Cervical Interlaminar Epidural Injections In The Treatment Of Cervical Disc Herniation, Post Surgery Syndrome, Or Discogenic Pain: Cost Utility Analysis From Randomized Trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (22;5) ◽  
pp. 421-431
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Cervical Disc Herniation ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Discogenic Pain ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Post Surgery

Background: Neck pain is one of the major conditions attributing to overall disability in the United States. There have been multiple publications assessing clinical and cost effectiveness of multiple modalities of interventions in managing chronic neck pain. Even then, the literature has been considered sparse in relation to cervical interlaminar epidural injections in managing chronic neck pain. In contrast, cost utility studies of lumbar interlaminar injections, caudal epidural injections, cervical and lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, percutaneous adhesiolysis demonstrated costs of less than $3,500 for quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Objectives: To assess the cost utility of cervical interlaminar epidural injections in managing chronic neck and/or upper extremity pain secondary to cervical disc herniation, post-surgery syndrome in neck, and axial or discogenic neck pain. Study Design: Analysis based on 3 previously published randomized trials of the effectiveness of cervical interlaminar epidural injections assessing their role in disc herniation, cervical post-surgery syndrome, and axial or discogenic pain. Setting: A contemporary, private, specialty referral interventional pain management center in the United States. Methods: Cost utility of cervical interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids in managing cervical disc herniation, cervical post-surgery syndrome, and cervical discogenic or axial neck back pain was conducted with data derived from 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included a 2-year follow-up, with inclusion of 356 patients. The primary outcome was significant improvement defined as at least 50% in pain reduction and disability status. Direct payment data from all carriers from 2018 was utilized for the assessment of procedural costs. Overall costs, including drug costs, were determined by multiplication of direct procedural payment data by a factor of 1.67 to accommodate for indirect payments respectively for disc herniation, discogenic pain, and cervical post-surgery syndrome. Results: The results of the 3 RCTs showed direct cost utility for one year of QALY of $2,412.31 for axial or discogenic pain without disc herniation, $2,081.07 for disc herniation, and $2,309.20 for post surgery syndrome, with an average cost per one year QALY of $2,267.57, with total estimated overall costs with addition of indirect costs of $3,475.38, $4,028.55, $3,856.36, and $3,785.89 respectively. Limitations: The limitation of this cost utility analysis includes that it is a single center evaluation. Indirect costs were extrapolated. Conclusion: This cost utility analysis of cervical interlaminar epidural injections in patients nonresponsive to conservative management in the treatment of disc herniation, post surgery syndrome and axial or discogenic neck pain shows $2,267.57 for direct costs with a total cost of $3,785.89 per QALY. Key words: Cervical interlaminar epidural injections, chronic neck pain, cervical disc herniation, cervical discogenic pain, post surgery syndrome, cost utility analysis, cost effectiveness analysis, quality-adjusted life years

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of Fluoroscopic Cervical Interlaminar Epidural Injections in Managing Chronic Cervical Disc Herniation and Radiculitis: Preliminary Results of a Randomized, DoubleBlind, Controlled Trial

2010 ◽  
Vol 3;13 (3;5) ◽  
pp. 223-236
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Local Anesthetic ◽  
Chronic Neck Pain ◽  
Cervical Disc Herniation ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Group I ◽  
Group Ii

Background: Chronic neck pain is a common problem in the adult population with a typical 12- month prevalence of 30% to 50%. Cervical disc herniation and radiculitis is one of the common conditions described responsible for chronic neck and upper extremity pain. Cervical epidural injections for managing chronic neck pain with disc herniation are one of the commonly performed non-surgical interventions in the United States. However, the literature supporting cervical interlaminar epidural steroids in managing chronic neck pain is scant. Study Design: A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Setting: A private interventional pain management practice and specialty referral center in the United States. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of cervical interlaminar epidural injections of local anesthetic with or without steroids in providing effective and long-lasting relief in the management of chronic neck pain and upper extremity pain in patients with disc herniation and radiculitis, and to evaluate the differences between local anesthetic with or without steroids. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to one of 2 groups: Group I patients received cervical interlaminar epidural injections of local anesthetic (lidocaine 0.5%, 5 mL); Group II patients received cervical interlaminar epidural injections with 0.5% lidocaine, 4 mL, mixed with 1 mL of nonparticulate betamethasone. Outcomes Assessment: Multiple outcome measures were utilized. They included the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), the Neck Disability Index (NDI), employment status, and opioid intake. Assessments were done at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months post-treatment. Significant pain relief was defined as 50% or more; significant improvement in disability score was defined as a reduction of 50% or more. Results: Significant pain relief (≥ 50%) was demonstrated in 77% of patients in both groups. Functional status improvement was demonstrated by a reduction (> 50%) in the NDI scores in 74% of Group I and 71% of Group II at 12 months. The overall average procedures per year were 3.7 ± 1.1 in Group I and 4.0 ± 0.91 in Group II; the average total relief per year was 39.45 ± 11.59 weeks in Group I and 41.06 ± 11.56 weeks in Group II over the 52 week study period in the patients defined as successful. The initial therapy was considered to be successful if a patient obtained consistent relief with 2 initial injections lasting at least 4 weeks. All others were considered failures. Limitations: The study results are limited by the lack of a placebo group and a preliminary report of 70 patients, 35 in each group. Conclusion: Cervical interlaminar epidural injections with local anesthetic with or without steroids might be effective in 77% of patients with chronic function-limiting neck pain and upper extremity pain secondary to cervical disc herniation and radiculitis. Key words: Chronic neck pain, cervical disc herniation, upper extremity pain, cervical epidural injections, epidural steroids, local anesthetics

