eMedicine Specialties > Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation > Lumbar Spine Disorders

Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease

Rajeev K Patel, MD, Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopedics, University of Rochester; Consulting Surgeon, Strong Health Spine Center, Strong Memorial Health System
Curtis W Slipman, MD, Director, University of Pennsylvania Spine Center; Associate Professor, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center

Updated: Aug 3, 2009

Introduction

Background

Descriptions of treatment for low back pain (LBP) date to Hippocrates (460-370 BCE), who reported joint manipulation and use of traction. Onset of LBP often is associated with bipedal ambulation. Theories propose that this transformation in the mechanics of locomotion is the inciting evolutionary event that made the lumbar spine susceptible to degenerative disease. Degeneration is universal to structures that comprise the functional spinal unit, composed of 2 adjacent vertebral bodies and the intervertebral disk. The disk and 2 zygapophyseal joints at the same level function as a trijoint complex.

As humans age, they endure both macrotraumas and microtraumas and undergo changes in body habitus that alter and redistribute biomechanical forces unevenly on the lumbar spine. Natural progression of degeneration of the lumbar segment with motion proceeds with characteristic anatomic, biomechanical, radiologic, and clinical findings in lumbar degenerative disk disease (LDDD).

Pathophysiology

Posterior elements of the lumbar spinal functional unit typically bear less weight than anterior elements in all positions. Anterior elements bear over 90% of forces transmitted through the lumbar spine in sitting; during standing, this portion decreases to approximately 80%. As the degenerative process progresses, relative anterior-to-posterior force transmission approaches parity. The spine functions best within a realm of static and dynamic stability. Bony architecture and associated specialized soft tissue structures, especially the intervertebral disk, provide static stability. Dynamic stability, however, is accomplished through a system of muscular and ligamentous supports acting in concert during various functional, occupational, and avocational activities.

The overall mechanical effect of these structures maintains the histologic integrity of the trijoint complex. Net shear and compressive forces must be maintained below respective critical minima to maintain trijoint articulation integrity. Persistent, recurrent, nonmechanical, and/or excessive forces to the motion segment beyond minimal thresholds lead to microtrauma of the disk and facet joints, triggering and continuing the degenerative process.^{[1 ]}Degenerative cascade, described by Kirkaldy-Willis, is the widely accepted pathophysiologic model describing the degenerative process as it affects the lumbar spine and individual motion segments.^{[2 ]}This process occurs in 3 phases that comprise a continuum with gradual transition, rather than 3 clearly definable stages.

Phase I

The dysfunctional phase, or phase I, is characterized histologically by circumferential tears or fissures in the outer annulus. Tears can be accompanied by endplate separation or failure, interrupting blood supply to the disk and impairing nutritional supply and waste removal. Such changes may be the result of repetitive microtrauma. Since the outer one third of the annular wall is innervated, tears or fissures in this area may be painful. Strong experimental evidence suggests that most episodes of LBP are a consequence of disk injury, rather than musculotendinous or ligamentous strain. Circumferential tears may coalesce to form radial tears. The nucleus pulposus may lose its normal water-imbibing abilities as a result of biochemical changes in aggregating proteoglycans.

Studies suggest proteoglycan destruction may result from an imbalance between the matrix metalloproteinase-3 (MMP-3) and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1).^{[3,4,5 ]}This imbalance results in diminished capacity for imbibing water, causing loss of nuclear hydrostatic pressure and leading to buckling of the annular lamellae. This phenomenon leads to increased focal segmental mobility and shear stress to the annular wall. Delamination and fissuring within the annulus can result. Annular delamination has been shown to occur as a separate and distinct event from annular fissures.

Microfractures of collagen fibrils in the annulus have been demonstrated with electron microscopy. MRI at this stage may reveal desiccation, disk bulging without herniation, or a high-intensity zone (HIZ) in the annulus. Structural alteration of the facet joint following disk degeneration is acknowledged widely, but this expected pathologic alteration does not necessarily follow. Changes associated with zygapophyseal joints during the dysfunctional phase may include synovitis and hypomobility. The facet joint may serve as a pain generator.

Phase II

The unstable phase, or phase II, may result from progressive loss of mechanical integrity of the trijoint complex. Disk-related changes include multiple annular tears (eg, radial, circumferential), internal disk disruption (IDD) and resorption, or loss of disk-space height. Concurrent changes in the zygapophyseal joints include cartilage degeneration, capsular laxity, and subluxation. The biomechanical result of these alterations leads to segmental instability. Clinical syndromes of segmental instability, IDD syndrome, and herniated disk seem to fit in this phase.

