Clinical spine surgery · 2024
Coexisting Lower Back Pain in Patients With Cervical Myelopathy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nakarai Hiroyuki, Kato So, Hirao Yujiro, Maayan Omri, Kawamura Naohiro, Higashikawa Akiro, Takeshita Yujiro, Ono Takashi, Fukushima Masayoshi, Hara Nobuhiro, Azuma Seiichi, Iwai Hiroki, Taniguchi Yuki, Matsubayashi Yoshitaka, Takeshita Katsushi, Tanaka Sakae, Oshima Yasushi
Аннотация
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study is to investigate the coexisting lower back pain (LBP) in patients with cervical myelopathy and to evaluate changes in LBP after cervical spine surgery.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Only a few studies with a small number of participants have evaluated the association between cervical myelopathy surgery and postoperative improvement in LBP.
METHODS: Patients who underwent primary cervical decompression surgery with or without fusion for myelopathy and completed preoperative and 1-year postoperative questionnaires were reviewed using a prospectively collected database involving 9 tertiary referral hospitals. The questionnaires included the patient-reported Japanese Orthopaedic Association (PRO-JOA) score and Numerical Rating Scales (NRS). The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for NRS-LBP was defined as >30% improvement from baseline. Patient demographics, characteristics, and PRO-JOA score were compared between patients with and without concurrent LBP, and the contributor to achieving the MCID for LBP was analyzed using logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 786 consecutive patients with cervical myelopathy were included, of which 525 (67%) presented with concurrent LBP. LBP was associated with a higher body mass index ( P <0.001) and worse preoperative PRO-JOA score ( P <0.001). Among the 525 patients with concurrent LBP, the mean postoperative NRS-LBP significantly improved from 4.5±2.4 to 3.4±2.7 ( P <0.01) postoperatively, with 248 (47%) patients reaching the MCID cutoff. Patients with a PRO-JOA recovery rate >50% were more likely to achieve MCID compared with those with a recovery rate <0% (adjusted odd ratio 4.02, P <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: More than 50% of patients with myelopathy reported improvement in LBP after cervical spine surgery, and 47% achieved the MCID for LBP, which was positively correlated with a better PRO-JOA recovery rate. Treating cervical myelopathy in patients with concomitant LBP may be sufficient to mitigate concomitant LBP.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study is to investigate the coexisting lower back pain (LBP) in patients with cervical myelopathy and to evaluate changes in LBP after cervical spine surgery.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Only a few studies with a small number of participants have evaluated the association between cervical myelopathy surgery and postoperative improvement in LBP.
METHODS: Patients who underwent primary cervical decompression surgery with or without fusion for myelopathy and completed preoperative and 1-year postoperative questionnaires were reviewed using a prospectively collected database involving 9 tertiary referral hospitals. The questionnaires included the patient-reported Japanese Orthopaedic Association (PRO-JOA) score and Numerical Rating Scales (NRS). The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for NRS-LBP was defined as >30% improvement from baseline. Patient demographics, characteristics, and PRO-JOA score were compared between patients with and without concurrent LBP, and the contributor to achieving the MCID for LBP was analyzed using logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 786 consecutive patients with cervical myelopathy were included, of which 525 (67%) presented with concurrent LBP. LBP was associated with a higher body mass index ( P <0.001) and worse preoperative PRO-JOA score ( P <0.001). Among the 525 patients with concurrent LBP, the mean postoperative NRS-LBP significantly improved from 4.5±2.4 to 3.4±2.7 ( P <0.01) postoperatively, with 248 (47%) patients reaching the MCID cutoff. Patients with a PRO-JOA recovery rate >50% were more likely to achieve MCID compared with those with a recovery rate <0% (adjusted odd ratio 4.02, P <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: More than 50% of patients with myelopathy reported improvement in LBP after cervical spine surgery, and 47% achieved the MCID for LBP, which was positively correlated with a better PRO-JOA recovery rate. Treating cervical myelopathy in patients with concomitant LBP may be sufficient to mitigate concomitant LBP.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.