scholarly journals Cost Utility Analysis of Lumbar Interlaminar Epidural Injections in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation, Central Spinal Stenosis, and Axial or Discogenic Low Back Pain

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (20;4) ◽  
pp. 219-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Epidural Injections

Background: Cost utility or cost effective analysis continues to take center stage in the United States for defining and measuring the value of treatments in interventional pain management. Appropriate cost utility analysis has been performed for caudal epidural injections, percutaneous adhesiolysis, and spinal cord stimulation. However, the literature pertaining to lumbar interlaminar epidural injections is lacking, specifically in reference to cost utility analysis derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a pragmatic approach in a practical setting. Objectives: To assess the cost utility of lumbar interlaminar epidural injections in managing chronic low back and/or lower extremity pain secondary to lumbar disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and axial or discogenic low back pain. Study Design: Analysis based on 3 previously published randomized trials of effectiveness of lumbar interlaminar epidural injections assessing their role in disc herniation, spinal stenosis, and axial or discogenic pain. Setting: A contemporary, private, specialty referral interventional pain management center in the United States. Methods: Cost utility of lumbar interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids in managing lumbar disc herniation, central spinal stenosis, and discogenic or axial low back pain was conducted with data derived from 3 RCTs that included a 2-year follow-up, with inclusion of 360 patients. The primary outcome was significant improvement defined as at least a 50% in pain reduction and disability status. Direct payment data from 2016 was utilized for assessment of procedural costs. Overall costs, including drug costs, were determined by multiplication of direct procedural payment data by a factor of 1.67 to accommodate for indirect payments respectively for disc herniation, spinal stenosis, discogenic pain. Results: The results of 3 RCTs showed direct cost utility for one year of quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of $2,050.87 for disc herniation, $2,112.25 for axial or discogenic pain without disc herniation, and $1,773.28 for spinal stenosis, with an average cost per one year QALY of $1,976.58, with total estimated costs of $3,425, $3,527, $2,961, and $3,301 respectively. Limitations: The limitation of this cost utility analysis includes that it is a single center evaluation, even though 360 patients were included in this analysis. Further, only the costs of interventional procedures and physician visits were assessed based on the data, with extrapolation of indirect costs presenting the overall total costs. The benefits of returning to work were not assessed. Conclusion: This cost utility analysis of lumbar interlaminar epidural injections in patients nonresponsive to conservative management in the treatment of disc herniation, central spinal stenosis, and axial or discogenic low back pain in the lumbar spine shows the clinical effectiveness and cost utility of these injections of $1,976.58 for direct costs with a total cost of $3,301 per QALY.Key words: Lumbar interlaminar epidural injections, chronic low back pain, lumbar disc herniation, lumbar discogenic pain, cost utility analysis, cost effectiveness analysis, qualityadjusted life years

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Cervical Epidural Injections in the Management of Chronic Neck and Upper Extremity Pain

2012 ◽  
Vol 4;15 (4;8) ◽  
pp. E405-E434
Author(s):  
Sudhir A. Diwan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Local Anesthetic ◽  
Chronic Neck Pain ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Discogenic Pain ◽  
Epidural Injections

Background: Chronic persistent neck pain with or without upper extremity pain is common in the general adult population with prevalence of 48% for women and 38% for men, with persistent complaints in 22% of women and 16% of men. Multiple modalities of treatments are exploding in managing chronic neck pain along with increasing prevalence. However, there is a paucity of evidence for all modalities of treatments in managing chronic neck pain. Cervical epidural injections for managing chronic neck pain are one of the commonly performed interventions in the United States. However, the literature supporting cervical epidural steroids in managing chronic pain problems has been scant. Study Design: A systematic review of cervical interlaminar epidural injections for cervical disc herniation, cervical axial discogenic pain, cervical central stenosis, and cervical postsurgery syndrome. Objective: To evaluate the effect of cervical interlaminar epidural injections in managing various types of chronic neck and upper extremity pain emanating as a result of cervical spine pathology. Methods: The available literature on cervical interlaminar epidural injections in managing chronic neck and upper extremity pain were reviewed. The quality assessment and clinical relevance criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and the criteria developed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria for observational studies. The level of evidence was classified as good, fair, and limited based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to December 2011, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief = up to 6 months and long-term > 6 months). Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake. Results: For this systematic review, 34 studies were identified. Of these, 24 studies were excluded and a total of 9 randomized trials, with 2 duplicate studies, met inclusion criteria for methodological quality assessment. For cervical disc herniation, the evidence is good for cervical epidural with local anesthetic and steroids; whereas, it is fair with local anesthetic only. For axial or discogenic pain, the evidence is fair for local anesthetic, with or without steroids. For spinal stenosis, the evidence is fair for local anesthetic, with or without steroids. For postsurgery syndrome, the evidence is fair for local anesthetic, with or without steroids. Limitations: The limitations of this systematic review continue to be the paucity of literature. Conclusion: The evidence is good for radiculitis secondary to disc herniation with local anesthetics and steroids, fair with local anesthetic only; whereas, it is fair for local anesthetics with or without steroids, for axial or discogenic pain, pain of central spinal stenosis, and pain of post surgery syndrome. Key words: Cervical disc herniation, cervical axial discogenic pain, cervical central spinal stenosis, cervical post surgery syndrome, cervical radiculitis, cervical interlaminar epidural injections, local anesthetic, steroids

scholarly journals Cost Utility Analysis of Caudal Epidural Injections in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation, Axial or Discogenic Low Back Pain, Central Spinal Stenosis, and Post Lumbar Surgery Syndrome

2013 ◽  
Vol 3;16 (3;5) ◽  
pp. E129-E143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Caudal Epidural

Background: In this era of escalating health care costs and the questionable effectiveness of multiple interventions, cost effectiveness or cost utility analysis has become the cornerstone of evidence-based medicine, and has an influence coverage decisions. Even though multiple cost effectiveness analysis studies have been performed over the years, extensive literature is lacking for interventional techniques. Cost utility analysis studies of epidural injections for managing chronic low back pain demonstrated highly variable results including a lack of cost utility in randomized trials and contrasting results in observational studies. There has not been any cost utility analysis studies of epidural injections in large randomized trials performed in interventional pain management settings. Objectives: To assess the cost utility of caudal epidural injections in managing chronic low back pain secondary to lumbar disc herniation, axial or discogenic low back pain, lumbar central spinal stenosis, and lumbar post surgery syndrome. Study Design: This analysis is based on 4 previously published randomized trials. Setting: A private, specialty referral interventional pain management center in the United States. Methods: Four randomized trials were conducted assessing the clinical effectiveness of caudal epidural injections with or without steroids for lumbar disc herniation, lumbar discogenic or axial low back pain, lumbar central spinal stenosis, and post surgery syndrome. A cost utility analysis was performed with direct payment data for a total of 480 patients over a period of 2 years from these 4 trials. Outcome included various measures with significant improvement defined as at least a 50% improvement in pain reduction and disability status. Results: The results of 4 randomized controlled trials of low back pain with 480 patients with a 2 year follow-up with the actual reimbursement data showed cost utility for one year of quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of $2,206 for disc herniation, $2,136 for axial or discogenic pain without disc herniation, $2,155 for central spinal stenosis, and $2,191 for post surgery syndrome. All patients showed significant improvement clinically and showed positive results in the cost utility analysis with an average cost per one year QALY of $2,172.50 for all patients and $1,966.03 for patients judged to be successful. The results of this assessment show a better cost utility or lower cost of managing chronic, intractable low back pain with caudal epidural injections at a QALY that is similar or lower in price than medical therapy only, physical therapy, manipulation, and surgery in most cases. Limitations: The limitations of this cost utility analysis include that it is a single center evaluation, even though 480 patients were included in the analysis. Further, only the costs of interventional procedures and physician visits were included. The benefits of returning to work were not assessed. Conclusion: This cost utility analysis of caudal epidural injections in the treatment of disc herniation, axial or discogenic low back pain, central spinal stenosis, and post surgery syndrome in the lumbar spine shows the clinical effectiveness and cost utility of these injections at less than $2,200 per one year of QALY. Key words: Caudal epidural injections, chronic low back pain, lumbar disc herniation, lumbar discogenic pain, lumbar spinal stenosis, lumbar post surgery syndrome, cost utility analysis, cost effectiveness analysis, quality-adjusted life years

scholarly journals Cost-Utility Analysis of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Cervical Disc Arthroplasty