Phase III

The third and final phase, stabilization, is characterized by further disk resorption, disk-space narrowing, endplate destruction, disk fibrosis, and osteophyte formation. Diskogenic pain from such disks may have a higher incidence than that of the pain from the disks in phases I and II; however, great variation of phases can be expected in different disks in any given individual and individuals of similar ages vary greatly.

Frequency

United States

Lifetime incidence of LBP is reported to be 60-90% with annual incidence of 5%. Each year, 14.3% of new patient visits to primary care physicians are for LBP, and nearly 13 million physician visits are related to complaints of chronic LBP, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.^{[6,7 ]}

Mortality/Morbidity

The natural history has been reported to be favorable in some studies and is frequently quoted to patients. Reports indicate that 40-50% of patients are symptom-free within 1 week and up to 90% of symptoms resolve without medical attention in 6-12 weeks.

Deyo and Tsui-Wu reported that 33.2% of patients with LBP reported symptoms for less than 1 month, 33% reported pain for 1-5 months, and 32.7% reported pain for longer than 6 months.^{[8 ]}Later, over a 2-year follow-up, 44% of patients reported chronic symptoms (defined as back pain for >90 d in the previous 6 mo). Most patients had low levels of back pain, with 20% rating their pain at 4 or greater on a scale of 0-10 (where 0 indicates no pain), 13% rated their pain as 5 or greater, and 8% reporting pain of 6 or greater.

Von Korff and colleagues reported that 15-20% of primary care patients with LBP had moderate-to-severe limitations in activity during a 1-year follow-up after their initial episode resolved. Recurrence rates of 60-85% have been reported in the first 2 years after an acute episode of LBP.^{[9 ]}
Although incidence of LBP has remained relatively static, disability from LBP has increased 14 times the rate of population growth. Back pain results in more lost productivity than any other medical condition and is second only to upper respiratory complaints as cause of time lost from work. Back pain accounts for approximately 175.8 million days of restricted activity each year in the United States. At any given time, 2.4 million Americans are disabled because of LBP, with 1.2 million on a chronic basis. As of 2005, lower back pain ranks as the number one cause of disability in individuals under the age of 45.
In 1990, 400,000 industrial low back injuries resulted in disability in the United States. This number represents approximately 21% of injuries in the workplace but accounted for 31% of compensation payments. After a patient receiving worker's compensation is out of work for more than 6 months, the likelihood of his or her returning to work is only 50%. After 1 year, the likelihood is only 25%, and after 2 years, the individual will likely never return to productive work. In 1990, direct medical cost of spinal disorders was estimated to than $23 billion in the United States. Furthermore, plausible estimates of total costs of low back disorders ranged from $25 billion to almost $85 billion in 1990.^{[10 ]}

Looking at 1998 statistics, Luo and colleagues found total health care expenditures incurred by individuals with back pain in the United States to have reached $90.7 billion; total incremental expenditures attributable to back pain among these persons were approximately $26.3 billion. On average, individuals with back pain incurred health care expenditures that were approximately 60% higher than individuals without back pain ($3498 vs $2178). Of service expenditures, 75% were attributed to those individuals within the top 25% of expenditure. Disk disorders were also found to be associated with higher medical costs.^{[11 ]}

Sex

LBP secondary to degenerative disk disease affects men and women equally.

Age

LBP secondary to degenerative disk disease is a condition that affects young to middle-aged persons with peak incidence at approximately 40 years. With respect to radiologic evidence of LDDD, the prevalence of disk degeneration increases with age, but degenerated disks are not necessarily painful.

Clinical

History

The patient's history is an extremely valuable tool for identifying the intervertebral disk as the nociceptive source. Classic historic features are associated with a diskogenic etiology of mechanical low lumbar complaints. The clinician must ask several key questions to elicit the information necessary for correct diagnosis. These questions address events that cause the symptoms, the location and nature of the symptoms, any exacerbating and mitigating factors or positions, and the patients' medical and surgical history. Often, a nociceptive source of back pain is not found.

Patients with diskogenic pain typically describe an inciting traumatic event resulting in sudden forced flexion and/or rotational moment; however, some patients describe a spontaneous onset of symptoms.
Symptoms, usually isolated in the low lumbar region and buttocks, can vary, with referral to the lower thoracic and/or upper lumbar region, abdomen, flanks, groin, genitals, thighs, knees, calves, ankles, feet, and toes.
Classic diskogenic pain is exacerbated by activities that load the disk, such as sitting, arising from a seated position, awaking in the morning, lumbar flexion with and without rotation/twisting, lifting, vibration (eg, riding in a car), coughing, sneezing, laughing, and the Valsalva maneuver.
Symptoms are mitigated by lying on the side with hips and knees flexed (fetal position), by changing positions frequently, and/or by engaging in activity.
Diskogenic pain is usually described as aching; however, a wide spectrum of adjectives can be reported from soreness to stabbing pain.
Patients with a surgical history of lumbar arthrodesis, lumbar diskectomy, or lumbar laminectomy have changes in lumbar spine biomechanics resulting in susceptibility to diskogenic disease.
The patient's medical history should be investigated with specific inquiry directed toward a personal history of cancer, arthritis, or infection or systemic disease that could increase risk of infection.
The review of systems should include assessments for fever, incontinence, symptoms suggestive of metastasis or metabolic disease, and psychological issues including depression and drug use or abuse.

