This review article describes anatomy, physiology, pathophysiology and treatment of intervertebral disc. The intervertebral discs lie between the vertebral bodies, linking them together. The components of the disc are nucleus pulposus, annulus fibrosus and cartilagenous end-plates. The blood supply to the disc is only to the cartilagenous end-plates. The nerve supply is basically through the sinovertebral nerve. Biochemically, the important constituents of the disc are collagen fibers, elastin fibers and aggrecan. As the disc ages, degeneration occurs, osmotic pressure is lost in the nucleus, dehydration occurs, and the disc loses its height. During these changes, nociceptive nuclear material tracks and leaks through the outer rim of the annulus. This is the main source of discogenic pain. While this is occurring, the degenerative disc, having lost its height, effects the structures close by, such as ligamentum flavum, facet joints, and the shape of the neural foramina. This is the main cause of spinal stenosis and radicular pain due to the disc degeneration in the aged populations. Diagnosis is done by a strict protocol and treatment options are described in this review. The rationale for new therapies are to substitute the biochemical constituents, or augment nucleus pulposus or regenerate cartilaginous end-plate or finally artificial disc implantation..

Intervertebral disc: anatomy-physiology-pathophysiology-treatment.

Background Comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines for interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain are described here to provide recommendations for clinicians. Objective To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic spinal pain. Design Systematic assessment of the literature. Methods Strength of evidence was assessed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria utilizing 5 levels of evidence ranging from Level I to III with 3 subcategories in Level II. Outcomes Short-term pain relief was defined as relief lasting at least 6 months and long-term relief was defined as longer than 6 months, except for intradiscal therapies, mechanical disc decompression, spinal cord stimulation and intrathecal infusion systems, wherein up to one year relief was considered as short-term. Results The indicated evidence for accuracy of diagnostic facet joint nerve blocks is Level I or II-1 in the diagnosis of lumbar, thoracic, and cervical facet joint pain. The evidence for lumbar and cervical provocation discography and sacroiliac joint injections is Level II-2, whereas it is Level II-3 for thoracic provocation discography. The indicated evidence for therapeutic interventions is Level I for caudal epidural steroid injections in managing disc herniation or radiculitis, and discogenic pain without disc herniation or radiculitis. The evidence is Level I or II-1 for percutaneous adhesiolysis in management of pain secondary to post-lumbar surgery syndrome. The evidence is Level II-1 or II-2 for therapeutic cervical, thoracic, and lumbar facet joint nerve blocks; for caudal epidural injections in managing pain of post-lumbar surgery syndrome, and lumbar spinal stenosis, for cervical interlaminar epidural injections in managing cervical pain (Level II-1); for lumbar transforaminal epidural injections; and spinal cord stimulation for post-lumbar surgery syndrome. The indicated evidence for intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET), mechanical disc decompression with automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy (APLD), and percutaneous lumbar laser discectomy (PLDD) is Level II-2. Limitations The limitations of these guidelines include a continued paucity of the literature, lack of updates, and conflicts in preparation of systematic reviews and guidelines by various organizations. Conclusion The indicated evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic interventions is variable from Level I to III. These guidelines include the evaluation of evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in managing chronic spinal pain and recommendations for managing spinal pain. However, these guidelines do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. Further, these guidelines also do not represent "standard of care."

/pdf/comprehensive-evidence-based-guidelines-for-interventional-25v98tginx.pdf

Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines for Interventional Techniques in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain

/pdf/comprehensive-evidence-based-guidelines-forinterventional-42xrrh561x.pdf

Comprehensive Evidence-Based Guidelines forInterventional Techniques in the Managementof Chronic Spinal Pain

A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intradiscal electrothermal therapy for the treatment of discogenic low back pain ☆

Evidence-based practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain are systematically developed and professionally derived statements and recommendations that assist both physicians and patients in making decisions about appropriate health care in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic or persistent pain. The guidelines were developed utilizing an evidence-based approach to increase patient access to treatment, to improve outcomes and appropriateness of care, and to optimize cost-effectiveness. All types of relevant and published evidence and consensus were utilized. The guidelines include a discussion of their purpose, rationale, and importance, including descriptions of the patient population served, the methodology, and the pathophysiologic basis for intervention. Multiple diagnostic and therapeutic interventional techniques are included in this document. Strong evidence was shown for diagnostic facet joint blocks for the diagnosis of facet joint pain, and lumbar provocative discography for discogenic pain. Moderate evidence was shown for sacroiliac joint blocks in the diagnosis of sacroiliac joint pain, and for transforaminal epidural injections in the preoperative evaluation of patients with negative or inconclusive imaging studies, but with clinical findings of nerve root irritation. Moderate to strong evidence was shown for multiple therapeutic interventional techniques including medial branch blocks and medial branch neurotomy; caudal epidural steroid injections and transforaminal epidural steroid injections; lumbar percutaneous adhesiolysis; and implantable therapies. These guidelines do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. It is expected that a provider will establish a plan of care on a case-by-case basis, taking into account an individual patient's medical condition, personal needs, and preferences, and the physician's experience. Based on an individual patient's needs, treatment different from that outlined here could be warranted. These guidelines do not represent "standard of care."

