eMedicine Specialties > Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation > Lumbar Spine Disorders

Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease: Differential Diagnoses & Workup

Author: Rajeev K Patel, MD, Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopedics, University of Rochester; Consulting Surgeon, Strong Health Spine Center, Strong Memorial Health System
Coauthor(s): Curtis W Slipman, MD, Director, University of Pennsylvania Spine Center; Associate Professor, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center
Contributor Information and Disclosures

Updated: Aug 3, 2009

Differential Diagnoses

Spinal Stenosis and Neurogenic Claudication

Other Problems to Be Considered

Muscle strain
Ligament/tendon injury
Sacroiliac joint syndrome
Lower lumbar zygapophyseal joint syndrome
Hip joint pain
Compression fracture
Stress reaction
Stress fracture
Spondylolysis
Spondyloarthropathy
Marfan syndrome
Fibromyalgia
Myofascial pain syndrome
Diskitis
Neoplastic disease

Workup

Laboratory Studies

  • No clinically relevant laboratory studies associated with LDDD have been found.

Imaging Studies

  • Radiography
    • Plain radiographs can be helpful in visualizing gross anatomic intervertebral disk changes. Obtain standing anteroposterior (AP) and lateral views. Intervertebral disks are visualized best on lateral views. Plain images are often not helpful unless evidence suggests a more dangerous etiology for LBP.
    • Signs of degeneration include loss of disk height, sclerosis of the endplates, or osteophytic ridging. In addition, spondylolisthesis can be diagnosed and the degree of slippage visualized easily on lateral images. Oblique views may be helpful is spondylolysis is suggested.
    • Coned-down lateral view provides a detailed look at the L5-S1 interspace. Flexion/extension images may help determine whether excess motion occurs between 2 vertebral bodies.
  • Nuclear imaging
    • Nuclear imaging assesses tissue metabolism by using radionuclide labeled technetium-99m that emits radiation in proportion to its attachment to targeted structures. These studies have not been helpful in identifying disk pathology.
    • Myelography may help in assessing neural compression, but it is not helpful in evaluating intervertebral disks unless it is combined with CT scanning.
  • CT scanning
    • CT can be used to identify symmetric uniform degenerative changes of the disk that result in a diffuse annular disk bulge, seen as diffuse peripheral extension of disk material. The margin of the annular bulge is usually smooth in contour12 but may be asymmetric. Overlapping 3- to 5-mm axial sections in 3-mm increments with multiplanar reformations is the optimal protocol. Sagittal reformations or CT scans may demonstrate loss of disk height. An intradisk vacuum phenomenon is seen commonly as focal or linear areas of markedly diminished density within the intervertebral disk.
    • CT also may demonstrate endplate degenerative changes, including sclerosis and cortical irregularity with erosions. CT allows for visualization of disk degeneration, bulging, and herniations but not with the detail of MRI. Degeneration of the intervertebral disk and endplate commonly is observed at autopsy and in imaging studies in asymptomatic patients. In the lumbar spine, CT scans are abnormal in 35% of asymptomatic volunteers of all ages and in 50% of persons aged 40 years or older.
  • Magnetic resonance imaging
    • MRI is currently the criterion standard imaging modality for detecting disk pathology. MRI has demonstrated degenerative changes in 3 times as many motion segments as contrast-enhanced CT scan. MRI uses a magnetic field to obtain direct multiplanar images with excellent soft-tissue contrast, and MRI provides superb resolution and precise localization of intervertebral disks.1
    • On MRI, degeneration of the intervertebral disk results in diminished signal intensity on T1- and T2-weighted images. These signal intensity changes are due to diminished water and glycosaminoglycan content and increased collagen content of the intervertebral disk.13 Sagittal images provide the best depiction of the loss of intervertebral disk height. Bulging of the disk annulus can be demonstrated on axial and sagittal images.14 Posterior extension of the disk annulus by >1.5 mm is invariably correlated with radial tears of the disk annulus. Furthermore, tears of the annulus fibrosus can be visualized as HIZ lesions (HIZL).15,16
    • In vitro, MRI can demonstrate radial tears of the disk annulus.17 The sensitivity of MRI is 67% compared with diskography in detecting radial annular tears. Focal enhancement of radial tears may be seen on gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted MRIs. This enhancement has been attributed to granulation tissue in the tear. A vacuum phenomenon is demonstrated as an area without signal intensity in the intervertebral disk; this is best appreciated on sagittal T1-weighted images.18 MRI shows notable abnormalities in approximately 30% of asymptomatic people of all ages, and in 57% of those aged 60 years or older. Disk degeneration or a bulging intervertebral disk is observed in 35% of subjects aged 20-39 years and in nearly 100% of those aged 60-80 years.
    • An important component of the degenerative process of the lumbar intervertebral disk is degeneration of the cartilaginous endplate. The cartilaginous endplate cannot be discretely identified on MRI because of its thinness and the chemical-shift artifacts at the endplate; however, MRI demonstrates reactive changes in the bone marrow due to the degenerative process in the diskovertebral joint associated with chronic repetitive stress. Disruption and fissuring of the endplate with granulation tissue and reactive woven bone result in endplate changes where vascularized fibrous tissue replaces adjacent marrow.19,20
    • Type 1 endplate changes are characterized by decreased signal intensity on T1-weighted images and increased signal intensity on T2-weighted images. Disruption of the endplate with replacement of the hematopoietic elements in the adjacent marrow by fat result in type 2 changes. Consequently, type 2 endplate changes are nearly isointense with fat, have hyperintensity on T1-weighted images and isointensity or slight hypointensity on T2-weighted images. Type 1 changes appear to convert to type 2 changes over time. Extensive bony sclerosis with thickening of subchondral trabeculae results in type 2 endplate changes. Type 3 changes have decreased signal intensity on both T1- and T2-weighted images.
  • MRI and CT scanning have considerable false-positive rates and less frequent false-negative results.

Other Tests

  • Plain radiographs, myelography (of value only in patients with nerve impingement on moving or standing), enhanced or nonenhanced CT, and nuclear imaging cannot depict painful disks. MRI is helpful in showing changes in signal intensity generated by the nucleus pulposus and, occasionally, in adjacent vertebral bodies; however, the same types of MRI changes can be seen in lifelong asymptomatic individuals.21
  • Both April and Schellhaus have suggested that HIZL observed on MRI may be a marker of a painful disk.16,22 However, findings from 4 independent studies of the clinical usefulness of HIZL as an indicator of a symptomatic disk are not supportive of this conclusion.
  • Provocation of concordant pain with lumbar diskography has been well demonstrated. The key feature of diskography is the patient's response to disk stimulation and not the appearance of the disk.
  • Results of physiologic testing explicitly determine whether a disk is painful. Specificity of diskography in this regard has been well established by the work of Walsh and colleagues.23
  • Because the only available diagnostic intervention that identifies a symptomatic disk is provocative diskography, consider ordering this diagnostic tool before surgery. Diskography remains controversial; some spinal physicians do not acknowledge its reliability or validity.24 Their contention primarily rests in a desire to prevent inappropriate surgery because of a potential to abuse diskography combined with the view, albeit unsubstantiated, that IDD represents a constellation of symptoms rather than a specific diagnosis. The value of diskography is debatable. Actual demonstration of disk disruption has been shown to be no more important than pain reproduction.
  • After diskographic assessment, refer patients for surgery, nonoperative treatment, or psychological care. The best candidates for surgery should have involvement of only 1 disk, possibly the 2 most caudal lumbar disk segments, or the 2 most cephalic disks. Refer patients with any other combination of disk involvement for nonsurgical pain modulation.
  • Electrodiagnostic testing (nerve conduction studies and electromyography) is warranted when their results may change the patient's therapy. In particular, electrodiagnostic testing is indicated (1) if patients have symptoms suggestive of cauda equina syndrome and their imaging studies are not diagnostic; (2) if imaging studies show an abnormality not consistent with the symptoms; (3) if such studies appear to be normal despite clinical suspicions; (4) if the clinician suspects focal nerve entrapment, polyneuropathy, or myopathic condition; and (5) if the clinician needs to identify which of several anatomic lesions in the spine is the cause of radicular symptoms.
  • If a malignancy is suggested, laboratory studies, including determination of the complete blood count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and alkaline phosphatase levels and serum protein electrophoresis, may be helpful. Conversely, if a rheumatologic etiology is considered, tests for antinuclear antibody, rheumatoid factor, uric acid, and HLA-B27 levels may be beneficial.

