Recovery of impaired muscle function in severe sciatica

Motor Recovery Depends on Timing of Surgery in Patients With Lumbar Disk Herniation

BACKGROUND

Although approximately half of the patients undergoing lumbar disk surgery present with motor deficits, timing of surgery for radicular weakness is largely unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of surgical timing on motor recovery in patients with lumbar disk herniation (LDH) and to identify an ideal time window for intervention.

METHODS

In a single-center observational trial, 390 patients with LDH-associated motor deficits were prospectively followed for a minimum of 12 months after nonelective microscopic disk surgery. The duration of motor deficit before surgery was documented. Motor function was graded according to the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale. Statistical analysis of motor recovery applied unbiased recursive partitioning conditional inference tree to determine cutoff times for optimal surgical intervention. The slope of recovery calculated as the change of the MRC grade over time served as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

A preoperative motor deficit of MRC ≤2/5 and the duration of paresis were identified as the most important predictors of recovery ( P < .001). Surgery within 3 days was associated with a better recovery for both severe and moderate/mild deficits ( P = .017 for MRC ≤ 2/5; P < .001 for MRC > 2/5; number needed to treat [NNT] <2). A sensitivity analysis in mild motor deficits indicated a cutoff of 8 days.

CONCLUSION

Timing of surgery is crucial for motor recovery in LDH-associated deficits. Immediate diagnosis, imaging, and referral should be aimed for to allow disk surgery within 3 days in patients with severe and moderate radicular weakness. If functionally disabling, even mild deficits may warrant decompression within a week.

Predictors of the conservative management outcomes in patients with lumbar herniated nucleus pulposus: A prospective study in Indonesia

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to identify the predictors of the conservative management outcomes in patients with lumbar herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP).

METHODS

A prospective study was conducted between June 2010 and April 2012 in Banda Aceh, Indonesia. Clinical and baseline neurologic examinations such as passive straight leg raising test (SLRT), cross SLRT, and patellar and Achilles reflexes were assessed prior to the conservative management. The patients were evaluated at 2nd, 4th, 8th, 12th and 24th week following commencement of the conservative management.

RESULTS

We recruited and followed 171 HNP patients of which 35.7% of them had good outcome. At univariate analysis, patients with more than 12 months duration of complaint, those with dominant radicular pain, severe pain intensity (visual analogue scale 7-10), positive SLRT, positive cross SLRT, and reduced motor power of knee extensors (muscle strength grade 1-4), were associated with poor outcome. Multivariate analysis suggested that patients with dominant radicular type of pain were likely to had poor outcome compared to those with dominant back pain (odd ratio (OR) 10.57 with 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-96.93). Patients with reduced motor power of knee extensors also had a higher chance to have poor outcome compared to those who were normal (OR: 10.57; 95% CI: 1.15-96.93).

CONCLUSION

Type of pain and the strength of lower extremities could be able to predict the failure of conservative management in patients with lumbar disc herniation. However, further studies with the bigger sample size are warrant to validate our results.

Differential diagnosis of knee pain following a surgically induced lumbosacral plexus stretch injury. A case report

Background and Purpose: Knee joint biomechanics requires an understanding of lower extremity (LE) segmental interactions. In some cases, knee pain may arise as a result of altered LE biomechanics; while in other cases, knee pain may stem from other causes, such as a peripheral nerve injury. Case Description: A 33-year-old woman presented via direct access for physical therapist (PT) examination with a chief complaint of left knee pain. The day after undergoing a dilation and curettage (D&C) procedure the patient had an acute onset of gait dysfunction. Over the next few days, the patient developed left anterior knee pain (7/10 at worst) in addition to a significant change in physical functioning (Lower Extremity Functional Scale [LEFS] 38/80). Physical examination revealed left LE weakness, altered sensation, and an absent Achilles deep tendon reflex. Outcomes: The patient's presentation was consistent with a lumbosacral plexus stretch injury, with S1 being most affected. A physiatrist was consulted and recommended initiating PT treatment with bi-weekly re-examination. The 6-week (14 visits) re-examination revealed abolished left knee pain and improved physical functioning (LEFS 66/80). Conclusion: Stretch injuries are a known complication of lithotomy positioning. Knowledge of this and the addition of a thorough examination allowed the PT to identify the possible cause of the patient's abrupt onset of left LE dysfunction. Regardless of mode of patient access, screening for referral is crucial and may include referral or, as in this case, consultation with other professionals.

Preoperative motor deficit in lumbar disc herniation and its influence on quality of life

Objective: Evaluate the impact of motor deficit (MD) on pain, disability, depression and quality of life measures of patients with LDH prior to a specific treatment. Methods: A total of 254 consecutively enrolled patients with LDH associated to neurological impairment and sciatica who have not responded to conservative treatment were evaluated. After reviewing the exclusion criteria, 168 were included. Validated instruments were used in the preoperative period to evaluate: pain, disability, quality of life, anxiety and depression. Results: Normal motor strength was observed in 57 (33.9%) patients and MD was observed in 111 (66.1%) cases. No statistically significant differences were observed between patients with and without MD regarding gender, age, level of herniation, lateralization and workers&amp;apos; compensation. Regarding quality of life, no difference was detected in the eight domains of SF36 and between the PCS and MCS groups. The only difference observed was a higher disability rate in the MD group, with the mean ODI difference being 7.84 (CI 95%: 1.82&#226;&#8364;"13.87; p=0.011). Motor weakness was observed in 35.1% (n=39/111) of patients who had abnormal results at the motor evaluation, being related to severity (X&#178;: 46.058; p&lt;0.0001). Conclusion: In patients with LDH without prior specific treatment, the presence of MD did not modify the pain, disability, depression measures and self-reported quality of life. The MD has no discriminative power for measures of quality of life in patients with LDH.

