Cannabis Use and Low-Back Pain: A Systematic Review.

Introduction: The potential use of cannabis and cannabinoid products for the treatment of low-back pain is an important area for investigation. As one of the leading reasons to visit a primary care provider, low-back pain results in a significant burden of disease in both the United States' economic and health care systems. Given the current opioid epidemic, it is important to seek novel analgesics and understand their efficacy for myriad pain conditions, including low-back pain. Materials and Methods: A systematic review was performed using multiple online databases to assess the association of cannabis use and low-back pain in the literature. Results: A total of 124 articles were produced via our search methods, 73 abstracts in total were screened, 16 articles underwent full-text review, and 6 articles were included in qualitative synthesis. Discussion: This systematic literature review reveals a lack of primary research investigating cannabis as a potential treatment of low-back pain and highlights the need for further investigation with well-designed clinical trials. There remain substantial political and legal barriers to performing such research. Conclusion: Although there is a considerable body of work on the usage of cannabinoid products for many medical conditions, including the treatment of chronic pain, more directed clinical research into their utility as an analgesic for low-back pain and related symptoms needs to be addressed.

The Impact of Local Steroid Administration on the Incidence of Neuritis following Lumbar Facet Radiofrequency Neurotomy.

BACKGROUND: Pain arising from the lumbar facet joints is a common cause of axial back pain in adults. Radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) of the medial branches of the spinal dorsal rami has been used as a treatment option. The most common side effect is transient, localized, burning, neuritic-type pain, termed post-neurotomy neuritis (PNN). Corticosteroids have been administered through the radiofrequency cannula after neurotomy to prevent PNN, but no study has examined the effects of this on PNN. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the incidence of PNN in patients who received corticosteroids after RFN and in those patients who did not receive corticosteroids. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective evaluation. SETTING: Single-site interventional pain management practice in an urban tertiary academic medical center. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-four patients were included in this study and were categorized into non-steroid (n = 87) and steroid (n = 77) groups. Patient's age, gender, body mass index (BMI), laterality of procedure, use of neuropathic pain medications, baseline pain, and duration of pain were all recorded. PNN was determined if the patient self-reported transient burning or neuropathic pain at the site prior to or at the 6-week routine follow-up encounter. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in demographic characteristics between the 2 groups in age, gender, baseline pain, and duration of pain. The proportion of patients in the steroid treated group with PNN was 5 out of 77 (6.4%) and the non-steroid group was 6 out of 87 (6.9%). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence in neuritis between individuals taking neuropathic agents and individuals not taking neuropathic agents. LIMITATIONS: This study has several limitations including small sample size, patients' self-reported neuropathic symptoms, and inability to draw strong conclusions due to the retrospective study design. A single interventionalist performed all the procedures in this retrospective study and variations in technique amongst others are inevitable. CONCLUSION: Administration of steroids after RFN does not reduce the incidence of post-neurotomy neuritis. Concurrently administering neuropathic medications does not protect against neuritis. KEY WORDS: Radiofrequency neurotomy, radiofrequency ablation, neuritis, corticosteroid, lumbar facet pain, post neurotomy neuritis.

Clinical experience using the Mann assessment of swallowing ability for identification of patients at risk for aspiration in a mixed-disease population.

PURPOSE: To determine the clinical performance characteristics of the Mann Assessment of Swallowing Ability (MASA) for predicting aspiration (determined by videofluoroscopic swallowing study [VFSS]) in a mixed population. METHOD: We selected 133 cases clinically evaluated using MASA and VFSS from January through June 2007. Ordinal risk rating (ORR) and total numeric score (TNS) were evaluated as predictors of aspiration on VFSS. To account for missing items, the maximum possible score was determined and a weighted percentage score calculated for each patient. We used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to compare the sensitivity and specificity of ORR and TNS for predicting aspiration. RESULTS: VFSS identified 51 (38.4%) aspirators, while ORR identified 54 (40.6%) as probable or definite aspiration and TNS 19 (14.3%) as moderate to severe aspiration risk. ROC analysis demonstrated an area under the curve of 0.74, 95% CI [0.66, 0.82], for ORR and 0.51, 95% CI [0.41, 0.61], for TNS. These ROC scores suggest that the MASA ORR is better at predicting aspiration on VFSS than the numeric score. CONCLUSION: In this sample, the subjective ORR had good predictive ability, while the percentage TNS failed to predict aspiration on VFSS. The MASA ORR assessment was a better predictor for a patient's aspiration risk in this population.