Procedures

  • Initial reports of epidural injections almost a century ago described the instillation of cocaine into the epidural space to treat lumbago and sciatica. In the early 1900s, epidural injection of local anesthetic was used to treat intractable sciatica. In 1952, Robecchi and Capra reported success with the first epidural steroid instillation in treating lumbar and associated sciatic pain.25 Instillation of steroid into the epidural space has become a common modality in treating lumbar and lower-extremity pain due to a suspected inflammatory etiology.
  • Patient characteristics that may suggest an unfavorable or suboptimal response to possible epidural steroid injection (ESI) are a long duration of symptoms, a nonradicular diagnosis, unemployment because of pain, smoking, increasing use of pain medication, increasing number of treatments for pain, pain not relieved by medication, and pain not increased by activity.
  • Optimal timing for the administration of epidural steroids has not been elucidated. Patients generally undergo conservative palliative measures (eg, NSAID therapy, lumbar-spine stabilization therapy) before they are considered for ESIs. However, do not delay epidural injections when conservative treatments do not seem to be helping. Delaying aggressive treatment may allow the ongoing inflammatory process to result in fibrosis and possibly permanent damage.
  • How often ESIs can be administered is unknown. Practitioners often wait as long as 2 weeks before reassessing the patient for a response to the injection and for possible reinjection. This practice became popular after Swerdlow and Sayle-Creer suggested that steroid injected into the epidural space may remain in situ for up to 2 weeks.26
  • In 1972, Winnie and colleagues emphasized the importance of placing medication as close to the site of pathology as possible to maximize the outcome.27 They reported improvement in 80% of patients in whom steroids were injected at the site of pathology. The best route for injection of steroids into the epidural space in patients with a diskogenic source is transforaminal. This route allows the clinician to drive the injected steroid ventrally with approximately 5 mL of local anesthetic to bathe the suspected diskogenic inflammatory source. The efficacy of this approach has been demonstrated in various prospective studies in lumbar axial pain syndromes and in those associated with corroborative radicular pain.
    • Only 2 nonrandomized, retrospective studies have address the outcome of transforaminal ESIs on spinally mediated lumbar axial pain due to diskogenic pathology without imaging evidence of nerve-root involvement.
      • Rosenberg and colleagues reported greater than 50% pain reduction after 1 year in 59% of patients.28
      • Manchikanti and colleagues examined patients with spinally mediated lumbar axial pain treated with blind interlaminar ESI, fluoroscopically guided caudal injection, or fluoroscopically guided transforaminal injection. The authors reported superior short- and long-term pain relief with the transforaminal route.29 This conclusion makes anatomic sense because transforaminal ESIs likely distribute the injectate more focally to the ventral epidural space than do the interlaminar and caudal routes. Therefore, is may be most target specific when one attempts to deliver medication to the focus of a posterior diskogenic inflammatory response.
    • The optimal route for injection of corticosteroids into the epidural space at the site of pathology in patients with diskogenic mediated lumbar axial pain syndromes with corroborative radicular involvement is the transforaminal route. This approach allows the clinician to deliver the injectate, composed of a betamethasone 6-12 mg and 1% lidocaine 0.5-1 mL. The goal is to precisely eradicate the known inflammatory response emanating from the potentially inflammagenic herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP) focally on the corroborative inflamed nerve root sleeve.
    • The efficacy of the aforementioned approach has been demonstrated in 4 randomized prospective, double-blind controlled clinical trials.
      • Riew and colleagues reported the results of fluoroscopically guided lumbar transforaminal injections in 55 patients with imaging evidence of nerve-root compression and corroborative radicular symptoms.30 Twenty-eight patients received bupivacaine and betamethasone, and 27 received bupivacaine. At 13- to 26-month follow-up, 33.3% of patients in the bupivacaine group decided not to have surgery compared with 71.4% of the bupivacaine-and-betamethasone group. The difference in surgical rates was statistically significant (P <.004). This study demonstrated the beneficial effect of precisely delivered corticosteroids in obviating operative treatment in patients with HNP and/or spinal stenosis.
      • Kraemer and colleagues reported long-term pain relief with transforaminal ESI.31 In their study, 49 patients with lumbar radicular pain were randomly assigned to into a corticosteroid group and control group.
      • Karppinen and colleagues reported 160 consecutive patients with symptomatic herniated disks with no history of lumbar-spine surgery.32 Patients were randomly selected for a corticosteroid group or a normal-saline group. Outcome measures obtained at 2 weeks, 3 months and 6 months included pain relief, sick leave, medical costs, findings on the Nottingham Health Profile, and future requirements for surgical intervention. Transforaminal ESI provided significant short- and long-term improvement in all of the outcome measures.
      • Thomas and colleagues reported the relative effectiveness of fluoroscopically guided lumbar transforaminal ESIs versus blind interlaminar ESIs in patients with radicular pain.33 Transforaminal ESIs were superior a variety of outcome measures, including finger-to-floor lumbar flexion, daily activity (including work and vocational function), and Dallas pain scores. Findings from this direct comparison underscore the importance of fluoroscopic guidance and of delivering medication accurately and precisely to the site of a potential ongoing inflammatory response.
    • In a prospective nonblinded randomized study by Buttermann, transforaminal ESIs provided efficacy measured by reduced symptoms and disability and obviation of surgery at a follow-up of up to 3 years. Patients had large (>25% of the cross-sectional area of the spinal canal) symptomatic lumbar herniated disks. Buttermann also reported that patients who had short-term improvement or ineffectiveness of transforaminal ESIs and who require surgical diskectomy had no adverse affect in the outcome of that surgery due to the temporal delay caused by the trial of transforaminal ESIs.34
    • Findings from several prospective nonrandomized clinical trials of the efficacy of transforaminal ESI strongly suggest the beneficial effects of transforaminal ESIs for HNP that causes lumbar axial pain with corroborative radicular pain.
      • Weiner and colleagues reported that 21 of 28 patients with a CT-documented HNP and corroborative lower-extremity pain had moderate or complete pain relief after receiving a single transforaminal infusion of betamethasone and 1% Xylocaine; patients did not require surgery at an average of 3.4 years during follow-up.35
      • Lutz and colleagues reported 69 patients, with an average of 22 weeks of symptoms, who had MRI evidence of a HNP and radicular pain.36 Patients underwent an average of 1.8 transforaminal injections of betamethasone and 1% Xylocaine followed by a 6- 12-week course of lumbar-spine stabilization therapy. At an average of 80 weeks of follow-up, 75% of patients had a success outcome (defined as pain reduction by 50% or more and return to previous or near-previous level of function).
      • In a retrospective evaluation, Wang and colleagues demonstrated significant short- and long-term symptomatic improvement and the avoidance of diskectomy in 77% of patients with lumbar disk herniations who were treated with 1-6 transforaminal ESIs.37
  • The literature discussed above strongly suggests that transforaminal ESI should be the standard of care for index interventional spinal procedure in patients with spinally mediated lumbar axial pain syndromes associated with radicular involvement due to diskogenic disease and/or HNP when more conservative measures fail. Furthermore, in most cases of HNP, the known phagocytic immunologic response and consequent benign anatomic natural history contributes to the relatively high long-term success rates of transforaminal ESIs.
  • Contraindications to steroid instillations in the epidural space are pregnancy (because of the adverse effects of fluoroscopy on the fetus), hypersensitivity to any component of the injected steroid, bacteremia, full anticoagulation, and bleeding diathesis. Other concerns are elevation of serum glucose levels in patients with diabetes, elevation of blood pressure in hypertensive patients, and fluid retention in patients with congestive heart failure. Use of aspirin and other NSAIDs has not been demonstrated to predispose patients to clinically significant bleeding when they are receiving epidural injections.

