Recommendation 1: Clinicians should conduct a focused history and physical examination to help place patients with low back pain into 1 of 3 broad categories: nonspecific low back pain, back pain potentially associated with radiculopathy or spinal stenosis, or back pain potentially associated with another specific spinal cause. The history should include assessment of psychosocial risk factors, which predict risk for chronic disabling back pain (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Recommendation 2: Clinicians should not routinely obtain imaging or other diagnostic tests in patients with nonspecific low back pain (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Recommendation 3: Clinicians should perform diagnostic imaging and testing for patients with low back pain when severe or progressive neurologic deficits are present or when serious underlying conditions are suspected on the basis of history and physical examination (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Recommendation 4: Clinicians should evaluate patients with persistent low back pain and signs or symptoms of radiculopathy or spinal stenosis with magnetic resonance imaging (preferred) or computed tomography only if they are potential candidates for surgery or epidural steroid injection (for suspected radiculopathy) (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Recommendation 5: Clinicians should provide patients with evidence-based information on low back pain with regard to their expected course, advise patients to remain active, and provide information about effective self-care options (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Recommendation 6: For patients with low back pain, clinicians should consider the use of medications with proven benefits in conjunction with back care information and self-care. Clinicians should assess severity of baseline pain and functional deficits, potential benefits, risks, and relative lack of long-term efficacy and safety data before initiating therapy (strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). For most patients, first-line medication options are acetaminophen or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Recommendation 7: For patients who do not improve with selfcare options, clinicians should consider the addition of nonpharmacologic therapy with proven benefits—for acute low back pain, spinal manipulation; for chronic or subacute low back pain, intensive interdisciplinary rehabilitation, exercise therapy, acupuncture, massage therapy, spinal manipulation, yoga, cognitive-behavioral therapy, or progressive relaxation (weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).

/pdf/diagnosis-and-treatment-of-low-back-pain-a-joint-clinical-wx8jag77hu.pdf

Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Back Pain: A Joint Clinical Practice Guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society

Study design A prospective observational cohort study. Objective To assess long-term outcomes of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated surgically or nonsurgically. Summary of background data The relative benefit of various treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis is uncertain. Surgical treatment has been associated with short-term improvement, but recurrence of symptoms has been documented. Few studies have compared long-term outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical treatments. Methods Patients recruited from the practices of orthopaedic surgeons, neurosurgeons, and occupational medicine physicians throughout Maine had baseline interviews with follow-up questionnaires mailed at regular intervals over 10 years. Clinical data were obtained at baseline from a physician questionnaire. Most patients initially undergoing surgery had a laminectomy without fusion performed. Outcomes including patient-reported symptoms of leg and back pain, functional status, and satisfaction were assessed at 8- to 10-year follow-up. Primary analyses were based on initial treatment received with secondary analyses examining actual treatment received by 10 years. Results Of 148 eligible consenting patients initially enrolled, 105 were alive after 10 years (67.7% survival rate). Among surviving patients, long-term follow-up between 8 and 10 years was available for 97 of 123 (79%) patients (including 11 patients who died before the 10-year follow-up but completed a 8 or 9 year survey); 56 of 63 (89%) initially treated surgically and 41 of 60 (68%) initially treated nonsurgically. Patients undergoing surgery had worse baseline symptoms and functional status than those initially treated nonsurgically. Outcomes at 1 and 4 years favored initial surgical treatment. After 8 to 10 years, a similar percentage of surgical and nonsurgical patients reported that their low back pain was improved(53% vs. 50%, P = 0.8), their predominant symptom (either back or leg pain) was improved (54% vs. 42%, P = 0.3), and they were satisfied with their current status (55% vs. 49%, P = 0.5). These treatment group findings persisted after adjustment for other determinants of outcome in multivariate models. However, patients initially treated surgically reported less severe leg pain symptoms and greater improvement in back-specific functional status after 8 to 10 years than nonsurgically treated patients. By 10 years, 23% of surgical patients had undergone at least one additional lumbar spine operation, and 39% of nonsurgical patients had at least one lumbar spine operation. Patients undergoing subsequent surgical procedures had worse outcomes than those continuing with their initial treatment. Outcomes according to actual treatment received at 10 years did not differ because individuals undergoing additional surgical procedures had worse outcomes than those continuing with their initial treatment. Conclusions Among patients with lumbar spinal stenosis completing 8- to 10-year follow-up, low back pain relief, predominant symptom improvement, and satisfaction with the current state were similar in patients initially treated surgically or nonsurgically. However, leg pain relief and greater back-related functional status continued to favor those initially receiving surgical treatment. These results support a shared decision-making approach among physicians and patients when considering treatment options for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Long-term outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: 8 to 10 year results from the maine lumbar spine study.

BackgroundThe efficacy of fusion surgery in addition to decompression surgery in patients who have lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis, has not been substantiated in controlled trials. MethodsWe randomly assigned 247 patients between 50 and 80 years of age who had lumbar spinal stenosis at one or two adjacent vertebral levels to undergo either decompression surgery plus fusion surgery (fusion group) or decompression surgery alone (decompression-alone group). Randomization was stratified according to the presence of preoperative degenerative spondylolisthesis (in 135 patients) or its absence. Outcomes were assessed with the use of patient-reported outcome measures, a 6-minute walk test, and a health economic evaluation. The primary outcome was the score on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; which ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe disability) 2 years after surgery. The primary analysis, which was a per-protocol analysis, did not include the 1...

