290 likes | 443 Views
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 >
E N D
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 > 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 RCTplus 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: Rationale Proposed mechanism of action: • Stiffening and strengthening of the collagen? • Deactivation of inflammatory enzymes / chemicals? • coagulation of posterior annular nociceptive pain fibers?
IDET Evidence • Synthesis – 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 2004 • Pauza, 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 2004 • Patient 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 204 • IDET. # 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 204 • Sham. # 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 204 • Blinding 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 204 • SF 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 • IDET is not a placebo treatment . • However, after a very rigorous screening process IDET substantially reduces pain in only 1 of 5
Freeman, Spine 2005 • Freeman 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 • Inclusion 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 • No 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: IDET • Equivocal . • 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.