Histologic Findings

The lumbar intervertebral disk is composed of the nucleus pulposus and annulus fibrosis. The disk is intimately related as a functional unit to the cartilaginous endplate. The intervertebral disk contains water, collagen, and proteoglycans. The nucleus pulposus normally is well hydrated, containing approximately 85-90% water in children aged 0-10 years and 70-80% water in adults. Elongated fibrocytes are organized loosely, forming a gelatinous matrix. The nucleus has a higher content of proteoglycans than the disk annulus.

The annulus fibrosis contains 75% water in children aged 0-010 years and 70-80% water in adults. The peripheral annulus is primarily composed of type I collagen, lending tensile strength to the intervertebral disk. The inner annulus is primarily composed of type 2 collagen, which, in conjunction with the nucleus pulposus, provides compressive strength. Type 2 collagen may contain more water than type 1 collagen.

The collagenous lamellae are fewer, thinner, and more tightly packed posteriorly than anteriorly. The central depression of the vertebral endplate is covered by hyaline cartilage.

With age-related degeneration, the volume of the nucleus pulposus diminishes with decreasing hydration and increasing fibrosis. Changes in water content are from alteration in the relative composition of proteoglycan, as well as decrease in the extent of aggregating proteoglycans. By age 30 years, in-growth of fibrous tissue into the nucleus results in an intranuclear cleft. Fibrocartilage, derived from cells in the annulus and endplate, gradually replaces mucoid material within the nucleus. Gradual loss of definition between nucleus and inner annular fibers occurs.

In the final stages of degeneration, the nucleus is replaced completely by fibrocartilage indistinguishable from the fibrotic disk annulus. Specifically, the type 1 collagen content of the disk annulus increases, especially posteriorly, and type 2 collagen content diminishes. Cartilaginous metaplasia begins in the inner annular fibers with changes in the overall fiber direction from vertical to horizontal. Infolding of fibers of the outer annulus occurs early with myxoid degeneration of the outer annular fibers.

Concentric and/or transverse tears in the annulus fibrosis are frequent findings. Peripheral tears are more frequent posterior or posterolateral where the annular lamellae are fewer. The development of a radial tear, particularly a tear extending to the disk nucleus, is a major hallmarks of disk degeneration. The degenerated intervertebral disk loses height and overall volume. Herniation of both nuclear material and annulus fibrosis may occur through the tear. With aging, the cartilage endplate may become thin and eventually calcified. In advanced disk degeneration, the cartilage endplate is calcified, with fissuring and microfractures. At autopsy, 97% of adults aged 49 years or older have degenerative changes.

For a structure to be considered a pain generator, it must have a nerve supply, it must be susceptible to disease or injuries known to be painful, and it must be capable of causing pain similar to that observed clinically. The superficial layers of the annulus fibrosis contain nerve fibers in the posterior portion of the annulus, which are branches from the sinuvertebral nerves. The sinuvertebral nerves are branches of the ventral rami. They also contain fibers derived from the grey ramus. Small branches from the grey ramus communicans or sympathetic fibers innervate the anterior longitudinal ligament and lateral and anterior annulus. The grey ramus communicans joins the sinuvertebral nerve that reenters the intervertebral foramen and spinal canal to innervate the posterior annulus and the posterior longitudinal ligament.

A dense nerve network on the posterior portion of the lumbar intervertebral disk has been demonstrated in rats. This network disappears almost completely after total resection of bilateral sympathetic trunks at L2-L6. In rats, sympathetic nerves bilaterally and multisegmentally innervate the posterior portion of the lumbar intervertebral disk and posterior longitudinal ligament. A variety of free and complex nerve endings have been demonstrated in the outer one third to one half of the annulus. Coppes and colleagues observed that disk innervation was more extensive in severely degenerated lumbar disks than in compared normal disks.38

Substance P immunoreactivity suggest nociceptive properties of at least some of these nerves, which provides further evidence for a morphologic substrate of diskogenic pain. Nerve fibers were restricted to the outer or middle third of the annulus in control samples.

In the patient population undergoing spinal fusion for chronic LBP, nerves extended into the inner third of the annulus fibrosis in 46% and into nucleus pulposus in 22%. The findings that isolated nerve fibers express substance P deep within diseased intervertebral disks and the association with pain suggests an important role for nerve ingrowth into the intervertebral disk in the pathogenesis of chronic LBP.

Weinstein and colleagues identified substance P, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), and vasoactive intestinal polypeptides (VIP) in the outer annular fibers of the disk in rats.39 These chemicals are all related to pain perception. Substance P–, dopamine-, and choline acetyltransferase–immunoreactive nerve fibers are found in human longitudinal ligaments that have been removed surgically. These findings not only provide evidence to support the first criterion but also reveal changes associated with painful disks.

More on Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease

Overview: Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease
Differential Diagnoses & Workup: Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease
Treatment & Medication: Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease
Follow-up: Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease
References
Further Reading
[ CLOSE WINDOW ]

References

  1. Kong MH, Hymanson HJ, Song KY, et al. Kinetic magnetic resonance imaging analysis of abnormal segmental motion of the functional spine unit. J Neurosurg Spine. Apr 2009;10(4):357-65. [Medline].

  2. Kirkaldy-Willis WH. The pathology and pathogenesis of low back pain. In: Managing Low Back Pain. New York, NY:. Churchill Livingstone;1988: 49.

  3. Dean DD, Martel-Pelletier J, Pelletier JP, et al. Evidence for metalloproteinase and metalloproteinase inhibitor imbalance in human osteoarthritic cartilage. J Clin Invest. Aug 1989;84(2):678-85. [Medline].

  4. Komiya Y. Immunohistochernical localization of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases (TIMP) and stromelysin in human joint synovium. Jpn J Rheum Joint Surg. 1992;11:59-70.

  5. MacNaul KL, Chartrain N, Lark M, et al. Discoordinate expression of stromelysin, collagenase, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1 in rheumatoid human synovial fibroblasts. Synergistic effects of interleukin-1 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha on stromelysin expression. J Biol Chem. Oct 5 1990;265(28):17238-45. [Medline].

  6. NCHS. National Center for Health Statistics. Prevalence of Selected Impairment. Hyattsville, MD:. US Department of Health and Human Services;1984.

  7. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital statistics of the United States. Washington, DC:. Government Printing Office;1968-1988.

  8. Deyo RA, Tsui-Wu YJ. Descriptive epidemiology of low-back pain and its related medical care in the United States. Spine. Apr 1987;12(3):264-8. [Medline].

