BackgroundFacet joint pain is a common cause of chronic low back pain (CLBP). Radiofrequency (RF) denervation is an effective treatment option.PurposeA systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to evaluate and compare the efficacy and effectiveness of different RF denervation treatments in managing facet joint-derived CLBP.MethodsThe Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and China Biology Medicine were searched to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from January 1966 through December 2021. Interventions included conventional radiofrequency denervation (CRF), pulsed radiofrequency denervation (PRF), pulsed radiofrequency treatment of the dorsal root ganglia (PRF-DRG), radiofrequency facet capsule denervation (RF-FC), and radiofrequency ablation under endoscopic guidance (ERFA). The outcome was the mean change in visual analog scale (VAS) score from baseline. A random-effects NMA was used to compare the pain relief effects of the interventions over the short term (≤6 months) and long term (12 months). The rank of effect estimation for each intervention was computed using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve.ResultsA total of 10 RCTs with 715 patients met the inclusion criteria. Moderate evidence indicated that CRF denervation had a greater effect on pain relief than sham control in the short term (standardized mean difference (SMD) −1.58, 95% confidence intervals (CI) −2.98 to −0.18) and the long term (SMD −4.90, 95% CI, −5.86 to −3.94). Fair evidence indicated that PRF denervation was more effective than sham control for pain over the long term (SMD −1.30, 95% CI, −2.17 to −0.43). Fair evidence showed that ERFA denervation was more effective for pain relief than sham control in the short term (SMD −3.07, 95% CI, −5.81 to −0.32) and the long term (SMD −4.00, 95% CI, −4.95 to −3.05). Fair evidence showed that RF-FC denervation was more effective for pain relief than sham control in the long term (SMD −1.11, 95% CI, −2.07 to −0.15). A fair level of evidence indicated that PRF-DRG denervation was more effective for pain relief than sham control in the short term (SMD −5.34, 95% CI, −8.30 to −2.39).ConclusionRF is an effective option for patients diagnosed with facet joint-derived CLBP.Systematic Review Registration: Identifier: CRD42022298238.
IntroductionThis study aimed to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of modified percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) in the surgical management of single-segment lumbar disc herniation (LDH) gluteal pain and to determine whether it provides a better clinical outcome than open lumbar discectomy (OD).MethodsA retrospective analysis of patients treated with modified PETD and OD for gluteal pain in LDH from January 2015 to December 2020 was conducted. Sample size was determined using a priori power analysis. Demographic information, surgical outcomes including procedure time (minutes), intraoperative blood loss (mL), hospital days, costs (RMB), fluoroscopy shots, recurrence and complications, etc., were recorded and analyzed. Prognostic outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Japanese Orthopedic Association Score (JOA) and modified MacNab criteria. The preoperative and postoperative VAS, ODI and JOA scores were recorded by two assistants. When the results were inconsistent, the scores were recorded again by the lead professor until all scores were consistently recorded in the data. MRI was used to assess radiological improvement and all patients received follow-ups for at least one year.ResultsThe sample size required for the study was calculated by a priori analysis, and a total of 72 participants were required for the study to achieve 95% statistical test power. A total of 93 patients were included, 47 of whom underwent modified PETD, and 46 of whom underwent OD. In the modified PETD intragroup comparison, VAS scores ranged from 7.14 ± 0.89 preoperatively to 2.00 ± 0.58, 2.68 ± 0.70, 2.55 ± 0.69, 2.23 ± 0.81, and 1.85 ± 0.72 at 7 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively. Patients showed significant pain relief postoperatively (P < 0.01). According to the modified MacNab score, the excellent rate in the PETD group was 89.36%. There was no significant difference compared to the OD group (89.13%, P > 0.05). Complication rates were lower (P > 0.05) but recurrence rates were higher (P > 0.05) in the modified PETD group than in the OD group. The modified PETD group had a faster operative time (P < 0.01), shorter hospital stay (P < 0.01), less intraoperative bleeding (P < 0.01), and less financial burden to the patient (P < 0.01) than the OD group. At 7 days postoperatively, the VAS score for low back pain was higher in the OD group than in the modified PETD group (P < 0.01). The VAS and JOA scores at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively were not significantly different between the modified PETD and OD groups (P > 0.05), and the ODI was significantly different at 3 months postoperatively (P < 0.05).ConclusionModified PETD treatment is safe and effective for gluteal pain due to L4/5 disc herniation and has the advantages of a lower complication rate, faster postoperative recovery, shorter length of stay, fewer anesthesia risks and lower cost of the procedure compared with OD. However, modified PETD has a higher recurrence rate.