Physical

Physical examination is an important adjunct to history in determining diskogenic etiology of symptoms, beginning with the first view of the patient in the examination room. The patient may prefer to stand, pace, or sit in a reclining position since these positions usually alleviate symptoms of diskogenic etiology.

Note the patient's height and weight, as obesity may produce excess load to the low lumbar intervertebral disks.
Inspection of the low lumbar region is important since this part of the examination may offer a clue to history of lumbar surgery if a scar exists. Inspection while the patient is standing and during forward flexion and extension may reveal a kyphotic or scoliotic deformity. Inspection and palpatory examination should be performed in flexion with the patient standing and seated to determine whether the pain source is in the pelvis or sacral area.
Palpation of the lumbar paraspinals and spine stabilizers may elicit tenderness, as these muscles may be tight, have active or latent trigger or tender points, or be in reactive muscle spasm.
A step deformity, in which the spinous process of the segment involved protrudes ventrally, may exist as a consequence of spondylolisthesis.
Measure the lower extremity circumference at mid thigh and mid calf at the same time of day so comparable results are obtained; they should be symmetric. Hips, knees, and ankles should have full range of motion (ROM), without crepitus or effusions.
Diskogenic stress maneuvers usually reproduce the patient's low lumbar and buttock symptoms. These maneuvers include pelvic rocking and sustained hip flexion.
- Perform pelvic rocking with the patient in a supine position. Flex the patient's hips until the flexed knees approximate to the chest; then, rotate the lower extremities from one side to the other.
- Perform sustained hip flexion with the patient supine; raise the patient's extended lower extremities to approximately 60° in relation to the examination table. Then ask the patient to hold the lower extremities in that position and release. Query the patient regarding reproduction of low lumbar and/or buttock pain. Then lower the extremities successively approximately 15°, and, at each point, note the reproduction and intensity of pain. The test is positive if the patient complains of low lumbar and/or buttock pain of increasing intensity as the extremities are lowered at successive angles. Sacroiliac joint stress maneuvers do not provoke pain. Root tension signs are negative.
Orientation, mood, and affect usually are within normal limits, and excessive emotional lability may be a sign of nonorganic pathology. These provocative maneuvers should not be accompanied by exorbitant demonstrations of perceived pain. Such overt pain behavior should alert the clinician to important psychosocial issues.
Normal neurologic examination, with intact pinprick sensation throughout all dermatomes, full muscle strength throughout all myotomes, and symmetric muscle stretch reflexes, are associated with diskogenic disease. Two muscles should be tested with reflexes elicited representing each lumbar root; this test helps determine whether the problem is root pathology or a focal neuropathy; the straight leg test also should be performed in supine and seated positions.
Gait usually is normal.
Lumbar ROM usually is limited and painful, chiefly into flexion; however, extension also can be restricted and painful. Lumbar ROM should be assessed in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and rotation. A careful, systematic, and thorough structural examination should be performed to assess for subtle abnormal findings that may be amenable to manual therapy or manipulation.

Causes

The cause of LDDD is unknown. Several theories cite traumatically induced acute annular tear as the inciting pathologic event. Other theories suggest that degeneration of the lumbar disk is a natural part of aging; however, these theories do not explain spontaneously occurring annular tears and disk degeneration in the young. Therefore, the cause of LDDD is most likely multifactorial. Various genetic, environmental, autoimmune, inflammatory, traumatic, infectious, toxin-induced, and other factors, alone or in various combinations, may result in initiation and progression of degeneration of the lumbar disks in a way that has not been elucidated.

Differential Diagnoses

Spinal Stenosis and Neurogenic Claudication

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 contour^{[12 ]}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.

Treatment

Rehabilitation Program

Physical Therapy

Physical rehabilitation with active patient participation is a key approach to treatment of patients with diskogenic pain. Physical therapy programs prescribed specifically to address the primary site of injury and secondary sites of dysfunction can provide a means of treatment, with or without adjunct medications, therapeutic procedures, or surgical intervention.