Recovery of motor deficit accompanying sciatica--subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

In patients with sciatica due to a lumbar disc herniation, it is generally recommended to reserve surgical treatment for those who suffer from intolerable pain or those who demonstrate persistent symptoms after conservative management. Controversy exists about the necessity of early surgical intervention for those patients that have an additional motor deficit.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the recovery of motor deficit among patients receiving early surgery to those receiving prolonged conservative treatment.

STUDY DESIGN

Subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

PATIENT SAMPLE

This subgroup analysis focuses on 150 (53%) of 283 patients with sciatica due to a lumbar disc herniation and whose symptoms at baseline (before randomization) were accompanied by a motor deficit.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Motor deficit was assessed through manual muscle testing and graded according to the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale.

METHODS

In total, 150 patients with 6 to 12 weeks of sciatica due to a lumbar disc herniation and whose symptoms were accompanied by a moderate (MRC Grade 4) or severe (MRC Grade 3) motor deficit were randomly allocated to early surgery or prolonged conservative treatment. Repeated standardized neurologic examinations were performed at baseline and at 8, 26, and 52 weeks after randomization. This study was supported by a grant from the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMW) and the Hoelen Foundation The Hague.

RESULTS

Sciatica recovered among seven (10%) of the 70 patients assigned to early surgery before surgery could be performed, and of the 80 patients assigned to conservative treatment, 32 patients (40%) were treated surgically because of intolerable pain. Baseline severity of motor deficit was graded moderate in 84% of patients and severe in 16% of patients. Motor deficit recovered significantly faster among patients allocated to early surgery (p=.01), but the difference was no longer significant at 26 (p=.21) or 52 weeks (p=.92). At 1 year, complete recovery of motor deficit was found in 81% of patients allocated to early surgery and in 80% of patients allocated to prolonged conservative treatment. Perceived overall recovery of sciatica was directly related to the presence of an accompanying motor deficit. Severe motor deficit at baseline (odds ratio, 5.4; confidence interval, 1.7-17.4) and a lumbar disc herniation encompassing ≥25% of the cross-sectional area of the spinal canal (odds ratio, 6.4; confidence interval, 1.3-31.8) were the most important risk factors for persistent deficit at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

Early surgery resulted in a faster recovery of motor deficit accompanying sciatica compared with prolonged conservative treatment but the difference was no longer significant during the final follow-up examination at 1 year.

How is recovery from low back pain measured? A systematic review of the literature

Recovery is commonly used as an outcome measure in low back pain (LBP) research. There is, however, no accepted definition of what recovery involves or guidance as to how it should be measured. The objective of the study was designed to appraise the LBP literature from the last 10 years to review the methods used to measure recovery. The research design includes electronic searches of Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane database of clinical trials and PEDro from the beginning of 1999 to December 2008. All prospective studies of subjects with non-specific LBP that measured recovery as an outcome were included. The way in which recovery was measured was extracted and categorised according to the domain used to assess recovery. Eighty-two included studies used 66 different measures of recovery. Fifty-nine of the measures did not appear in more than one study. Seventeen measures used pain as a proxy for recovery, seven used disability or function and seventeen were based on a combination of two or more constructs. There were nine single-item recovery rating scales. Eleven studies used a global change scale that included an anchor of 'completely recovered'. Three measures used return to work as the recovery criterion, two used time to insurance claim closure and six used physical performance. In conclusion, almost every study that measured recovery from LBP in the last 10 years did so differently. This lack of consistency makes interpretation and comparison of the LBP literature problematic. It is likely that the failure to use a standardised measure of recovery is due to the absence of an established definition, and highlights the need for such a definition in back pain research.

Health related quality of life after lumbar disc surgery: A prospective study of 145 patients

PURPOSE

This study compared health related quality of life (HRQOL) among lumber disc surgery patients to general population, and assessed the relationships between HRQOL and other outcome measures 2 and 14 months after surgery.

METHODS

The 15D instrument was use to measure HRQOL in 145 lumber disk surgery patients. Subjective outcome was also assessed by the Oswestry index, Short Depression Inventory (SDI) and pain, and objective outcome by trunk muscle strength and mobility of the spine.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) 15D score among the patients 2 months after surgery was 0.880 (0.104) compared to 0.941 (0.076) among general population (p = 0.016). The 15D, Oswestry and SDI scores remained unchanged during the follow-up, while the improvements in the spine mobility and trunk muscle strength were significant. Back pain decreased by 68% and leg pain by 74% from preoperative level to 2 months check-up. Leg pain further decreased during the following 12 months, while back pain remained unchanged. HRQOL was associated with age, pain, Oswestry and SDI indices, but not with physical function.

CONCLUSION

HRQOL measured by 15D was lower in lumber disc surgery patients compared to general population. 15D was associated with the subjective outcome measures of pain, Oswestry and SDI indices, but not with the objective measures of physical function. Thus, a combination of "disease specific" and "generic" measures is recommended to be used to obtain more accurate information about the overall welfare of individual.