Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Does the Use of Epiduroscopic Lysis of Adhesions Reduce the Need for Spinal Cord Stimulation in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome? A Short-Term Pilot Study||Authors:||Tuijp, Steven J.
VAN ZUNDERT, Jan
DE VOOGHT, Pieter
|Issue Date:||2018||Publisher:||WILEY||Source:||PAIN PRACTICE, 18(7), p. 839-844||Abstract:||Background and AimsPersistent low back pain after initially successful surgery that is not attributed to structural deficits is called failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). When conservative and minimal invasive therapy fail, the recommended treatment is spinal cord stimulation (SCS). Because epidural fibrosis can be a contributing factor in the majority of FBSS patients, lumbosacral epiduroscopic lysis of adhesions may be considered as a less invasive alternative treatment option. We hypothesized that the use of epiduroscopic lysis of adhesions could reduce the need for SCS. MethodsA pilot study was performed in 35 consecutive patients with FBSS who underwent epiduroscopic lysis of adhesions. SCS was considered if epiduroscopic lysis of adhesions gave less than 50% global perceived effect (GPE) improvement after 15 months of follow-up. The GPE was measured 1 week and 6 months after the procedure. ResultsOver a period of 69 months, 35 patients were included. After 15 months of follow-up, 43% of patients required SCS. Eight of the 15 patients who reported no short-term improvement needed SCS; those patients had severe epidural fibrosis. One week after epiduroscopic lysis of adhesions, 34%, 23%, and 43% of patients reported GPE improvement of > 50%, 20% to 50%, and < 20%, respectively. After 6 months, 5 patients were lost to follow-up, and 30%, 17%, and 16% of patients reported improvement of > 50%, 20% to 50%, and < 20%, respectively. ConclusionsIn this pilot study we observed a reduced need for SCS when lumbosacral epiduroscopic lysis of adhesions was used for patients with FBSS and magnetic resonance imaging-proven adhesions. These observations justify the evaluation of both treatment options in a prospective observational trial.||Notes:||[Tuijp, Steven J.; Van Zundert, Jan; De Vooght, Pieter; Puylaert, Martine; Mestrum, Roel; Heylen, Rene; Vanelderen, Pascal] Ziekenhuis Oost Limburg, Dept Anesthesiol Intens Care Emergency Care & Pai, Lanaken, Belgium. [Van Zundert, Jan] Maastricht Univ, Dept Anesthesiol & Pain Med, Med Ctr, Maastricht, Netherlands. [Vanelderen, Pascal] Univ Hasselt, Dept Med & Life Sci, Diepenbeek, Belgium.||Keywords:||lumbosacral epiduroscopy; failed back surgery syndrome; spinal cord stimulation; cost;lumbosacral epiduroscopy; failed back surgery syndrome; spinal cord stimulation; cost||Document URI:||http://hdl.handle.net/1942/27664||ISSN:||1530-7085||e-ISSN:||1533-2500||DOI:||10.1111/papr.12681||ISI #:||000443318000002||Rights:||2018 World Institute of Pain, 1530-7085/18/$15.00Pain Practice, Volume 18, Issue 7, 2018 839–844||Category:||A1||Type:||Journal Contribution||Validations:||ecoom 2019|
|Appears in Collections:||Research publications|
Show full item record
Files in This Item:
|Published version||68.69 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open Request a copy|
checked on Sep 5, 2020
WEB OF SCIENCETM
checked on May 21, 2022
checked on May 26, 2022
checked on May 26, 2022
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.