Relative rest, which restricts all occupational and avocational activities, for up to the first 2 days after an acute episode, may be indicated to help calm initial pain. Rest for longer periods has not been shown to be beneficial and can cause deconditioning, loss of bone density, decreased intradiskal nutrition, loss of muscle strength and flexibility, and increased segmental stiffness. Passive modalities are valuable during the initial 48 hours of relative rest to aid in pain relief, but protracted courses of passive treatments become counterproductive, as they place patient in a dependent role instead of an active one.

Education is one of the most important components of any back-care program and should include an explanation of the natural history of acute, subacute, and chronic disk injury. The physical rehabilitation program should also include training in proper body mechanics and lumber ergonomics during various functional, occupational, and avocational activities. Manual techniques may be applied to increase soft tissue pliability when secondary myofascial tightness is present. If the aforementioned measures are appropriate and completed, an active, dynamic rehabilitation program to stabilize the lumbar spine may be started on an outpatient basis. In addition, rehabilitation of other associated components of the functional kinetic chain may be appropriate, as these structures may also be affected.

Dynamic lumbar-spine stabilization programs are aimed at maintaining a neutral spine position throughout various daily activities. An extension bias commonly is used to help reduce intradiskal pressure. This position allows for balanced segmental force distribution between the disk and zygapophyseal joints, it provides functional stability with axial loading to help minimize the chance for acute dynamic overload upon the disks, it minimizes tension on ligaments and fascia planes, and it decreases symptoms. Repetition is key to increasing flexibility, building endurance, and developing the required muscle motor engrams that subconsciously activate a series of key multimuscular contractions to maintain the lumbar spine in a neutral position throughout static and dynamic activities.

For athletes, the aforementioned program can be progressively combined with sport-specific plyometrics to help the lumbar spine maintain neutral position during high-intensity, unpredictable, reaction-intensive sports. Rehabilitation of athletes should also train them to maintain a neutral spine position in sport-specific motions. These component motions should then be grouped into a new, safe spine-stable movement. Cardiovascular training is an important adjunct to comprehensive rehabilitation programs because it provides endurance necessary to prevent fatigue of the muscles that stabilize the spine.

Occupational Therapy

Occupational therapy can be an important adjunct in the rehabilitation process when generalized muscular deconditioning has created adverse effects on strength, endurance, and flexibility of the upper extremities and/or impairment in activities of daily living (ADLs).

An occupational therapist often provides this portion of the rehabilitation program. Essential elements consist of ensuring proper ergonomics at the work site, which may involve simply reconfiguring a desktop and/or workstation, or it may require complex solutions. Another aspect involves rehabilitation before the patient resumes full-time duties. After the offending source of pain is resolved, the patient typically has deconditioning and may require activity-specific reconditioning to prevent new or recurring injury.

Recreational Therapy

Recreation therapy may have a role in assisting the patient to resume avocational activities, possibly with adaptations in technique or with the use of adaptive equipment.

Medical Issues/Complications

Medical causes of LBP include the spondyloarthropathies (eg, enteric arthropathy, Reiter syndrome, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis), Marfan syndrome, fibromyalgia, myofascial pain syndrome, diskitis, and neoplastic disease.

Surgical Intervention

Available surgical approaches include anterior, posterior, or combined procedure; interbody fusion with allograft autologous bone or threaded titanium cage; and intertransverse process in situ fusion with or without instrumentation. The introduction of disk arthroplasty has been proposed as a possible surgical option in those patients who would like to maintain as much segmental motion as possible.

To date, no prospective randomized blind study has demonstrated the superiority of any surgical approach or technique. One retrospective study was performed to compare posterolateral fusion with iliac-crest allografting and translaminar facet-screw augmentation, anterior interbody fusion with fibula allografting, posterolateral fusion with pedicle screw-rod fixation, and anterior interbody threaded cage fusion combined with facet-joint fusion and posterolateral fusion. The results suggested that the last procedure may provide superior outcomes.
Other investigators report outcome rates ranging from 39% to 82-93% for various procedures. With respect to disk arthroplasty, the literature is not clear on its definitive role, if any, in the treatment of symptomatic LDDD.
In a study of 59 patients suffering from low back pain and 1- or 2-level LDDD, Freudenberger et al compared the effectiveness of anterior lumbar interbody fusion with anterior tension band plating (ALIF-ATB) with that of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with pedicle screw instrumentation.^{[40 ]}The investigators found that both techniques had similar fusion rates, but that patients who underwent PLIF had greater estimated blood loss and required more surgical time than did patients who were treated with ALIF-ATB.

Consultations

Consultation of the primary care physician with a nonsurgical spine specialist is appropriate for patients with symptoms lasting longer than 6 weeks secondary to LDDD. Consultation with a spinal surgeon may be appropriate for patients with intractable severe function-limiting symptoms secondary to IDD, at 1 or 2 contiguous levels, for those with symptoms lasting longer than 6 months who have had no relief from nonsurgical approaches, and for persons with abnormal neurologic findings.