https://www.painphysicianjournal.com/current/pdf?article=MTI3&journal=14

Evidence-Based Practice Guidelines for Interventional Techniques in the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain

Objective. This one-year pilot outcome study was designed to investigate prospectively a series of patients with chronic discogenic back pain who underwent intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty (IDET). Patients with chronic discogenic low back pain usually respond poorly to conservative medical care. Spinal fusion procedures have yielded mixed results. IDET is a new procedure to heat the intervertebral disc for the purpose of relieving discogenic pain. This study presents the one-year results for the first 32 patients undergoing the IDET procedure. The objective of this article is to determine the safety and efficacy of the IDET procedure in patients with chronic discogenic back pain. Methods. Utilizing standard discographic technique, the disc was heated using a navigable intradiscal catheter with a temperature-controlled thermal resistive coil. Six-month and one-year outcomes were assessed comparatively within subjects using a Roland-Morris (RM) questionnaire and a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and between subjects using the NASS Low Back Pain Outcome Assessment Instrument Satisfaction Index and a general activity scale modified from the back pain/disability scale from the same instrument. The results from the individual outcome measures were combined to generate an overall outcome of favorable, nonfavorable, and no change. Results. There were no significant differences between overall outcome measures at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups. At 12 month follow-up the VAS had a mean decrease of 1.84 (sd = 2.38) and the RM had a mean decrease of 4.03 (sd = 4.82). 78.1% of patients stated that the procedure met their expectations or that they would undergo the same treatment for the same outcome. 53.1% of patients stated that their overall activity level was either better or much better compared to before the procedure. Overall, 62.5% had a favorable outcome, 12.5% nonfavorable, and 25% no change. Patients with excellent or good catheter positions and those with low pressure sensitive discs on preoperative discography had the most favorable outcomes. There were no significant complications. Conclusions. One-year pilot study outcome results suggest that IDET may be an effective, minimally invasive treatment for chronic discogenic low back pain.

Intradiscal Electrothermal Annuloplasty (IDET): A Novel Approach for Treating Chronic Discogenic Back Pain.

This was a pilot study to test the potential effectiveness of intradiscal restorative injection therapy and compare with intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET). Thirty-five patients for intradiscal injection and seventy-four for IDET took part in the study. All patients had intractable chronic discogenic low back pain, confirmed by discogram study. Injection solution consisted of glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate combined with hypertonic dextrose and dimethylsulfoxide. Outcome was rated as 0-10 on visual analog scale (VAS), satisfaction rate, and flare up before and after the procedures. Post-procedure, patients were followed from 6 months to 18 months. Pain relief was statistically significant for both procedures, but slightly better for injections (2.2 VAS) than for IDET (1.27 VAS). 47.8% of IDET patients reported that they felt better, whereas 65.6% of injection patients reported this outcome. Among IDET patients, 35.8% reported they were worse, while no restorative injection patient reported worsening of pain. Post-procedure flare-up occurred more frequently after restorative injection (81%) than after IDET (68.9%) and was more severe (7.9 versus 6.1 VAS, respectively). However, the duration of pain flare-up was notably shorter for restorative injections (8.6 days) than for IDET (33.1 days). Biochemical intradiscal restorative injections may be useful to reduce pain and disability in patients with chronic discogenic low back pain, and have clinically similar efficacy to IDET, but with improved cost-benefit ratio. The results of this study indicate that controlled random prospective comparative studies need to be performed to establish the efficacy of this treatment.

Comparison of intradiscal restorative injections and intradiscal electrothermal treatment (IDET) in the treatment of low back pain.

P163. In Vivo Safety Study of Intradiscal Restorative Injection: Assessment of Neural Toxicity of Restorative Injectate

https://www.prolotherapy.com/Klein_Biochemical%20injection%20treatment%20for%20discogenic%20bank%20pain_2003.pdf

Biochemical injection treatment for discogenic low back pain: a pilot study

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Bjorn Eek

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Intradiscal Electrothermal Annuloplasty (IDET): A Novel Approach for Treating Chronic Discogenic Back Pain.

Comparison of intradiscal restorative injections and intradiscal electrothermal treatment (IDET) in the treatment of low back pain.

P163. In Vivo Safety Study of Intradiscal Restorative Injection: Assessment of Neural Toxicity of Restorative Injectate

Biochemical injection treatment for discogenic low back pain: a pilot study