Introduction Painful lumbar spinal disorders represent a leading cause of disability in the US and worldwide. Interventional treatments for lumbar disorders are an effective treatment for the pain and disability from low back pain. Although many established and emerging interventional procedures are currently available, there exists a need for a defined guideline for their appropriateness, effectiveness, and safety. Objective The ASPN Back Guideline was developed to provide clinicians the most comprehensive review of interventional treatments for lower back disorders. Clinicians should utilize the ASPN Back Guideline to evaluate the quality of the literature, safety, and efficacy of interventional treatments for lower back disorders. Methods The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified an educational need for a comprehensive clinical guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations. Experts from the fields of Anesthesiology, Physiatry, Neurology, Neurosurgery, Radiology, and Pain Psychology developed the ASPN Back Guideline. The world literature in English was searched using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Scopus, and meeting abstracts to identify and compile the evidence (per section) for back-related pain. Search words were selected based upon the section represented. Identified peer-reviewed literature was critiqued using United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria and consensus points are presented. Results After a comprehensive review and analysis of the available evidence, the ASPN Back Guideline group was able to rate the literature and provide therapy grades to each of the most commonly available interventional treatments for low back pain. Conclusion The ASPN Back Guideline represents the first comprehensive analysis and grading of the existing and emerging interventional treatments available for low back pain. This will be a living document which will be periodically updated to the current standard of care based on the available evidence within peer-reviewed literature.

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation via a complete sternal-sparing (CSS) technique is gaining interest due to several potential benefits. We hypothesized that the CSS approach for HeartMate 3 (HM3) LVAD implantation improves postoperative mobility and physical independence compared to full sternotomy (FS). We retrospectively reviewed patients who were implanted with a commercial HM3 at our institution from September 2017 to August 2018. The Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care short forms and Functional Independence Measure scores were used to assess the patient’s physical limitations postoperatively. A total of 43 patients were included in the study: 27 (63%) CSS patients and 16 (37%) FS patients. At postoperative day 3, the CSS cohort demonstrated improved mobility based on Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care scores compared to the FS group; 40% of the CSS cohort versus 67% of the FS cohort remained 100% impaired. The CSS cohort also demonstrated greater postoperative independence in the Functional Independence Measure sit-to-stand metric with 78% of the CSS cohort achieving modified or complete independence by postoperative day 15 compared to only 21% of the FS patients. These early data suggest that the CSS approach for HM3 LVAD implantation improves postoperative mobility and functional independence compared to FS.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract