Click here to load reader

EBM of Intradiscal Electrothermal Therapies

  • View
    38

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

EBM of Intradiscal Electrothermal Therapies. Ray M. Baker Clinical Professor of Anesthesiology University of Washington NASS, Spring Break 2006, Back to The Evidence. Reporter: Yuan-Chun Huang. EBM Hierarchy. Synthesis (e.g. Cochrane) Studies RCT > Case control > Case Series > - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Text of EBM of Intradiscal Electrothermal Therapies

  • EBM of Intradiscal Electrothermal TherapiesRay M. Baker Clinical Professor of Anesthesiology University of WashingtonNASS, Spring Break 2006, Back to The EvidenceReporter: Yuan-Chun Huang

  • EBM HierarchySynthesis (e.g. Cochrane) Studies RCT > Case control > Case Series > Retrospective > Case reports

  • Levels of Evidence: Cochrane . Level A: strong research-based evidence provided by generally consistent findings in multiple high-quality RCTs; . Level B: moderate research-based evidence provided by generally consistent findings in one high-quality RCT plus one or more low-quality RCTs, or generally consistent findings in multiple low-quality RCTs; . Level C: limited or conflicting research-based evidence provided by one RCT (either high or low quality) or inconsistent findings in multiple RCTs; . Level D: no research-based evidence i.e., no RCTs.

  • IDET

  • IDET: RationaleProposed mechanism of action: Stiffening and strengthening of the collagen? Deactivation of inflammatory enzymes / chemicals? coagulation of posterior annular nociceptive pain fibers?

  • IDET EvidenceSynthesis 1 Chou AJPMR 2005( Chou LH, Lew HL, Coelho PC, Slipman CW: Intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2005;84:538-549. )Studies # RCTs 2 (Pauza and Freeman) # Several prospective case control studies and cohort control studies. # Several prospective observational, retrospective studies, and case series.

  • Pauza, TSJ 2004Pauza, Howell, Dreyfuss et al. A randomized placebo-controlled Trial of IDET for the treatment of discogenic LBP. The Spine J 2004; Volume 4: Issue 1, 27-35.

  • Pauza, TSJ 2004 4,523 patients inquired about the study; after phone interview 1,360 underwent an interview and physical examination

    260 met initial criteria and underwent discography

    64 patients eligible after discography.

    37 randomized to IDET. 27 randomized to sham.

  • Pauza, TSJ 2004Patient selection criteria:

    Discogenic LBP > 6 months in duration. LBP > leg pain. Less than 20% disc height narrowing on lateral plain film radiographs. Beck depression scale score less than 20. No co-morbid conditions.

  • Pauza, TSJ 2004 .Exclusion Criteria

    #.Previous lumbar spine surgery #.Abnormal neurological exam #.Radicular pain #.Chronic medical conditions #.Central or foraminal stenosis #.Intervertebral disc herniations > 4 mm. #.Cervical or thoracic pain > than 2/10. #.Gait altering LE conditions

  • Pauza, TSJ 204IDET. # Catheter passed circumferentially to completely cover the posterior anulus (bilateral passes if needed) # Catheter heated to final temperature of 90 C via the standard 16.5 minute protocol

  • Pauza, TSJ 204Sham. # Introducer passed to postero-lateral aspect of disc, but disc never entered # 16.5 mins passed, sounds/images of IDET # Sedation (versed) used as in IDET group

  • Pauza, TSJ 204Blinding process was maintained-approximately 75% in both groups believed they had the real treatment

    8 patients (12.5%) excluded. (including: unacceptable catheter placement, died, concurrent illness, non-compliant with follow up, drug abuse)

  • Pauza, TSJ 204SF 36: (The Medical Outcome Study 36-item short-form health survey ) no statistically significant difference. Oswestry disability scale: IDET > placebo (p=0.038) VAS Mean 2.4 IDET vs. 1.2 Sham 50% of patients unchanged.

  • Pauza, TSJ 204

  • Pauza, TSJ 204

  • Pauza, TSJ 204IDET is not a placebo treatment .However, after a very rigorous screening process IDET substantially reduces pain in only 1 of 5

  • Freeman, Spine 2005Freeman BJ, Fraser RD, Cain CM, Hall DJ, Chapple DC. A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Trial Intradiscal Electrothermal Therapy Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Chronic Discogenic Low Back Pain. Spine 2005; Volume 30( Number 21): pp 2369 -2377.

  • Freeman, Spine 2005

  • Freeman, Spine 2005Inclusion Criteria: # LBP > LE pain # Disc Height > 50% # 1 or 2 level disc degeneration # Discography (+) with normal control # No prior surgery # Sitting Tolerance > Standing tolerance # Normal neurologic exam

  • Freeman, Spine 2005

  • Freeman, Spine 2005

  • Freeman, Spine 2005No statistically significant difference in any of the outcome measurements. Even looking at subsets, did not result in any subset reaching a p value close to 0.05. Zero placebo

  • Levels of Evidence: IDETEquivocal .Level C: limited or conflicting research-based evidence provided by one RCT (either high or low quality) or inconsistent findings in multiple RCTs;

  • Pauza et al may well have shown statistical significance between their two groups, but Freeman et al would argue that this does not necessarily equate to clinical significance. One thing is clear from the literature: that highly selected groups of patients are required to show only marginal benefit from the procedure and that IDET is not beneficial for the vast majority of patients with CDLBP.

  • Thanks for attention!

  • Figure 1. T2-weighted sagittal magnetic resonance image lumbar spine. Note loss of signal in the L4 L5 disc with high intensity zone posteriorly.

    Modified Somatic Perceptions Questionnaire (MSPQ)

    Oswestry Disability Index (ODI),