  9. Von Korff M, Deyo RA, Cherkin D, Barlow W. Back pain in primary care: outcomes at 1 year. Spine. Jun 1 1993;18(7):855-62. [Medline].

  10. Frymoyer JW. Epidemiology: the magnitude of the problem. In: Wiesel SW, Weinstein JN, Herkowitz HH, Dvorak J, eds. The Lumbar Spine. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Co;1996.

  11. Luo X, Pietrobon R, Sun SX. Estimates and patterns of direct health care expenditures among individuals with back pain in the United States. Spine. Jan 1 2004;29(1):79-86.

  12. Lee SU, Lee JI, Butts K, et al. Changes in posterior lumbar disk contour abnormality with flexion-extension movement in subjects with low back pain and degenerative disk disease. PM R. Jun 2009;1(6):541-6. [Medline].

  13. Panagiotacopulos ND, Pope MH, Krag MH, Block R. Water content in human intervertebral discs, I: Measurement by magnetic resonance imaging. Spine. Nov 1987;12(9):912-7. [Medline].

  14. Watanabe A, Benneker LM, Boesch C, et al. Classification of intervertebral disk degeneration with axial T2 mapping. AJR Am J Roentgenol. Oct 2007;189(4):936-42. [Medline].

  15. Smith BM, Hurwitz EL, Solsberg D, et al. Interobserver reliability of detecting lumbar intervertebral disc high- intensity zone on magnetic resonance imaging and association of high- intensity zone with pain and anular disruption. Spine. Oct 1 1998;23(19):2074-80. [Medline].

  16. Aprill C, Bogduk N. High-intensity zone: a diagnostic sign of painful lumbar disc on magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Radiol. May 1992;65(773):361-9. [Medline].

  17. Schiebler ML, Grenier N, Fallon M, et al. Normal and degenerated intervertebral disk: in vivo and in vitro MR imaging with histopathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. Jul 1991;157(1):93-7. [Medline].

  18. Grenier N, Grossman RI, Schiebler ML, et al. Degenerative lumbar disk disease: pitfalls and usefulness of MR imaging in detection of vacuum phenomenon. Radiology. Sep 1987;164(3):861-5. [Medline].

  19. de Roos A, Kressel H, Spritzer C, Dalinka M. MR imaging of marrow changes adjacent to end plates in degenerative lumbar disk disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. Sep 1987;149(3):531-4. [Medline].

  20. Modic MT, Steinberg PM, Ross JS, Carter JR. Degenerative disk disease: assessment of changes in vertebral body marrow with MR imaging. Radiology. Jan 1988;166(1 Pt 1):193-9. [Medline].

  21. Quint U, Wilke HJ. Grading of degenerative disk disease and functional impairment: imaging versus patho-anatomical findings. Eur Spine J. Dec 2008;17(12):1705-13. [Medline].

  22. Schellhas KP, Pollei SR, Gundry CR, Heithoff KB. Lumbar disc high-intensity zone. Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging and discography. Spine. Jan 1 1996;21(1):79-86. [Medline].

  23. Walsh TR, Weinstein JN, Spratt KF, et al. Lumbar discography in normal subjects. A controlled, prospective study. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Aug 1990;72(7):1081-8. [Medline].

  24. Scuderi GJ, Brusovanik GV, Golish SR, et al. A critical evaluation of discography in patients with lumbar intervertebral disc disease. Spine J. Jul-Aug 2008;8(4):624-9. [Medline].

  25. Robecchi A, Capra R. L'idrocortisone (composto F): prime esperienze cliniche in campo reumatologico. Minerva Med. 1952;98:1259-63.

  26. Swerdlow M, Sayle-Creer WS. A study of extradural medication in the relief of the lumbosciatic syndrome. Anaesthesia. Jul 1970;25(3):341-5. [Medline].

  27. Winnie AP, Hartman JT, Meyers HL Jr, et al. Pain clinic, II: intradural and extradural corticosteroids for sciatica. Anesth Analg. Nov-Dec 1972;51(6):990-1003. [Medline].

  28. Rosenberg SK, Grabinsky A, Kooser C, et al. Effectiveness of transforaminal epidural steroid injections in low back pain: a one year experience. Pain Physician. Jul 2002;5(3):266-70. [Medline].

  29. Manchikanti L, Staats PS, Singh V, et al. Evidence-based practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain. Pain Physician. Jan 2003;6(1):3-81. [Medline].

  30. Riew KD, Yin Y, Gilula L, et al. Can nerve root injections obviate the need for operative treatment of lumbar radicular pain? A prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study. Presented at the 14th Annual North American Spine Society Meeting. Chicago, IL, October 20-23, 1999.

  31. Kraemer J, Ludwig J, Bickert U, et al. Lumbar epidural perineural injection: a new technique. Eur Spine J. 1997;6(5):357-61. [Medline].

  32. Karppinen J, Malmivaara A, Kurunlahti M, et al. Periradicular infiltration for sciatica: a randomized controlled trial. Spine. May 1 2001;26(9):1059-67. [Medline].

  33. Thomas E, Cyteval C, Abiad L, et al. Efficacy of transforaminal versus interspinous corticosteroid injectionin discal radiculalgia - a prospective, randomised, double-blind study. Clin Rheumatol. Oct 2003;22(4-5):299-304. [Medline].

  34. Buttermann GR. Treatment of lumbar disc herniation: epidural steroid injection compared with discectomy. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Apr 2004;86-A(4):670-9. [Medline].

  35. Weiner BK, Fraser RD. Foraminal injection for lateral lumbar disc herniation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. Sep 1997;79(5):804-7. [Medline].

  36. Lutz GE, Vad VB, Wisneski RJ. Fluoroscopic transforaminal lumbar epidural steroids: an outcome study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. Nov 1998;79(11):1362-6. [Medline].

  37. Wang JC, Lin E, Brodke DS, et al. Epidural injections for the treatment of symptomatic lumbar herniated discs. J Spinal Disord Tech. Aug 2002;15(4):269-72. [Medline].

  38. Coppes MH, Marani E, Thomeer RT, Groen GJ. Innervation of "painful" lumbar discs. Spine. Oct 15 1997;22(20):2342-9; discussion 2349-50. [Medline].

  39. Weinstein J, Claverie W, Gibson S. The pain of discography. Spine. Dec 1988;13(12):1344-8. [Medline].

  40. Freudenberger C, Lindley EM, Beard DW, et al. Posterior versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion with anterior tension band plating: retrospective analysis. Orthopedics. Jul 2009;32(7):[Medline].

  41. Kapural L, Mekhail N. Novel intradiscal biacuplasty (IDB) for the treatment of lumbar discogenic pain. Pain Pract. Jun 2007;7(2):130-4. [Medline].

  42. Kapural L, Ng A, Dalton J, et al. Intervertebral disc biacuplasty for the treatment of lumbar discogenic pain: results of a six-month follow-up. Pain Med. Jan-Feb 2008;9(1):60-7. [Medline].

  43. Saal JS, Saal JA. A novel approach to painful internal disc derangement: collagen modulation with a thermal percutaneous navigable intradiscal catheter: a prospective trial. Proceedings of the 13th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Society. 1998.

  44. Freeman BJ, Fraser RD, Cain CM. A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial: intradiscal electrothermal therapy versus placebo for the treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain. Spine. Nov 1 2005;30(21):2369-77; discussion 2378. [Medline].

  45. Derby R, Eek B, Ryan DP. Intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty. Presented at 13th Annual Meeting North American Spine Society 13th Annual Meeting. San Francisco, CA, October 28-31, 1998.