Other Treatment

New intradiskal techniques are being investigated to ascertain whether they can obviate fusion procedures. With intradiskal electrothermal therapy, a navigable intradiskal catheter is used to heat the posterior annular wall at the nuclear interface corresponding to the 4- to 8-o'clock zone.^{[ 41, 42 ]}Temperatures produced in the outer annulus (46-48°C) are sufficient for thermal coagulation of nervous tissue. Temperatures in the nucleus and the annulus (65-75°C) are sufficient for collagen contraction or shrinkage.

Saal and colleagues observed 20% focal nuclear shrinkage (by volume) and 7% total nuclear shrinkage after treatment.^{[43 ]}Therefore, some authorities postulate that this intervention may cause thermocoagulation of annular nerve fibers. In addition, by means of collagen shrinkage, it may also result in tightening of the fibrous structure of annular tissue that then may enhance structural integrity of a degenerated or damaged disk and possibly stabilize annular fissures. Intradiskal electrothermal therapy showed great promise in initial studies and was touted as being effective at controlling diskogenic axial lumbar back pain. However, a later investigation, a double-blinded, controlled study conducted by Freeman and colleagues, established safety with limited efficacy.^{[44 ]}

Saal and Saal reported their results in 36 patients who were followed up for 6-13 months.^{[43 ]}Improvement in function, lowering of pain scores, and improvement in sitting tolerance times were observed in 75%.
In a clinical trial of 20 patients, Derby reported a mean 2-point decrease on a 10-point visual analog scale (P <.05) at 6 months.^{[45 ]}In addition, 73% reported satisfaction with outcome and indicated that they would repeat the procedure for the same outcome. Although early results are promising with this exciting novel technique, no definitive judgments can be made because only preliminary outcomes with short-term follow-up have been reported to date.
The idea of intradiskal injections and procedures is becoming exciting with new trials of OB1 and other biological therapies being developed in the hopes of being able to regenerate diskal materials and reverse the degenerative cascade underway.
Since their discovery by Marshall Urist, MD at UCLA, bone morphogenetic proteins have been categorized as either growth or differentiation factors and consist of a family of proteins with important regulatory and developmental effects on bone growth and the development of musculoskeletal tissue. These proteins are clinically used by spine surgeons to facilitate bony fusion and obviate the need for autografting. Studies have shown that these proteins are capable of controlling the mRNA transcription of cells within human and animal disk models. At the 2002 North American Spine Society (NASS) annual meeting, studies were presented that showed great promise with regard to the development of treatments for degenerative disk disease using bone morphogenic proteins 2 and 7, with augmentation of diseased disks employed at an early stage to offset the degenerative cascade.^{[46,47 ]}

Miyamoto and colleagues showed restoration of disk viscoelastic properties in a rabbit model of degenerative disk disease after injection of osteogenic protein 1 (OP-1). It is hoped that disk regenerative therapy using intradiskal injections of biological pharmaceuticals will become an effective treatment for degenerative disk disease.^{[48 ]}

Medication

Medications are an integral part of treatment of LDDD. A myriad of medications of various subtypes has been prescribed by a wide array of medical specialties to help patients with sequelae of LDDD. Several types of medications may be helpful in treatment of diskogenic pain (eg, analgesics [peripheral and centrally acting], muscle relaxants, sedatives, glucocorticoids, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, antihistamines, stimulants). Mainstays of oral treatment of LDDD, peripherally acting analgesics, are discussed here. The following information was collected from the Physician's Desk Reference.

Analgesics act either peripherally or centrally. Peripherally acting analgesics include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen. NSAIDs are the drugs of choice (DOCs) in initial pharmacologic treatment of acute episodes of diskogenic pain or with acute exacerbation of chronic diskogenic pain. NSAIDs have mild-to-moderate analgesic, antipyretic, and anti-inflammatory properties. NSAIDs have multiple mechanisms of action, including inhibition of cyclo-oxygenase, competition with prostaglandin at receptor sites, and inhibition of WBC migration and of lysosomal enzymes from WBCs.

Analgesic effect appears earlier and at lower doses than anti-inflammatory effects. Increasing dosage usually increases analgesic effect, with a ceiling effect after which increasing dosages do not increase therapeutic efficacy but do increase toxicity. Use of these medications on a long-term basis is not advised. For reasons not well understood, some patients respond to some NSAIDs and not to others despite their apparently similar mechanisms of action.