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa1513721

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Study design Clinical practice guideline Objective To develop evidence-based recommendations on use of interventional diagnostic tests and therapies, surgeries, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation for low back pain of any duration, with or without leg pain Summary of background data Management of patients with persistent and disabling low back pain remains a clinical challenge A number of interventional diagnostic tests and therapies and surgery are available and their use is increasing, but in some cases their utility remains uncertain or controversial Interdisciplinary rehabilitation has also been proposed as a potentially effective noninvasive intervention for persistent and disabling low back pain Methods A multidisciplinary panel was convened by the American Pain Society Its recommendations were based on a systematic review that focused on evidence from randomized controlled trials Recommendations were graded using methods adapted from the US Preventive Services Task Force and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Working Group Results Investigators reviewed 3348 abstracts A total of 161 randomized trials were deemed relevant to the recommendations in this guideline The panel developed a total of 8 recommendations Conclusion Recommendations on use of interventional diagnostic tests and therapies, surgery, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation are presented Due to important trade-offs between potential benefits, harms, costs, and burdens of alternative therapies, shared decision-making is an important component of a number of the recommendations

Interventional therapies, surgery, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation for low back pain: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline from the American Pain Society.

Study design: Systematic review. 

Objective: To systematically assess benefits and harms of surgery for nonradicular back pain with common degenerative changes, radiculopathy with herniated lumbar disc, and symptomatic spinal stenosis. 

Summary of background data: Although back surgery rates continue to increase, there is uncertainty or controversy about utility of back surgery for various conditions. 

Methods: Electronic database searches on Ovid MEDLINE and the Cochrane databases were conducted through July 2008 to identify randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews of the above therapies. All relevant studies were methodologically assessed by 2 independent reviewers using criteria developed by the Cochrane Back Review Group (for trials) and Oxman (for systematic reviews). A qualitative synthesis of results was performed using methods adapted from the US Preventive Services Task Force. 

Results: For nonradicular low back pain with common degenerative changes, we found fair evidence that fusion is no better than intensive rehabilitation with a cognitive-behavioral emphasis for improvement in pain or function, but slightly to moderately superior to standard (nonintensive) nonsurgical therapy. Less than half of patients experience optimal outcomes (defined as no more than sporadic pain, slight restriction of function, and occasional analgesics) following fusion. Clinical benefits of instrumented versus noninstrumented fusion are unclear. For radiculopathy with herniated lumbar disc, we found good evidence that standard open discectomy and microdiscectomy are moderately superior to nonsurgical therapy for improvement in pain and function through 2 to 3 months. For symptomatic spinal stenosis with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis, we found good evidence that decompressive surgery is moderately superior to nonsurgical therapy through 1 to 2 years. For both conditions, patients on average experience improvement either with or without surgery, and benefits associated with surgery decrease with long-term follow-up in some trials. Although there is fair evidence that artificial disc replacement is similarly effective compared to fusion for single level degenerative disc disease and that an interspinous spacer device is superior to nonsurgical therapy for 1- or 2-level spinal stenosis with symptoms relieved with forward flexion, insufficient evidence exists to judge long-term benefits or harms. 

Conclusion: Surgery for radiculopathy with herniated lumbar disc and symptomatic spinal stenosis is associated with short-term benefits compared to nonsurgical therapy, though benefits diminish with long-term follow-up in some trials. For nonradicular back pain with common degenerative changes, fusion is no more effective than intensive rehabilitation, but associated with small to moderate benefits compared to standard nonsurgical therapy.

Surgery for Low Back Pain: A Review of the Evidence for an American Pain Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Study design A cohort of 100 patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis, characterized in a previous article, were given surgical or conservative treatment and followed for 10 years. Objectives To identify the short- and long-term results after surgical and conservative treatment, and to determine whether clinical or radiologic predictors for the treatment result can be defined. Summary of background data Surgical decompression has been considered the rational treatment. However, clinical experience indicates that many patients do well with conservative treatment. Methods In this study, 19 patients with severe symptoms were selected for surgical treatment and 50 patients with moderate symptoms for conservative treatment, whereas 31 patients were randomized between the conservative (n = 18) and surgical (n = 13) treatment groups. Pain was decisive for the choice of treatment group. All patients were observed for 10 years by clinical evaluation and questionnaires. The results, evaluated by patient and physician, were rated as excellent, fair, unchanged, or worse. Results After a period of 3 months, relief of pain had occurred in most patients. Some had relief earlier, whereas for others it took 1 year. After a period of 4 years, excellent or fair results were found in half of the patients selected for conservative treatment, and in four fifths of the patients selected for surgery. Patients with an unsatisfactory result from conservative treatment were offered delayed surgery after 3 to 27 months (median, 3.5 months). The treatment result of delayed surgery was essentially similar to that of the initial group. The treatment result for the patients randomized for surgical treatment was considerably better than for the patients randomized for conservative treatment. Clinically significant deterioration of symptoms during the final 6 years of the follow-up period was not observed. Patients with multilevel afflictions, surgically treated or not, did not have a poorer outcome than those with single-level afflictions. Clinical or radiologic predictors for the final outcome were not found. There were no dropouts, except for 14 deaths. Conclusions The outcome was most favorable for surgical treatment. However, an initial conservative approach seems advisable for many patients because those with an unsatisfactory result can be treated surgically later with a good outcome.

F Lilleâs

Papers

Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management?: A prospective 10-year study.