Association between facet joint osteoarthritis and the Oswestry Disability Index

AIM:To investigate the correlation of facet joint osteoarthritis(FJOA) at lumbar levels L4/L5 and L5/S1 and the Oswestry Disability Index(ODI).METHODS:The study involved lumbar MRIs of 591 patients with a mean age of 47.3 years.The MRIs of the lumbar spine were performed on a 1.5 Tesla scanner(Magnetom Avanto,Siemens AG,Erlangen,Germany) using a dedicated receive only spine coil.After initial blinding,each dataset was evaluated by 2 board certified radiologist with more than 5 years experience in musculoskeletal imaging.In total 2364 facet joints were graded.Degenerative changes of the facet joints were evaluated according to the 4-point scale as proposed by Weishaupt et al Functional status was assessed using the ODI.The index is scored from 0 to 100 and interpreted as follows:0%-20%,minimaldisability; 20%-40%,moderate disability; 40%-60%,severe disability; 60%-80%,crippled; 80%-100%,patients are bedbound.Spearman’s coefficient of rank correlation was used for statistical analysis,with significance set at P 【 0.05.RESULTS:In total 2364 facet joints at lumbar levels L4/5 and L5/S1 were analysed in 591 individuals.FJOA was present in 97%(L4/L5) and 98%(L5/S1).At level L4/5(left/right) 17/15(2.9%/2.5%) were described as grade 0,146/147(24.7%/24.9%) as grade 1,290/302(49.1%/51.1%) as grade 2 and 138/127(23.4%/21.5%) as grade 3.At level L5/S1(left/right) 10/11(1.7%/1.9%) were described as grade 0,136/136(23.0%/23.0%) as grade 1,318/325(53.8%/55.0%) as grade 2 and 127/119(21.5%/20.1%) as grade 3.Regarding the ODI scores,patients’ disability had a minimum of 0% and a maximum of 91.11% with an arithmetic mean of 32.77% ± 17.02%.The majority of patients(48.39%) had moderate functional disability(21%-40%).There was no significant correlation between FJOA and ODI on both sides of lumbar level L4/5 and on the left side of lumbar level L5/S1.A weak positive correlation was evaluated between ODI and FJOA on the right side of lumbar level L5/S1.CONCLUSION:The missing correlation of FJOA and ODI confirms our clinical experience that imaging alone is an insufficient approach explaining low back pain.Clinical correlation is imperative for an adequate diagnostic advance in patients with low back pain.

Combined administration of platelet rich plasma and autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate for spinal cord injury: a descriptive case series

Administration of platelet rich plasma(PRP) and bone marrow aspirate concentrate(BMAC) has shown some promise in the treatment of neurological conditions;however, there is limited information on combined administration. As such, the purpose of this study was to assess safety and functional outcomes for patients administered combined autologous PRP and BMAC for spinal cord injury(SCI). This retrospective case series included seven patients who received combined treatment of autologous PRP and BMAC via intravenous and intrathecal administration as salvage therapy for SCI. Patients were reviewed for adverse reactions and clinical outcomes using the Oswestry Disability Index(ODI) for up to 1 year, as permitted by availability of follow-up data. Injury levels ranged from C3 through T11, and elapsed time between injury and salvage therapy ranged from 2.4 months to 6.2 years. Post-procedure complications were mild and rare, consisting only of self-limited headache and subjective memory impairment in one patient. Four patients experienced severe disability prior to PRP combined with BMAC injection, as evidenced by high(> 48/100) Oswestry Disability Index scores. Longitudinal Oswestry Disability Index scores for two patients with incomplete SCI at C6 and C7, both of whom had cervical spine injuries, demonstrated a decrease of 28–40% following salvage therapy, representing an improvement from severe to minimal disability. In conclusion, intrathecal/intravenous co-administration of PRP and BMAC resulted in no significant complications and may have had some clinical benefits. Larger clinical studies are needed to further test this method of treatment for patients with SCI who otherwise have limited meaningful treatment options. This study was reviewed and approved by the Ohio Health Institutional Review Board(IRB No. 1204946) on May 16, 2018.