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. S82
Author(s):  
Christian Hoelscher ◽  
Daniel Warren ◽  
Pedro Ricart-Hoffiz ◽  
John Bendo ◽  
Jeffrey Goldstein
Keyword(s):  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Anterior Cervical Discectomy ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Cervical Discectomy

scholarly journals Analysis of compliance and efficacy of integrated management of whole process in the choice of percutaneous full-endoscopic surgery for patients with cervical disc herniation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhongyan Jiang ◽  
Ansu Wang ◽  
Chong Wang ◽  
Weijun Kong
Keyword(s):  
Neck Pain ◽  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Integrated Management ◽  
Cervical Disc Herniation ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Efficacy Rate ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Experimental Group

Abstract Background: Percutaneous spinal endoscopy is a new type of surgery for the treatment of cervical disc herniation. It can avoid the complications of the classic anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) approach and the risk of adjacent spondylosis. How can we effectively improve patients' awareness of spinal endoscopy and their election of endoscopic techniques?Objective: To analyze the compliance and clinical effect of the integrated management of the whole process in the choice of percutaneous full-endoscopic surgery for patients with cervical disc herniation.Methods: Retrospective analysis of 72 patients with cervical disc herniation undergoing surgery in our hospital from August 2015–August 2017 was performed. The whole-process integrated management model was used for all the patients. The 36 patients in the experimental group were treated by percutaneous full-endoscopic cervical discectomy, and the 36 patients in the control group were treated by ACDF. The postoperative feeding time, time to get out of bed, length of hospital stay, compliance, clinical efficacy, and recurrence rate of neck pain were observed. Changes between the preoperative and postoperative pain visual analog scale (VAS) scores and neurological function Japan Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores were assessed.Results: The postoperative feeding time in the experimental group was 8.319 ± 1.374 hours, the postoperative time to get out of bed was 16.64 ± 3.728 hours, and the hospitalization time was 6.403 ± 0.735 days. The excellent and good clinical efficacy rate was 91.67%, the compliance rate was 88.89%, and the neck pain recurrence rate was 5.56%. The postoperative feeding time in the control group was 26.56 ± 9.512 hours, the postoperative time to get out of bed was 45.06 ± 9.027 hours, and the length of hospital stay was 8.208 ± 0.865 days. The excellent and good clinical efficacy rate was 88.89%, the compliance rate was 69.4%, and the neck pain recurrence rate was 8.33%. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the excellent efficacy rate and the neck pain recurrence rate, p>0.05. The compliance rate in the experimental group was better than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant, p<0.05. The hospitalization time of the experimental group was significantly lower than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant, p<0.05. The postoperative VAS scores and JOA scores of the two groups were significantly better than the preoperative scores, and the difference was statistically significant, p<0.05; there was no significant difference between the two groups, p>0.05.Conclusion: The integrated management of the whole course can effectively improve the compliance of patients with cervical disc herniation receiving endoscopic treatment, yield the same treatment effect as the classic operation, shorten the hospitalization time, speed up the turnover of hospital beds, and improve satisfaction with medical quality and is worthy of clinical application.

scholarly journals Self Manipulated Cervical Spine Leads to Posterior Disc Herniation and Spinal Stenosis

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wyatt McGilvery ◽  
Marc Eastin ◽  
Anish Sen ◽  
Maciej Witkos
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Spinal Manipulation ◽  
Cervical Spinal Cord ◽  
Cervical Vertebrae ◽  
Cervical Disc Herniation ◽  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Manipulation Therapy

The authors report a case in which a 38-year-old male who presented himself to the emergency department with a chief complaint of cervical neck pain and paresthesia radiating from the right pectoral region down his distal right arm following self-manipulation of the patient’s own cervical vertebrae. Initial emergency department imaging via cervical x-ray and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) without contrast revealed no cervical fractures; however, there was evidence of an acute cervical disc herniation (C3–C7) with severe herniation and spinal stenosis located at C5–C6. Immediate discectomy at C5–C6 and anterior arthrodesis was conducted in order to decompress the cervical spinal cord. Acute traumatic cervical disc herniation is rare in comparison to disc herniation due to the chronic degradation of the posterior annulus fibrosus and nucleus pulposus. Traumatic cervical hernias usually arise due to a very large external force causing hyperflexion or hyperextension of the cervical vertebrae. However, there have been reports of cervical injury arising from cervical spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) where a licensed professional applies a rotary force component. This can be concerning, considering that 12 million Americans receive SMT annually (Powell, F.C.; Hanigan, W.C.; Olivero, W.C. A risk/benefit analysis of spinal manipulation therapy for relief of lumbar or cervical pain. Neurosurgery 1993, 33, 73–79.). This case study involved an individual who was able to apply enough rotary force to his own cervical vertebrae, causing severe neurological damage requiring surgical intervention. Individuals with neck pain should be advised of the complications of SMT, and provided with alternative treatment methods, especially if one is willing to self manipulate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document