This response does not correlate with the class of NSAIDs. Therefore, 7- to 14-day trials of up to 3 different NSAIDs should be performed before one deems NSAIDs ineffective for an individual patient. NSAIDs can be divided into categories based on the cyclo-oxygenase (COX-2) specificity and short, intermediate, or long half-lives. COX-2 specific NSAIDs are primarily beneficial because they do not inhibit the COX-1 isoenzyme. This property dramatically decreases risk of GI and renal adverse effects. NSAIDs with a short half-life (4-6 h) include aspirin, ibuprofen, ketoprofen, and flurbiprofen. Of these medications, aspirin and ibuprofen are the DOCs. NSAIDS with an intermediate half-life (8-12 h) include naproxen, etodolac, diclofenac, sulindac, and diflunisal. Of these, naproxen

Ketoralac requires special consideration because it is the NSAID best known for its analgesic effect at the opioid level. However, it should be used for a maximum of 5 days (in any form). Acetaminophen is effective for mild to moderate pain. It has analgesic and antipyretic properties but no anti-inflammatory action.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

These drugs have analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and antipyretic activities. Their mechanism of action is not known, but they may inhibit cyclo-oxygenase activity and prostaglandin synthesis. They may have other mechanisms as well, such as inhibition of leukotriene synthesis, lysosomal enzyme release, lipoxygenase activity, neutrophil aggregation, and various cell-membrane functions.

Aspirin (Anacin, Bayer Aspirin, Ascriptin)

Best-known NSAID; widely available; cardioprotective, cerebroprotective, and anticoagulation properties. Treats mild to moderate pain. Inhibits prostaglandin synthesis, which prevents formation of platelet-aggregating thromboxane A2.

Dosing

Adult

650 mg PO q6h; not to exceed 3 g/d

Pediatric

90-130 mg/kg/d PO divided q6h with target plasma salicylate level of 150-300 mcg/mL

Interactions

Effects may decrease with antacids and urinary alkalinizers; corticosteroids decrease salicylate serum levels; additive hypoprothrombinemic effects and increased bleeding time may occur with coadministration of anticoagulants; may antagonize uricosuric effects of probenecid and increase toxicity of phenytoin and valproic acid; doses > 2 g/d may potentiate glucose-lowering effect of sulfonylurea drugs

Contraindications

Documented hypersensitivity, liver damage, hypoprothrombinemia, vitamin K deficiency, bleeding disorders, and asthma; due to association of aspirin with Reye syndrome, do not use in children ( <16 y) with flu

Precautions

Pregnancy

D - Fetal risk shown in humans; use only if benefits outweigh risk to fetus

Precautions

May cause transient decrease in renal function and aggravate chronic kidney disease; avoid use in patients with severe anemia or a history of blood coagulation defects; avoid in patients taking anticoagulants

Ibuprofen (Ibuprin, Motrin)

DOC for patients with mild to moderate pain. Inhibits inflammatory reactions and pain by decreasing prostaglandin synthesis.

Dosing

Adult

400 mg PO q4-6h; not to exceed 2400 mg/d

Pediatric

<6 months: Not established
6 months to 12 years: 10 mg/kg PO q6-8h; not to exceed 40 mg/kg
>12 years: Administer as in adults

Interactions

Coadministration with aspirin increases risk of inducing serious NSAID-related adverse effects; probenecid may increase concentrations and, possibly, toxicity of NSAIDs; may decrease effect of hydralazine, captopril, and beta-blockers; may decrease diuretic effects of furosemide and thiazides; monitor PT closely (instruct patients to watch for signs of bleeding); may increase risk of methotrexate toxicity; phenytoin levels may be increased when administered concurrently

Contraindications

Documented hypersensitivity, peptic ulcer disease, recent GI bleeding or perforation, renal insufficiency, or high risk of bleeding

Precautions

Pregnancy

B - Fetal risk not confirmed in studies in humans but has been shown in some studies in animals

D - Fetal risk shown in humans; use only if benefits outweigh risk to fetus

Precautions

Category D in third trimester of pregnancy; caution in congestive heart failure, hypertension, and decreased renal and hepatic function; caution in anticoagulation abnormalities or during anticoagulant therapy

Naproxen (Naprelan, Naprosyn, Aleve)

For relief of mild to moderate pain; inhibits inflammatory reactions and pain by decreasing activity of cyclo-oxygenase, decreasing prostaglandin synthesis.