Magnetic resonance imaging-based interpretation of degenerative changes in the lower lumbar segments and therapeutic consequences

Intervertebral disc degeneration and facet joint osteoarthritis of the lumbar spine are, among others, wellknown as a cause of low back and lower extremity pain. Together with their secondary disorders they set a big burden on health care systems and economics worldwide. Despite modern imaging modalities, such as magnetic resonance imaging, for a large proportion of patients with low back pain(LBP) it remains difficult to provide a specific diagnosis. The fact that nearly all the lumbar structures are possible sources of LBP, may serve as a possible explanation. Furthermore, our clinical experience confirms, that imaging alone is not a sufficient approach explaining LBP. Here, the Oswestry Disability Index, as the most commonly used measure to quantify disability for LBP, may serve as an easy-toapply questionnaire to evaluate the patient's ability to cope with everyday life. For therapeutic purposes, among the different options, the lumbar facet joint intraarticular injection of corticosteroids in combination with an anaesthetic solution is one of the most frequently performed interventional procedures. Although widely used the clinical benefit of intra-articular steroid injections remains controversial. Therefore, prior to therapy, standardized diagnostic algorithms for an accurate assessment, classification and correlation of degenerative changes of the lumbar spine are needed.

Manipulation for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis:A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Objective: To assess the effectiveness and safety of manipulation intervention for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis(DLS).Methods: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis. A full-scale retrieval method was performed until February 1, 2021, including nine databases. The homogeneity of different studies was summarized using the Review Manager. The quality of studies was determined with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.The evidence quality was graded with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach.Results: A total of 6 studies involving 524 participants were included. The review demonstrated that manipulation has statistically significant improvements for treating DLS according to Japanese Orthopedic Association scores(mean difference, 3.76;95% confidence interval, 2.63 to 4.90;P <.001) and visual analog scale scores(mean difference,-1.50;95% confidence interval,-1.66 to-1.33;P <.001)compared to the control group. One study reported that the difference in the Oswestry Disability Index between the traction group and the combination of manipulation and traction group was statistically significant(P <.05), while another reported that manipulation treatment can significantly improve the lumbar spine rotation angle on X-ray images compared with the baseline data(P <.05). Moreover, the manipulation group(experimental group) had fewer adverse events than the lumbar traction group(control group).Conclusion: Manipulation intervention is more effective and safer for DLS. Nevertheless, large-scale randomized controlled trials are required to confirm the current conclusions.

Evaluation of Patients Who Received Robotic Therapy after Spinal Cord Injuries

Background: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the robotic device used in lower limb rehabilitation to reduce motor impairment and improve motor performance in patients with traumatic spinal injury. Methods: The data were obtained by retrospective analysis of patients who underwent lower extremity rehabilitation after traumatic spinal injury by robot-assisted rehabilitation in the hospital between December 2017 and December 2019. The results were statistically analyzed and shown as mean ± SD (min-max). Results: A total of 51 patients with mean age of 59.51 ± 8.2 (38 - 72) were admitted to the clinic. Mean ages of thirty-one male patients and twenty females patients were 58.74 ± 8.88 (38 - 77) and 60.7 ± 7.09 (44 - 72), respectively. Comparing ages in terms of gender, it was not statistically significant (p = 0.441). Body mass indexes of male patients were 32.84 ± 6.52 (20 - 48) and 31.4 ± 7.73 (18 - 48) for females. Body mass index of patients was not statistically significant in terms of their gender (p = 0.478). Oswestry disability index scores were 32.04 ± 10.74 (16 - 58) before treatment and 30.69 ± 10.31 (15 - 55) after treatment. Oswestry disability index values before and after robotic rehabilitation were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Significant improvement was observed in ASIA scale values after rehabilitation. Conclusions: The motor function gains obtained during the robot-assisted treatment of traumatic spinal injury patients showed robotic device was useful in the training program. Robotic rehabilitation was effective in the improvement of the lower extremities during motor examination.

Comparing the Effectiveness of Motor Control Exercises versus Mckenzie Exercises for Work Related Back Pain

Background: Work related low back pain has been identified as a one of the most costly disorders among the worldwide working population. This condition was highly prevalent that approximately 85% patients having back pain were brought on by prolonged sitting. With the rapid development of modern technology, sitting has now become the most common posture in today’s work- place. Idea of using motor control learning approach provides the optimal control and coordination of the spine. The McKenzie evaluation was received using repeated movements and sustained positions. Therefore high quality randomized clinical trial was required to compare the effectiveness of these treatments for work related low back pain. Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of motor control exercises and McKenzie exercises in reducing pain and disability in work related low back pain. Method: The study included 40 subjects with work related low back pain due to prolonged sitting. They were randomly allocated into two groups (Group A and Group B). Group A was treated with motor control exercises and group B was treated with McKenzie exercises for 4 weeks. Results: Both the groups have shown statically significant improvement in vas with p < 0.0001 and ODI with p < 0.0001. When the comparison was done after the 4 weeks, the percentage of improvement in group A was much higher than Group B. Conclusion: The study concluded that motor control exercises have shown statically and clinically significant improvement in reducing pain and disability when compared to McKenzie exercises among work related low back pain subjects.