  46. Moon SH, Lee HM, Park MS. Bone morphogenic protein-2 facilitates expression of chondrogenic not osteogenic phenotype in human intervertebral disc cells. Program and abstracts of the 17th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Soc. 2002.

  47. Ahn N, Imai Y, An H. Effect of nutrient concentration and OP-1 on the metabolism of intervertebral disc: In vitro organ culture study. Program and abstracts of the 17th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Soc. 2002.

  48. Miyamoto K, Masuda K, Kim JG. Intradiscal injections of osteogenic protein-1 restore the viscoelastic properties of degenerated intervertebral discs. Spine J. Nov-Dec 2006;6(6):692-703.

  49. Adams MA, McMillan DW, Green TP, Dolan P. Sustained loading generates stress concentrations in lumbar intervertebral discs. Spine. Feb 15 1996;21(4):434-8. [Medline].

  50. Lacroix JM, Powell J, Lloyd GJ, et al. Low-back pain. Factors of value in predicting outcome. Spine. Jun 1990;15(6):495-9. [Medline].

  51. Deyo RA, Diehl AK. Cancer as a cause of back pain: frequency, clinical presentation, and diagnostic strategies. J Gen Intern Med. May-Jun 1988;3(3):230-8. [Medline].

  52. Adams P, Eyre DR, Muir H. Biochemical aspects of development and ageing of human lumbar intervertebral discs. Rheumatol Rehabil. Feb 1977;16(1):22-9. [Medline].

  53. Aguila LA, Piraino DW, Modic MT, et al. The intranuclear cleft of the intervertebral disk: magnetic resonance imaging. Radiology. Apr 1985;155(1):155-8. [Medline].

  54. Andersson GB. Epidemiologic aspects on low-back pain in industry. Spine. Jan-Feb 1981;6(1):53-60. [Medline].

  55. Andersson GB, Schultz AB, Nachemson AL. Intervertebral disc pressures during traction. Scand J Rehabil Med Suppl. 1983;9:88-91. [Medline].

  56. Aoki J, Yamamoto I, Kitamura N, et al. End plate of the discovertebral joint: degenerative change in the elderly adult. Radiology. Aug 1987;164(2):411-4. [Medline].

  57. Bergquist-Ullman M, Larsson U. Acute low back pain in industry. A controlled prospective study with special reference to therapy and confounding factors. Acta Orthop Scand. 1977;(170):1-117. [Medline].

  58. Bernard TN Jr. Lumbar discography followed by computed tomography. Refining the diagnosis of low-back pain. Spine. Jul 1990;15(7):690-707. [Medline].

  59. Biering-Sorensen F. Physical measurements as risk indicators for low-back trouble over a one-year period. Spine. Mar 1984;9(2):106-19. [Medline].

  60. Bigos SJ, Battid MC. The impact of spinal disorders in industry. In: Frymoyer JW, ed. The Adult Spine. New York:. Raven Press;1991.

  61. Blair SN, Piserchia PV, Wilbur CS, Crowder JH. A public health intervention model for work-site health promotion. Impact on exercise and physical fitness in a health promotion plan after 24 months. JAMA. Feb 21 1986;255(7):921-6. [Medline].

  62. Block AR, Vanharanta H, Ohnmeiss DD, Guyer RD. Discographic pain report: influence of psychological factors. Spine. Feb 1 1996;21(3):334-8. [Medline].

  63. Boden SD, Davis DO, Dina TS, et al. Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects: a prospective investigation. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Mar 1990;72(3):403-8. [Medline].

  64. Bogduk N. The innervation of the lumbar spine. Spine. Apr 1983;8(3):286-93. [Medline].

  65. Bogduk N, Modic MT. Lumbar discography. Spine. Feb 1 1996;21(3):402-4. [Medline].

  66. Bogduk N, Twomey LT. Clinical Anatomy of the Lumbar Spine. 2nd ed. London: Churchill Livingstone;1991:161.

  67. Bogduk N, Tynan W, Wilson AS. The nerve supply to the human lumbar intervertebral discs. J Anat. Jan 1981;132(Pt 1):39-56. [Medline].

  68. Brickley-Parsons D, Glimcher MJ. Is the chemistry of collagen in intervertebral discs an expression of Wolff''s Law? A study of the human lumbar spine. Spine. Mar 1984;9(2):148-63. [Medline].

  69. Bush K, Cowan N, Katz DE, Gishen P. The natural history of sciatica associated with disc pathology: a prospective study with clinical and independent radiologic follow-up. Spine. Oct 1992;17(10):1205-12. [Medline].

  70. Butler D, Trafimow JH, Andersson GB, et al. Discs degenerate before facets. Spine. Feb 1990;15(2):111-3. [Medline].

  71. Butt WP. Lumbar discography. J Can Assoc Radiol. 1964;14:172.

  72. Cady LD Jr, Thomas PC, Karwasky RJ. Program for increasing health and physical fitness of fire fighters. J Occup Med. Feb 1985;27(2):110-4. [Medline].

  73. Cady LD Jr, Thomas PC, Karwasky RJ. Program for increasing health and physical fitness of fire fighters. J Occup Med. Feb 1985;27(2):110-4. [Medline].

  74. Cats-Baril WL, Frymoyer JW. The economics of spinal disorders. In: Frymoyer JW, ed. The Adult Spine: Principles of Practice. New York, NY: Raven Press;1991.

  75. Colhoun E, McCall IW, Williams L, Cassar Pullicino VN. Provocation discography as a guide to planning operations on the spine. J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. Mar 1988;70(2):267-71. [Medline].

  76. Coventry MB, Ghormley RK, Kernohan JW. The intervertebral disc: its microscopic anatomy and pathology, III: pathologic changes in the intervertebral disc. J Bone Joint Surg. 1945;27(1):460.

  77. Crook HV. Internal disc disruption. In: Frymover JW, ed. The Adult Spine: Principles and Practice. New York, NY: Raven;1991: 2015.

  78. DePalma AF, Rothman RH. The Invertebral Disc. Philadelphia, PA:. WB Saunders;1970.

  79. Derby R, Eek B, Van Peteghern PK, Ryan DP. Somatic referred pain patterns resulting from direct in vivo intradiscal thermal stimulation. Presented at Combined meeting of the International Spinal Injection Society and the Australian Faculty of Musculoskeletal Medicine Combined Meeting. Sydney, Australia,. September 26-27, 1998.

  80. Deyo RA, Bass JE. Lifestyle and low-back pain. The influence of smoking and obesity. Spine. May 1989;14(5):501-6. [Medline].

  81. Dixon ASJ. Diagnosis of low back pain: sorting the complainers. In: Jayson M, ed. The Lumbar Spine and Back Pain. New York, NY:. Grune and Stratton;1976.

  82. Donelson R, Aprill C, Medcalf R, Grant W. A prospective study of centralization of lumbar and referred pain. A predictor of symptomatic discs and anular competence. Spine. May 15 1997;22(10):1115-22. [Medline].

  83. Fordyce WE, Brockway JA, Bergman JA, Spengler D. Acute back pain: a control-group comparison of behavioral vs traditional management methods. J Behav Med. Apr 1986;9(2):127-40. [Medline].

  84. Forssell MZ. The back school. Spine. Jan-Feb 1981;6(1):104-6. [Medline].

  85. Freemont AJ, Peacock TE, Goupille P, et al. Nerve ingrowth into diseased intervertebral disc in chronic back pain. Lancet. Jul 19 1997;350(9072):178-81. [Medline].

  86. Fry J. Back pain and soft tissue rheumatism. In: Colloquium Proceedings of Advisory Services. London, England:. 1995.