This study aimed to develop a predictive system for prognostic evaluation of osteosarcoma patients. We obtained osteosarcoma sample data from 1998 to 2016 using SEER*Stat software version 8.3.8, and established a multivariable Cox regression model using R-4.0.3 software. Data were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The diagnosis of the model was completed through influential cases, proportionality, and multicollinearity. The predictive ability of the model was tested using area under the curve (AUC), calibration curves, and Brier scores. Finally, the bootstrap method was used to internally verify the model. In total, data from 3566 patients with osteosarcoma were included in this study. The multivariate Cox regression model was used to determine the independent prognostic variables. A nomogram and Kaplan–Meier survival curve were established. The AUC and Brier scores indicated that the model had a good predictive calibration. In addition, we found that the radiotherapy appears to be a risk factor of patients with osteosarcoma and made a discussion. We developed a prognostic evaluation system for patients with osteosarcoma for 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival with good predictive ability using sample data extracted from the SEER database. This has important clinical significance for the early identification and treatment of high-risk groups of osteosarcoma patients.
Minimally invasive surgeries, including posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (PECF), microsurgical anterior cervical foraminotomy (MACF), anterior transdiscal approach of endoscopic cervical discectomy (ATd-ECD), and anterior transcorporeal approach of endoscopic cervical discectomy (ATc-ECD), have obtained positive results for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy. Nonetheless, there is a lack of comparison among them regarding their biomechanical performance. The purpose of this study is to investigate the biomechanical changes of operated and adjacent segments after minimally invasive surgeries compared to a normal cervical spine. A three-dimensional model of normal cervical vertebrae C3–C7 was established using finite element analysis. Afterwards, four surgical models (PECF, MACF, ATd-ECD, and ATc-ECD) were constructed on the basis of the normal model. Identical load conditions were applied to simulate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation of the cervical spine. We calculated the range of motion (ROM), intradiscal pressure (IDP), annulus fibrosus pressure (AFP), uncovertebral joints contact pressure (CPRESS), and facet joints CPRESS under different motions. For all circumstances, ATc-ECD was close to the normal cervical spine model, whereas ATd-ECD significantly increased ROM and joints CPRESS and decreased IDP in the operated segment. PECF increased more the operated segment ROM than did the MACF, but the MACF obtained maximum IDP and AFP. Except for ATc-ECD, the other models increased joints CPRESS of the operated segment. For adjacent segments, ROM, IDP, and joints CPRESS showed a downward trend in all models. All models showed good biomechanical stability. With their combination biomechanics, safety, and conditions of application, PECF and ATc-ECD could be appropriate choices for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy.
Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating disorder of the central nervous system (CNS). It is mainly caused by trauma and reduces the quality of life of the affected individual. Ginsenosides are safe and effective traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs), and their efficacy against SCI is being increasingly researched in many countries, especially in China and Korea. This systematic review evaluated the neuroprotective effects of ginsenosides in SCI and elucidated their properties.MethodsAll experimental information and summaries used in this review were acquired from peer-reviewed articles in the relevant fields. The PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched for relevant articles. Information on the manual classification and selection of ginsenosides that protect against SCI is included in this review.ResultsA literature survey yielded studies reporting several properties of ginsenosides, including anti-inflammation, anti-apoptosis, anti-oxidative stress, and inhibition of glial scar formation.ConclusionIn this review, we discuss the mechanisms of action of different ginsenosides that exert neuroprotective effects in SCI. These results suggest that after further verification in the future, ginsenosides may be used as adjunctive therapy to promote neurological recovery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.