Unrelieved chronic pain is a worldwide epidemic. Chronic pain has been subject to multiple international initiatives through the World Health Organization. Interventional Pain Medicine, the use of minimally invasive techniques to relieve pain, is the best approach when simpler measures such as physical therapy or medications fail. However, these procedures can be associated with significant risk and expense. Establishing uniformity in diagnostic criteria and procedural performance can reduce both morbidity and unnecessary procedures, and hence healthcare expenditures. While other texts explain how to perform these procedures, little focus has been given to diagnostic considerations: if and when these procedures should be performed. Evidence-Based Interventional Pain Medicine focuses on a balance between effectiveness and safety of interventional management for specific diagnoses, across all areas of chronic pain including: Head, neck and shoulder pain. Lower back pain. Neuropathic pain syndromes. Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. Pain in patients with cancer. Vascular and visceral pain. Evidence-Based Interventional Pain Medicine provides essential knowledge for anyone who uses, or intends to use, interventional pain techniques.

Evidence-based interventional pain medicine according to clinical diagnoses.

Background Prolotherapy involves repeated injections of irritant solutions to strengthen lumbosacral ligaments and reduce some types of chronic low-back pain; spinal manipulation and exercises are often used to enhance its effectiveness. Objectives To determine the efficacy of prolotherapy in adults with chronic low-back pain. Search strategy We searched CENTRAL 2006, Issue 3 and MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and AMED from their respective beginnings to October 2006, with no restrictions on language, and consulted content experts. Selection criteria We included randomised (RCT) and quasi-randomised controlled trials (QRCT) that compared prolotherapy injections to control injections, alone or in combination with other treatments, which measured pain or disability before and after the intervention. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently selected the trials and assessed methodological quality. Intervention protocols varied from study to study, making meta-analysis impossible. Main results We identified five high quality studies with a total of 366 participants. All measured pain or disability levels at six months, and four measured the proportion of participants reporting a greater than 50% reduction in pain or disability scores. Three randomized controlled trials (206 participants) found that prolotherapy injections alone are no more effective than control injection for chronic low-back pain and disability. At six months, there was no difference between groups in mean pain or disability scores (2 RCTs; 184 participants) and no difference in proportions who reported over 50% improvement in pain or disability (3 RCTs; 206 participants). These trials could not be pooled due to clinical heterogeneity. Two RCTs (160 participants) found that prolotherapy injections, given with spinal manipulation, exercise, and other therapies, are more effective than control injections for chronic low-back pain and disability. At six months, one study reported a significant difference between groups in mean pain and disability scores, whereas the other study did not. Both studies reported a significant difference in the proportion of individuals who reported over 50% reduction in disability or pain. Co-interventions confounded interpretation of results and clinical heterogeneity in the trials prevented pooling. Authors' conclusions There is conflicting evidence regarding the efficacy of prolotherapy injections for patients with chronic low-back pain. When used alone, prolotherapy is not an effective treatment for chronic low-back pain. When combined with spinal manipulation, exercise, and other co-interventions, prolotherapy may improve chronic low-back pain and disability. Conclusions are confounded by clinical heterogeneity amongst studies and by the presence of co-interventions.

/pdf/prolotherapy-injections-for-chronic-low-back-pain-gkw3zxvbkb.pdf

Prolotherapy injections for chronic low‐back pain

Recent advances in molecular biology, cell biology and material sciences have opened a new emerging field of techniques for the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders. These new treatment modalities aim for biological repair of the affected tissues by introducing cell-based tissue replacements, genetic modifications of resident cells or a combination thereof. So far, these techniques have been successfully applied to various tissues such as bone and cartilage. However, application of these treatment modalities to cure intervertebral disc degeneration is in its very early stages and mostly limited to experimental studies in vitro or in animal studies. We will discuss the potential and possible shortcomings of current approaches to biologically cure disc degeneration by gene therapy or tissue engineering. Despite the increasing number of studies examining the therapeutic potential of biological treatment strategies, a practicable solution to routinely cure disc degeneration might not be available in the near future. However, knowledge gained from these attempts might be applied in a foreseeable future to cure the low back pain that often accompanies disc degeneration and therefore be beneficial for the patient.

/pdf/biological-treatment-strategies-for-disc-degeneration-v6h8eujwan.pdf

Biological treatment strategies for disc degeneration: potentials and shortcomings

Diagnosis and treatment of lumbar discogenic pain due to internal disc disruption (IDD) remains a challenge. It accounts for 39% of patients with low back pain. The mechanism of discogenic pain remains unclear and its clinical presentation is atypical. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can find high-intensity zone as an indirect indication of IDD. However, relative low sensitivity (26.7% to 59%) and high false-positive (24%) and false-negative (38%) rates reduce the value of MRI in screening for the existence of painful IDD. Provocative discography can provide unique information about the pain source and the morphology of the disc. It may also provide information for selecting appropriate treatment for the painful annular tear. Adjunctive therapies, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, physical therapy, rehabilitation, antidepressants, antiepileptics, and acupuncture, have been used for low back pain. The value of these treatments for discogenic pain is yet to be established. Intradiscal steroid injection has not been proved to provide long-term benefits. Intradiscal electrothermal therapy may offer some pain relief for a group of well-selected patients. No benefits have been found for the intradiscal radiofrequency thermocoagulation. A block in the ramus communicans may interfere with the transition of painful information from the discs to the central nervous system. Disc cell transplantation is in the experimental stage. It has the potential to become a useful tool for the prevention and treatment of discogenic pain. Minimally invasive treatments provide alternatives for discogenic pain with the appeal of cost-effectiveness and, possibly, less long-term side effects. However, the value of most of these therapies is yet to be established. More basic science and clinical studies are needed to improve the clinical efficacy of minimally invasive treatments.

Diagnosis and minimally invasive treatment of lumbar discogenic pain--a review of the literature.

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) stimulation has been shown to effect differentiation and activation of human chondrocytes. A study involving stimulation of rabbit disc cells with LIPUS revealed upregulation of cell proliferation and proteoglycan (PG) synthesis. However, the effect of LIPUS on human nucleus pulposus cells has not been investigated. In the present study, therefore, we investigated whether LIPUS stimulation of a human nucleus pulposus cell line (HNPSV-1) exerted a positive effect on cellular activity. HNPSV-1 cells were encapsulated in 1.2% sodium alginate solution at 1x10 5 cells/ml and cultured at 10 beads/ well in 6-well plates. The cells were stimulated for 20 min each day using a LIPUS generator, and the effects of LIPUS were evaluated by measuring DNA and PG synthesis. Furthermore, mRNA expression was analyzed by cDNA microarray using total RNA extracted from the cultured cells. Our study revealed no significant difference in cell proliferation between the control and the ultrasound treated groups. However, PG production was significantly upregulated in HNPSV cells stimulated at intensities of 15, 30, 60, and 120 mW/cm 2 compared with the control. The results of cDNA array showed that LIPUS significantly stimulated the gene expression of growth factors and their receptors (BMP2, FGF7, TGFβR1 EGFRF1, VEGF). These findings suggest that LIPUS stimulation upregulates PG production in human nucleus pulposus cells by the enhancement of several matrix-related genes including growth factor-related genes. Safe and non-invasive stimulation using LIPUS may be a useful treatment for delaying the progression of disc degeneration.

https://ecmjournal.org/journal/papers/vol017/pdf/v017a02.pdf

Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound stimulates cell proliferation, proteoglycan synthesis and expression of growth factor-related genes in human nucleus pulposus cell line.

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.

Caren Elin

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

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