  87. Frymoyer JW. Back pain and sciatica. N Engl J Med. Feb 4 1988;318(5):291-300. [Medline].

  88. Frymoyer JW, Pope MH, Clements JH, et al. Risk factors in low-back pain: an epidemiological survey. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Feb 1983;65(2):213-8. [Medline].

  89. Gonzalez VM, Goeppinger J, Lorig K. Four psychosocial theories and their application to patient education and clinical practice. Arthritis Care Res. Sep 1990;3(3):132-43. [Medline].

  90. Gower WE, Pedrini V. Age-related variations in proteinpolysaccharides from human nucleus pulposus, annulus fibrosus, and costal cartilage. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Sep 1969;51(6):1154-62. [Medline].

  91. Grenier N, Greselle JF, Vital JM, et al. Normal and disrupted lumbar longitudinal ligaments: correlative MR and anatomic study. Radiology. Apr 1989;171(1):197-205. [Medline].

  92. Hadler NM. The predicament of backache. J Occup Med. May 1988;30(5):449-50. [Medline].

  93. Hazard RG, Fenwick JW, Kalisch SM, et al. Functional restoration with behavioral support: a one-year prospective study of patients with chronic low-back pain. Spine. Feb 1989;14(2):157-61. [Medline].

  94. Heliovaara M. Risk factors for low back pain and sciatica. Ann Med. Aug 1989;21(4):257-64. [Medline].

  95. HHS. Department of Health and Human Services. Reducing the Health Consequences of Smoking: 25 Years of Progress. A report of the Surgeon General. Washington, DC:. Government Printing Office;1989.

  96. Higuchi M, Kaneda K, Abe K. Postnatal histogenesis of the cartilage plate of the spinal column: electron microscopic observations. Spine. Mar-Apr 1982;7(2):89-96. [Medline].

  97. Hirsch C, Ingelmark BE, Miller M. The anatomical basis for low back pain. Acra Orthop Scand. 1963;23:1-17.

  98. Hopwood MB, Abram SE. Factors associated with failure of lumbar epidural steroids. Reg Anesth. Jul-Aug 1993;18(4):238-43. [Medline].

  99. Horlocker TT, Wedel DJ, Offord KP. Does preoperative antiplatelet therapy increase the risk of hemorrhagic complications associated with regional anesthesia?. Anesth Analg. Jun 1990;70(6):631-4. [Medline].

  100. Hurri H. The Swedish back school in chronic low back pain, I: benefits. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1989;21(1):33-40. [Medline].

  101. Hurri H. The Swedish back school in chronic low back pain, II: factors predicting the outcome. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1989;21(1):41-4. [Medline].

  102. Ito M, Incorvaia KM, Yu SF, et al. Predictive signs of discogenic lumbar pain on magnetic resonance imaging with discography correlation. Spine. Jun 1 1998;23(11):1252-8; discussion 1259-60. [Medline].

  103. Jackson HC 2d, Winkelmann RK, Bickel WH. Nerve endings in the human lumbar spinal column and related structures. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Oct 1966;48(7):1272-81. [Medline].

  104. Jaffray D, O''Brien JP. Isolated intervertebral disc resorption. A source of mechanical and inflammatory back pain. Spine. May 1986;11(4):397-401. [Medline].

  105. Jamison RN, Raymond SA, Slawsby EA, et al. Opioid therapy for chronic noncancer back pain: a randomized prospective study. Spine. Dec 1 1998;23(23):2591-600. [Medline].

  106. Jamison RN, VadeBoncouer T, Ferrante FM. Low back pain patients unresponsive to an epidural steroid injection: identifying predictive factors. Clin J Pain. Dec 1991;7(4):311-7. [Medline].

  107. Jensen MC, Brant-Zawadzki MN, Obuchowski N, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine in people without back pain. N Engl J Med. Jul 14 1994;331(2):69-73. [Medline].

  108. Kambin P, Zhou L. History and current status of percutaneous arthroscopic disc surgery. Spine. Dec 15 1996;21(24 Suppl):57S-61S. [Medline].

  109. Kawakami M. Histochemical and immunohistochemical demonstrations of nerve fibers on human paraspinal soft tissue [Japanese]. J Wakayama Med Soc. 1989;40:621-30.

  110. Kieffer SA, Sherry RG, Wellenstein DE, King RB. Bulging lumbar intervertebral disk: myelographic differentiation from herniated disk with nerve root compression. AJR Am J Roentgenol. Apr 1982;138(4):709-16. [Medline].

  111. Klaber Moffett JA, Chase SM, Portek I, Ennis JR. A controlled, prospective study to evaluate the effectiveness of a back school in the relief of chronic low back pain. Spine. Mar 1986;11(2):120-2. [Medline].

  112. Koeller W, Muehlhaus S, Meier W, Hartmann F. Biomechanical properties of human intervertebral discs subjected to axial dynamic compression: influence of age and degeneration. J Biomech. 1986;19(10):807-16. [Medline].

  113. Kostuik JP, Harrington I, Alexander D, et al. Cauda equina syndrome and lumbar disc herniation. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. Mar 1986;68(3):386-91. [Medline].

  114. Kummel BM. Nonorganic signs of significance in low back pain. Spine. May 1 1996;21(9):1077-81. [Medline].

  115. Kuslich SD, Ahern JW, Dowdle JD. The BAK method of lumbar interbody fusion-2 year follow-up results: Proceedings of the 11th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Society. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins;. 1996.

  116. Kuslich SD, Ahern JW, Garner MD. An in-vivo, prospective analysis of tissue sensitivity of lumbar spinal tissues: Proceedings of the 12th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Society. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins;. 1997.

  117. Kuslich SD, Ulstrom CL, Michael CJ. The tissue origin of low back pain and sciatica: a report of pain response to tissue stimulation during operations on the lumbar spine using local anesthesia. Orthop Clin North Am. Apr 1991;22(2):181-7. [Medline].

  118. Lee CK, Vessa P, Lee JK. Chronic disabling low back pain syndrome caused by internal disc derangements. The results of disc excision and posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine. Feb 1 1995;20(3):356-61. [Medline].

  119. Lipson SJ, Muir H. Experimental intervertebral disc degeneration: morphologic and proteoglycan changes over time. Arthritis Rheum. Jan 1981;24(1):12-21. [Medline].

  120. Malinsky J. The ontogenetic development of nerve terminations in the intervertebral discs of man. (Histology of intervertebral discs, 11th communication). Acta Anat (Basel). 1959;38:96-113. [Medline].

  121. Manson JE, Tosteson H, Ridker PM, et al. The primary prevention of myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. May 21 1992;326(21):1406-16. [Medline].

  122. Mayer TG, Gatchel R, Mayer H, et al. A prospective two-year study of functional restoration in industrial low back pain injury: an objective assessment procedure. JAMA. 1989;258:1763.

  123. Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ, Kishino N, et al. Objective assessment of spine function following industrial injury: a prospective study with comparison group and one-year follow-up. Spine. Jul-Aug 1985;10(6):482-93. [Medline].

  124. McCarron RF, Wimpee MW, Hudkins PG, Laros GS. The inflammatory effect of nucleus pulposus: a possible element in the pathogenesis of low-back pain. Spine. Oct 1987;12(8):760-4. [Medline].

  125. McCoy CE, Selby D, Henderson R, et al. Patients avoiding surgery: pathology and one-year life status follow-up. Spine. Jun 1991;16(6 Suppl):S198-200. [Medline].

  126. McNally DS, Shackleford IM, Goodship AE, Mulholland RC. In vivo stress measurement can predict pain on discography. Spine. Nov 15 1996;21(22):2580-7. [Medline].