Dosing

Adult

250, 375, or 500 mg PO bid; not to exceed 1500 mg/d

Pediatric

<2 years: Not established
>2 years: 5 mg/kg PO bid

Interactions

Contraindications

Documented hypersensitivity, peptic ulcer disease, recent GI bleeding or perforation, renal insufficiency

Precautions

Pregnancy

B - Fetal risk not confirmed in studies in humans but has been shown in some studies in animals

D - Fetal risk shown in humans; use only if benefits outweigh risk to fetus

Precautions

Category D in third trimester of pregnancy; acute renal insufficiency, interstitial nephritis, hyperkalemia, hyponatremia, and renal papillary necrosis may occur; patients with preexisting renal disease or compromised renal perfusion risk acute renal failure; leukopenia occurs rarely, is transient, and usually returns to normal during therapy; persistent leukopenia, granulocytopenia, or thrombocytopenia warrants further evaluation and may require discontinuation of drug

Nabumetone (Relafen)

Nonacidic NSAID rapidly metabolized after absorption to a major active metabolite that inhibits cyclooxygenase enzyme, which inhibits pain and inflammation.

Dosing

Adult

1000 mg/d PO; not to exceed 1000 mg PO bid

Pediatric

Not established

Interactions

Contraindications

Documented hypersensitivity; active peptic ulceration, hepatic impairment

Precautions

Pregnancy

C - Fetal risk revealed in studies in animals but not established or not studied in humans; may use if benefits outweigh risk to fetus

D - Fetal risk shown in humans; use only if benefits outweigh risk to fetus

Precautions

Category D in third trimester of pregnancy; elderly may require lower doses; caution in hepatic and renal impairment

Meloxicam (Mobic)

Decreases activity of cyclo-oxygenase, which in turn inhibits prostaglandin synthesis. These effects decrease formation of inflammatory mediators.

Dosing

Adult

7.5 mg PO qd; may increase to 15 mg PO qd

Pediatric

Not established

Interactions

Coadministration with aspirin increases risk of inducing serious NSAID-related side effects; probenecid may increase concentrations and, possibly, toxicity of NSAIDs; may decrease effect of hydralazine, captopril, and beta-blockers; may decrease diuretic effects of furosemide and thiazides; may increase PT when taking anticoagulants (instruct patients to watch for signs of bleeding); may increase risk of methotrexate toxicity; phenytoin levels may be increased when administered concurrently

Contraindications

Documented hypersensitivity; active GI bleeding

Precautions

Pregnancy

D - Fetal risk shown in humans; use only if benefits outweigh risk to fetus

Precautions

Acute renal insufficiency, hyperkalemia, hyponatremia, interstitial nephritis, and renal papillary necrosis may occur; increases risk of acute renal failure in patients with preexisting renal disease or compromised renal perfusion; reversible leukopenia may occur (discontinue if persistent leukopenia, granulocytopenia, or thrombocytopenia occurs)

Ketorolac (Toradol)

Inhibits prostaglandin synthesis by decreasing activity enzyme, cyclo-oxygenase, decreasing formation of prostaglandin precursors.

Dosing

Adult

<65 years: 60 mg IM initially followed by 15-30 mg q6h prn; not to exceed 5 d of treatment
>65 years: 30 mg IM initially followed by 15 mg q6h prn; not to exceed 5 d of treatment

Pediatric

Not established

Interactions

Contraindications

Documented hypersensitivity; peptic ulcer disease; recent GI bleeding or perforation; renal insufficiency; high risk of bleeding; do not administer into CNS

Precautions

Pregnancy

C - Fetal risk revealed in studies in animals but not established or not studied in humans; may use if benefits outweigh risk to fetus

D - Fetal risk shown in humans; use only if benefits outweigh risk to fetus

Precautions

Category D in third trimester of pregnancy; acute renal insufficiency, hyperkalemia, hyponatremia, interstitial nephritis, and renal papillary necrosis may occur; increases risk of acute renal failure in patients with preexisting renal disease or compromised renal perfusion; low WBC counts (rare) usually return to normal during ongoing therapy; discontinue therapy if persistent leukopenia, granulocytopenia, or thrombocytopenia occur

Celecoxib (Celebrex)

Primarily inhibits COX-2. COX-2 is considered an inducible isoenzyme, induced by pain and inflammatory stimuli. Inhibition of COX-1 may contribute to NSAID GI toxicity. At therapeutic concentrations, COX-1 isoenzyme is not inhibited; thus, incidence of GI toxicity, such as endoscopic peptic ulcers, bleeding ulcers, perforations, and obstructions, may be decreased when compared with nonselective NSAIDs. Seek lowest dose for each patient.
Neutralizes circulating myelin antibodies through anti-idiotypic antibodies; down-regulates proinflammatory cytokines, including INF-gamma; blocks Fc receptors on macrophages; suppresses inducer T and B cells and augments suppressor T cells; blocks complement cascade; promotes remyelination; may increase CSF IgG (10%).
Has a sulfonamide chain and is primarily dependent upon cytochrome P450 enzymes (a hepatic enzyme) for metabolism.

