .33). CONCLUSIONS: Imaging measures of spinal stenosis are not associated with differential clinical responses following epidural corticosteroid injection.

Changes in Pain Sensitivity and Pain Modulation During Oral Opioid Treatment: The Impact of Negative Affect.

OBJECTIVE: Opioids are frequently prescribed for chronic low back pain (CLBP), but there are broad individual differences in the benefits and risks of opioid therapy, including the development opioid-induced hyperalgesia. This study examined quantitative sensory testing (QST) data among a group of CLBP patients undergoing sustained oral opioid treatment. We investigated whether individual differences in psychological characteristics were related to opioid-induced changes in pain perception and pain modulation. DESIGN: The six-month, open-label trial evaluated patients with low to high levels of negative affect (e.g., symptoms of distress, depression and anxiety); participants underwent QST at baseline (prior to initiating treatment) and during oral opioid treatment. SETTING: A chronic pain management center. PATIENTS: The 31 study participants had chronic discogenic back pain, with a pain intensity rating >3/10. Participants were divided into groups with high vs. low levels of Negative Affect (NA). RESULTS: In the previously-published manuscript describing the clinical outcomes of the trial, high NA patients achieved only about half of the analgesic effect observed in the low NA group (Wasan AD, Michna E, Edwards RR, et al. Psychiatric comorbidity is associated prospectively with diminished opioid analgesia and increased opioid misuse in patients with chronic low back pain. Anesthesiology 2015;123:861-72). The QST findings reported here suggested that tolerance to experimental (cold pressor) pain and conditioned pain modulation tended to decrease in the high NA group over the course of opioid treatment, while temporal summation of mechanical pain declined in the low NA group. CONCLUSIONS: These results reveal that while the low NA group seemed to exhibit a generally adaptive, analgesic pattern of changes during opioid management, the high NA group showed a pattern more consistent with opioid-induced hyperalgesic processes. A greater susceptibility to hyperalgesia-promoting changes in pain modulation among patients with high levels of distress may contribute to a lower degree of benefit from opioid treatment in high NA patients.

Spinal cord stimulation for chronic intractable angina pectoris: a unified theory on its mechanism.

The use of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for chronic intractable anginal pain was first described in 1987. Numerous studies have demonstrated its efficacy in improving exercise tolerance, decreasing frequency of anginal episodes, and prolonging time to electrocardiographic signs of ischemia. This review will examine the potential mechanisms of this antianginal effect and propose a unified hypothesis explaining it. The effect of SCS involves a mutual interaction of decreased pain, decreased sympathetic tone, and a likely redistribution of myocardial blood flow to ischemic regions. Spinal cord stimulation reduces the transmission of nociceptive impulse via the spinothalamic tract due to an enhanced release of gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) from dorsal horn interneurons. Improvement of myocardial blood flow at the microvascular level has been demonstrated by positron emission tomography (PET). A decreased sympathetic tone has been shown by norepinephrine kinetics, tests of sympathetic reflexes, and the use of ganglionic blockers. We hypothesize that SCS exerts its beneficial effects by decreasing pain and decreasing sympathetic tone, the result of which is decreased myocardial oxygen consumption along with an improved myocardial microcirculatory blood flow.

Opioid therapy for chronic noncancer back pain. A randomized prospective study.

STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, open, long-term, repeated-dose comparison of an anti-inflammatory drug and two opioid regimens in 36 patients with back pain. OBJECTIVES: To examine the long-term safety and efficacy of chronic opioid therapy in a randomized trial of patients with back pain. METHODS: All participants underwent a 4-week washout period of no opioid medication before being randomly assigned to one of three treatment regimens for 16 weeks: 1) naproxen only, 2) set-dose oxycodone, or 3) titrated-dose oxycodone and sustained-release morphine sulfate. All patients then were assigned to a titrated dose of opioids for 16 weeks and then gradually tapered off their medication for 12 weeks. Finally, all participants were monitored for a 1-month posttreatment washout period. Each patient was called once a week for a report on pain, activity, mood, medication, hours awake, and adverse effects and was monitored carefully for signs of abuse and noncompliance. RESULTS: Weekly reports during the experimental phase showed the titrated-dose group to have less pain (P < 0.001) and less emotional distress (P < 0.001) than the other two groups. Both opioid groups were significantly different from the naproxen-only group. During the titration phase, patients also reported significantly less pain and improved mood. Few differences were found in activity or hours asleep, or between average pretreatment and posttreatment phone-interview and questionnaire variables. No adverse events occurred, and only one participant showed signs of abuse behavior. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that opioid therapy has a positive effect on pain and mood but little effect on activity and sleep. Opioid therapy for chronic back pain was used without significant risk of abuse. However, tapered-off opioid treatment is palliative and without long-term benefit.