  127. Medical Economics. Physician Desk Reference. 54th ed. Montvale, NJ:. Medical Economics Company Inc;2000.

  128. Merriam WF, Quinnell RC, Stockdale HR, Willis DS. The effect of postural changes on the inferred pressures within the nucleus pulposus during lumbar discography. Spine. May-Jun 1984;9(4):405-8. [Medline].

  129. Miller JA, Schmatz C, Schultz AB. Lumbar disc degeneration: correlation with age, sex, and spine level in 600 autopsy specimens. Spine. Feb 1988;13(2):173-8. [Medline].

  130. Modic MT, Masaryk TJ, Ross JS. Imaging of degenerative disk disease. Radiology. Jul 1988;168(1):177-86. [Medline].

  131. Nachemson A, Morris JM. In vivo measurements of intradiscal pressure: discometery, a method for the determination of pressure in the lower lumbar discs. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Jul 1964;46:1077-92. [Medline].

  132. Nakamura S, Takahashi K, Takahashi Y, et al. Origin of nerves supplying the posterior portion of lumbar intervertebral discs in rats. Spine. Apr 15 1996;21(8):917-24. [Medline].

  133. Ohnmeiss DD, Vanharanta H, Ekholm J. Degree of disc disruption and lower extremity pain. Spine. Jul 15 1997;22(14):1600-5. [Medline].

  134. Palmgren T, Gronblad M, Virri J, et al. Immunohistochemical demonstration of sensory and autonomic nerve terminals in herniated lumbar disc tissue. Spine. Jun 1 1996;21(11):1301-6. [Medline].

  135. Parker LM, Murrell SE, Boden SD, Horton WC. The outcome of posterolateral fusion in highly selected patients with discogenic low back pain. Spine. Aug 15 1996;21(16):1909-16; discussion 1916-7. [Medline].

  136. Plowman SA. Physical activity, physical fitness, and low back pain. In: Holloszy JO, ed. Exercise and Sport Science Review. Vol 20. Philadelphia, PA:. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins;1992.

  137. Praemer A, Furrier S, Rice DP. Musculoskeletal Conditions in the United States. Rosemont, IL:. American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons;1992: 23-33.

  138. Pritzker KP. Aging and degeneration in the lumbar intervertebral disc. Orthop Clin North Am. Jan 1977;8(1):66-77. [Medline].

  139. Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders. Scientific approach to the assessment and management of activity-related spinal disorders: a monograph for clinicians. Spine. Sep 1987;12(7 Suppl):S1-59. [Medline].

  140. Resnick D. Degenerative diseases of the vertebral column. Radiology. Jul 1985;156(1):3-14. [Medline].

  141. Resnick D, Niwayama G, Guerra J Jr, et al. Spinal vacuum phenomena: anatomical study and review. Radiology. May 1981;139(2):341-8. [Medline].

  142. Ricketson R, Simmons JW, Hauser BO. The prolapsed intervertebral disc. The high-intensity zone with discography correlation. Spine. Dec 1 1996;21(23):2758-62. [Medline].

  143. Ross JS, Modic MT, Masaryk TJ. Tears of the anulus fibrosus: assessment with Gd-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Nov-Dec 1989;10(6):1251-4. [Medline].

  144. Rowe ML. Low back pain in industry. A position paper. J Occup Med. Apr 1969;11(4):161-9. [Medline].

  145. Saal JA, Saal JS. Intradiscal electrothermal treatment for chronic discogenic low back pain: prospective outcome study with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Spine. May 1 2002;27(9):966-73; discussion 973-4.

  146. Saal JA, Saal JS, Ashley J. Thermal characteristics of the lumbar disc: evaluation of a novel approach to targeted intra discal thermal therapy. Presented at the 13th Annual Meeting of the North American Spine Society. San Francisco, CA, October 28-31, 1998.

  147. Saifuddin A, Braithwaite I, White J, et al. The value of lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging in the demonstration of anular tears. Spine. Feb 15 1998;23(4):453-7. [Medline].

  148. Salkever DS. Morbidity costs: national estimates and economic determinants. NCHSR Research Summary Series. October 1985. Washington, DC:. US Department of Health and Human Services;1986.

  149. Schellhas KP. HIZ lesions. Spine. Jul 1 1997;22(13):1538. [Medline].

  150. Schnebel B, Kingston S, Watkins R, Dillin W. Comparison of MRI to contrast CT in the diagnosis of spinal stenosis. Spine. Mar 1989;14(3):332-7. [Medline].

  151. Schneiderman G, Flannigan B, Kingston S, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of disc degeneration: correlation with discography. Spine. Apr 1987;12(3):276-81. [Medline].

  152. Schwarzer AC, Aprill CN, Derby R, et al. The prevalence and clinical features of internal disc disruption in patients with chronic low back pain. Spine. Sep 1 1995;20(17):1878-83. [Medline].

  153. Selby DK. The structural degenerative cascade: the lumbar spine. In: White AH, Schofferman JA, eds. Spine Care: Diagnosis Conservative Treatment. St Louis:. Mosby;1995: 8-26.

  154. Sether LA, Yu S, Haughton VM, Fischer ME. Intervertebral disk: normal age-related changes in MR signal intensity. Radiology. Nov 1990;177(2):385-8. [Medline].

  155. Shulenberger CC. Ergonomic intervention for the prevention and treatment of spinal disorders. In: White AH, Schofferman JH, eds. Spine Care: Diagnosis and Conservative Treatment. St Louis, MO:. Mosby;1995: 472-85.

  156. Slipman CW. Discography. In: Gonzalez E, ed. Acute Low Back Pain: Assessment and Management. New York, NY:. Demos Vermande;1998.

  157. Sobel DF, Zyroff J, Thorne RP. Diskogenic vertebral sclerosis: MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr. Sep-Oct 1987;11(5):855-8. [Medline].

  158. Sponseller PD, Hobbs W, Riley LH III, Pyeritz RE. The thoracolumbar spine in Marfan syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Jun 1995;77(6):867-76. [Medline].

  159. Svensson HO, Vedin A, Wilhelmsson C. Low-back pain in relation to other diseases and cardiovascular risk factors. Spine. Apr 1983;8(3):277-85. [Medline].

  160. Troup JD, Martin JW, Lloyd DC. Back pain in industry. A prospective survey. Spine. Jan-Feb 1981;6(1):61-9. [Medline].

  161. Urban JP, Holm S, Maroudas A, Nachemson A. Nutrition of the intervertebral disk: an in vivo study of solute transport. Clin Orthop. Nov-Dec 1977;(129):101-14. [Medline].

  162. Valkenburg HA, Haanen HM. The epidemiology of low back pain. In: White AA, Gordon SL, eds. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Symposium. St Louis:. Mosby;1982.

  163. Vamvanij V, Fredrickson BE, Thorpe JM, et al. Surgical treatment of internal disc disruption: an outcome study of four fusion techniques. J Spinal Disord. Oct 1998;11(5):375-82. [Medline].

  164. Vernon-Roberts B, Pirie CJ. Degenerative changes in the intervertebral discs of the lumbar spine and their sequelae. Rheumatol Rehabil. Feb 1977;16(1):13-21. [Medline].

  165. Viner N. Intractable sciatica-the sacral injections- an effective method of giving relief. Can Med Assoc J. 1925;15:630-4.

  166. Waddell G. 1987 Volvo award in clinical sciences. A new clinical model for the treatment of low-back pain. Spine. Sep 1987;12(7):632-44. [Medline].

