{"title":"硬膜外类固醇对单侧双侧内窥镜椎间盘切除术治疗单水平腰椎间盘突出症后疼痛的控制效果:随机、双盲、安慰剂对照试验。","authors":"Rattalerk Arunakul, Thanapat Boonraksa, Punnawit Pinitchanon, Koopong Siribumrungwong, Thongchai Suntharapa, Waroot Pholsawatchai","doi":"10.14444/8655","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The effects of epidural steroid (ES) administration following open or minimally invasive surgery lumbar discectomy have been extensively studied. However, no research has investigated the impact of steroids following the unilateral biportal technique endoscopic lumbar discectomy (UBE-D) for lumbar disc herniation. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of ES administration in controlling postoperative pain and disability scores following UBE-D for single-level lumbar disc herniation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was conducted between June 2021 and June 2023. Eighty-two patients were assessed, and 60 were eligible and randomized to receive either ES (<i>n</i> = 30) or saline (placebo; <i>n</i> = 30) after UBE-D. The Outcome measures included visual analog scale scores for pain, Oswestry Disability Index scores, morphine consumption over 24 hours, serum C-reactive protein levels, and the occurrence of complications over a 6-month follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The baseline characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups, with no significant differences observed. Analysis of visual analog scale scores for back and leg pain, as well as Oswestry Disability Index scores, at various postoperative time points (6 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months), showed no statistically significant differences between the ES and placebo groups (<i>P</i> values ranged from 0.47-0.94). Additionally, no significant differences were found in morphine consumption within the first 24 hours postoperatively (<i>P</i> = 0.85), length of hospital stay (<i>P</i> = 0.36), or C-reactive protein levels at 24 hours and 3 weeks postoperatively (<i>P</i> values ranged from 0.54-0.79) between the 2 groups. Importantly, no postoperative or steroid-related complications were reported in either group within the 6-month follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ES administration after UBE-D did not significantly reduce postoperative pain, disability scores, or morphine consumption compared with placebo. The findings suggest that routine use of ESs in this context may not provide additional benefits.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Clinicians should reconsider the use of epidural steroids as part of standard postoperative management after UBE-D, as the lack of significant improvement in patient outcomes indicates that alternative pain management strategies may be more effective.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 1: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of Epidural Steroid in Controlling Pain After Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy for Single-Level Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Rattalerk Arunakul, Thanapat Boonraksa, Punnawit Pinitchanon, Koopong Siribumrungwong, Thongchai Suntharapa, Waroot Pholsawatchai\",\"doi\":\"10.14444/8655\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The effects of epidural steroid (ES) administration following open or minimally invasive surgery lumbar discectomy have been extensively studied. However, no research has investigated the impact of steroids following the unilateral biportal technique endoscopic lumbar discectomy (UBE-D) for lumbar disc herniation. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of ES administration in controlling postoperative pain and disability scores following UBE-D for single-level lumbar disc herniation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was conducted between June 2021 and June 2023. Eighty-two patients were assessed, and 60 were eligible and randomized to receive either ES (<i>n</i> = 30) or saline (placebo; <i>n</i> = 30) after UBE-D. The Outcome measures included visual analog scale scores for pain, Oswestry Disability Index scores, morphine consumption over 24 hours, serum C-reactive protein levels, and the occurrence of complications over a 6-month follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The baseline characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups, with no significant differences observed. Analysis of visual analog scale scores for back and leg pain, as well as Oswestry Disability Index scores, at various postoperative time points (6 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months), showed no statistically significant differences between the ES and placebo groups (<i>P</i> values ranged from 0.47-0.94). Additionally, no significant differences were found in morphine consumption within the first 24 hours postoperatively (<i>P</i> = 0.85), length of hospital stay (<i>P</i> = 0.36), or C-reactive protein levels at 24 hours and 3 weeks postoperatively (<i>P</i> values ranged from 0.54-0.79) between the 2 groups. Importantly, no postoperative or steroid-related complications were reported in either group within the 6-month follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ES administration after UBE-D did not significantly reduce postoperative pain, disability scores, or morphine consumption compared with placebo. The findings suggest that routine use of ESs in this context may not provide additional benefits.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Clinicians should reconsider the use of epidural steroids as part of standard postoperative management after UBE-D, as the lack of significant improvement in patient outcomes indicates that alternative pain management strategies may be more effective.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 1: </strong></p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38486,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Spine Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Spine Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14444/8655\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14444/8655","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Efficacy of Epidural Steroid in Controlling Pain After Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Discectomy for Single-Level Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.
Background: The effects of epidural steroid (ES) administration following open or minimally invasive surgery lumbar discectomy have been extensively studied. However, no research has investigated the impact of steroids following the unilateral biportal technique endoscopic lumbar discectomy (UBE-D) for lumbar disc herniation. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of ES administration in controlling postoperative pain and disability scores following UBE-D for single-level lumbar disc herniation.
Methods: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was conducted between June 2021 and June 2023. Eighty-two patients were assessed, and 60 were eligible and randomized to receive either ES (n = 30) or saline (placebo; n = 30) after UBE-D. The Outcome measures included visual analog scale scores for pain, Oswestry Disability Index scores, morphine consumption over 24 hours, serum C-reactive protein levels, and the occurrence of complications over a 6-month follow-up period.
Results: The baseline characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups, with no significant differences observed. Analysis of visual analog scale scores for back and leg pain, as well as Oswestry Disability Index scores, at various postoperative time points (6 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months), showed no statistically significant differences between the ES and placebo groups (P values ranged from 0.47-0.94). Additionally, no significant differences were found in morphine consumption within the first 24 hours postoperatively (P = 0.85), length of hospital stay (P = 0.36), or C-reactive protein levels at 24 hours and 3 weeks postoperatively (P values ranged from 0.54-0.79) between the 2 groups. Importantly, no postoperative or steroid-related complications were reported in either group within the 6-month follow-up period.
Conclusions: ES administration after UBE-D did not significantly reduce postoperative pain, disability scores, or morphine consumption compared with placebo. The findings suggest that routine use of ESs in this context may not provide additional benefits.
Clinical relevance: Clinicians should reconsider the use of epidural steroids as part of standard postoperative management after UBE-D, as the lack of significant improvement in patient outcomes indicates that alternative pain management strategies may be more effective.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Spine Surgery is the official scientific journal of ISASS, the International Intradiscal Therapy Society, the Pittsburgh Spine Summit, and the Büttner-Janz Spinefoundation, and is an official partner of the Southern Neurosurgical Society. The goal of the International Journal of Spine Surgery is to promote and disseminate online the most up-to-date scientific and clinical research into innovations in motion preservation and new spinal surgery technology, including basic science, biologics, and tissue engineering. The Journal is dedicated to educating spine surgeons worldwide by reporting on the scientific basis, indications, surgical techniques, complications, outcomes, and follow-up data for promising spinal procedures.