  167. Waddell G, Bircher M, Finlayson D, Main CJ. Symptoms and signs: physical disease or illness behaviour?. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). Sep 22 1984;289(6447):739-41. [Medline].

  168. Waddell G, McCulloch JA, Kummel E, Venner RM. Nonorganic physical signs in low-back pain. Spine. Mar-Apr 1980;5(2):117-25. [Medline].

  169. Weinstein J. Report of the 1985 ISSLS Traveling Fellowship. Mechanisms of spinal pain. The dorsal root ganglion and its role as a mediator of low-back pain. Spine. Dec 1986;11(10):999-1001. [Medline].

  170. Wetzel FT, LaRocca SH, Lowery GL, Aprill CN. The treatment of lumbar spinal pain syndromes diagnosed by discography: lumbar arthrodesis. Spine. Apr 1 1994;19(7):792-800. [Medline].

  171. White A, Mattmiller A, White L. Back School and Other Conservative Approaches to Low Back Pain. St Louis, MO:. Mosby;1983.

  172. White AA III, Gordon SL. Synopsis: workshop on idiopathic low-back pain. Spine. Mar-Apr 1982;7(2):141-9. [Medline].

  173. White AH. The socioeconomic cascade. In: White AH, Schoffermand JA, eds. Spine Care: Diagnosis and Conservative Treatment. St Louis, MO:. Mosby;1995; 27-34.

  174. White AW. Low back pain in men receiving workmen''s compensation. Can Med Assoc J. Jul 9 1966;95(2):50-6. [Medline].

  175. White L. Back School State of the Art Reviews. Philadelphia, PA:. Hanley and Belfus;1991.

  176. Wiesel SW, Tsourmas N, Feffer HL, et al. A study of computer-assisted tomography, I: the incidence of positive CAT scans in an asymptomatic group of patients. Spine. Sep 1984;9(6):549-51. [Medline].

  177. Williams AL, Haughton VM, Meyer GA, Ho KC. Computed tomographic appearance of the bulging annulus. Radiology. Feb 1982;142(2):403-8. [Medline].

  178. Wiltse LL. The history of spinal disorders. In: Frymoyer JW, ed. The Adult Spine: Principles and Practice. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA:. Lippincott-Raven;1997: 3-40.

  179. Woo SL, Buckwalter JA. AAOS/NIH/ORS workshop. Injury and repair of the musculoskeletal soft tissues. Savannah, GA, June 18-20, 1987. J Orthop Res. 1988;6(6):907-31. [Medline].

  180. Yu S, Haughton VM, Sether LA, et al. Criteria for classifying normal and degenerated lumbar intervertebral disks. Radiology. Feb 1989;170(2):523-6. [Medline].

  181. Yu SW, Haughton VM, Lynch KL, et al. Fibrous structure in the intervertebral disk: correlation of MR appearance with anatomic sections. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Sep-Oct 1989;10(5):1105-10. [Medline].

  182. Yu SW, Haughton VM, Sether LA, Wagner M. Anulus fibrosus in bulging intervertebral disks. Radiology. Dec 1988;169(3):761-3. [Medline].

  183. Yu SW, Haughton VM, Sether LA, Wagner M. Comparison of MR and diskography in detecting radial tears of the anulus: a postmortem study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. Sep-Oct 1989;10(5):1077-81. [Medline].

  184. Zdeblick TA. A prospective, randomized study of lumbar fusion. Preliminary results. Spine. Jun 15 1993;18(8):983-91. [Medline].

[ CLOSE WINDOW ]

Further Reading

Related eMedicine topics:
Back Pain, Mechanical
Cervical Discogenic Pain Syndrome
Degenerative Lumbar Disc Disease in the Mature Athlete
Herniated Nucleus Pulposus
Lumbar Disk Problems in the Athlete
Lumbar (Intervertebral) Disk Disorders
Lumbosacral Discogenic Pain Syndrome
Mechanical Low Back Pain
Pathophysiology of Chronic Back Pain
Therapeutic Injections for Pain Management

Clinical guidelines:
ACR Appropriateness Criteria® low back pain

Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 2: assessment of functional outcome

Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 6: magnetic resonance imaging and discography for patient selection for lumbar fusion

Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 8: lumbar fusion for disc herniation and radiculopathy

Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 11: interbody techniques for lumbar fusion

Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 12: pedicle screw fixation as an adjunct to posterolateral fusion for low-back pain

Low back disorders

Clinical trials:
Freedom Lumbar Disc in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease (FLD)

Pilot Study to Assess Safety/Preliminary Effectiveness of Prefix in Subjects With Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD) Undergoing Spine Fusion Surgery

Prospective Clinical Evaluation of the New Aegis Plate for Anterior Interbody Fusions

Safety and Efficacy Study of NeoFuse in Subjects Requiring Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion

Study of the Safety and Effectiveness of DIAM™ Spinal Stabilization System vs. Conservative Care

[ CLOSE WINDOW ]

Keywords

lumbar degenerative disk disease, lumbar degenerative disc disease, low back pain, LBP, bulging disc, lumbar spine, disc disease, degenerative disc, cervical disc, herniated disk, herniated disc, lumbar spondylosis, cervical surgery, cervical disc surgery, lumbar disc, spinal lumbar, annular tear, internal disc disruption syndrome, LDDD, internal disk disruption syndrome, lumbar strain, nucleus pulposus, annular delamination, annular lamellae, discogenic pain, diskogenic pain, disc degeneration, disk degeneration, lumbar arthrodesis, lumbar discectomy, lumbar laminectomy, spondylolisthesis, epidural steroid injection, ESI

[ CLOSE WINDOW ]

Contributor Information and Disclosures

Author

Rajeev K Patel, MD, Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopedics, University of Rochester; Consulting Surgeon, Strong Health Spine Center, Strong Memorial Health System
Rajeev K Patel, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Association of Academic Physiatrists, and North American Spine Society
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

Curtis W Slipman, MD, Director, University of Pennsylvania Spine Center; Associate Professor, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center
Curtis W Slipman, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Association of Academic Physiatrists, International Association for the Study of Pain, and North American Spine Society
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Medical Editor

J Michael Wieting, DO, MEd, Professor of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Professor of Osteopathic Principles and Practices, Director of Sports Medicine, Associate Director of Physician Assistant Training Program, Department of Osteopathic Principles and Practice, Lincoln Memorial University-DeBusk College of Osteopathic Medicine
J Michael Wieting, DO, MEd is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Osteopathy, American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American College of Forensic Examiners, American College of Sports Medicine, American Osteopathic Association, American Osteopathic College of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Association of Academic Physiatrists, and International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Pharmacy Editor

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine
Disclosure: eMedicine Salary Employment

Managing Editor

Patrick M Foye, MD, FAAPMR, FAAEM, Associate Professor of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Co-Director of Musculoskeletal Fellowship, Co-Director of Back Pain Clinic, Director of Coccyx Pain Service (Tailbone Pain Service: www.TailboneDoctor.com), University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, New Jersey Medical School
Patrick M Foye, MD, FAAPMR, FAAEM is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, Association of Academic Physiatrists, and International Spine Intervention Society
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

CME Editor

Kelly L Allen, MD, Regional Medical Director, IMX-Medical Management Services
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Rene Cailliet, MD, Professor-Chairman Emeritus, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Southern California School of Medicine; Former Director, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Santa Monica Hospital Medical Center
Rene Cailliet, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Pain Medicine, American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American Pain Society, Association of American Medical Colleges, International Association for the Study of Pain, and Pan American Medical Association
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

 
 
HONcode

We subscribe to the
HONcode principles of the
Health On the Net Foundation

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright© 1994- by Medscape.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.