Dosing

Adult

200 mg/d PO qd; alternatively, 100 mg PO bid

Pediatric

Not established

Interactions

CYP450 2C9 substrate; coadministration with fluconazole may cause increase in celecoxib plasma concentrations because of inhibition of celecoxib metabolism; coadministration of celecoxib with rifampin may decrease celecoxib plasma concentrations

Contraindications

Documented hypersensitivity

Precautions

Pregnancy

D - Fetal risk shown in humans; use only if benefits outweigh risk to fetus

Precautions

May cause fluid retention and peripheral edema; caution in compromised cardiac function, hypertension, conditions predisposing to fluid retention; caution in severe heart failure and hyponatremia because may deteriorate circulatory hemodynamics; NSAIDs may mask usual signs of infection; caution in the presence of existing controlled infections; evaluate therapy when symptoms or lab results suggest liver dysfunction

Analgesics

Pain control is essential to quality patient care. Analgesics ensure patient comfort, promote pulmonary toilet, and have sedating properties, which are beneficial for patients who experience pain.

Acetaminophen (Tylenol, Aspirin Free Anacin, Feverall)

Ensures patient comfort, promotes pulmonary toilet, and has sedating properties.

Dosing

Adult

1000 mg PO q4-6h prn; not to exceed 4000 mg/d

Pediatric

<6 years: Not established
6-12 years: 325 mg PO q4-6h; not to exceed 1625 mg/d
>12 years: Administer as in adults

Interactions

Rifampin can reduce analgesic effects; coadministration with barbiturates, carbamazepine, hydantoins, and isoniazid may increase hepatotoxicity

Contraindications

Documented hypersensitivity

Precautions

Pregnancy

B - Fetal risk not confirmed in studies in humans but has been shown in some studies in animals

Precautions

Hepatotoxicity possible in chronic alcoholism following various dose levels; severe or recurrent pain or high or continued fever may indicate a serious illness; present in many OTC products, and combined use may result in cumulative doses exceeding recommended maximum

Skeletal muscle relaxants

These drugs are effective in reducing morbidity. Their mechanism of action not clearly understood.

Orphenadrine (Norflex)

Although the exact mode of action not well understood, has clinical effectiveness in muscular injury. Effectiveness may be related to analgesic properties. May have atropinelike effects and analgesic properties.

Dosing

Adult

100 mg PO bid
60 mg IV/IM q12h

Pediatric

Not established

Interactions

None reported

Contraindications

Documented hypersensitivity; GI obstruction, glaucoma, myasthenia gravis, or cardiospasm

Precautions

Pregnancy

C - Fetal risk revealed in studies in animals but not established or not studied in humans; may use if benefits outweigh risk to fetus

Precautions

Caution in cardiac arrhythmias and congestive heart failure

Cyclobenzaprine (Flexeril)

Acts centrally and reduces motor activity of tonic somatic origins, influencing both alpha and gamma motor neurons. Structurally related to tricyclic antidepressants.
Skeletal muscle relaxants have modest short-term benefit as adjunctive therapy for nociceptive pain associated with muscle strains and, used intermittently, for diffuse and certain regional chronic pain syndromes. Long-term improvement over placebo has not been established. Often produces a "hangover" effect, which can be minimized by taking the nighttime dose 2-3 h before going to sleep.

Dosing

Adult

10 mg PO tid with a range of 20-40 mg/d in divided doses; not to exceed 60 mg/d

Pediatric

Not recommended

Interactions

Coadministration with MAO inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants may increase toxicity; cyclobenzaprine may have additive effect when used concurrently with anticholinergics; effects of alcohol, CNS depressants, and barbiturates may be enhanced with cyclobenzaprine

Contraindications

Documented hypersensitivity; have taken MAO inhibitors within the last 14 d

Precautions

Pregnancy

B - Fetal risk not confirmed in studies in humans but has been shown in some studies in animals

Precautions

Caution in angle closure glaucoma and urinary hesitance; may cause drowsiness, dizziness, and xerostomia

Follow-up

In/Out Patient Meds:

See Other Treatment.

Deterrence/Prevention:

Back schools and other training programs that are not job specific have not been shown to be effective statistically; however, programs that integrate job requirements into training programs show statistically significant results.

Complications:

IDD, or incompetent disk disease, may account for 39% of all cases of chronic LBP. Alterations in the internal structure and metabolic functions of the disk account for associated symptoms.
- IDD most commonly occurs after significant trauma (eg, sudden or unexpected lifting, forces transmitted through the disk secondary to high-speed accidents, substantial axial load). Some individuals develop IDD in the absence of a known inciting event. For inexplicable reasons, a small number of individuals with insidiously progressing degenerative disk disease develop IDD.
- The major clinical characteristic is a deep-seated spinal ache. IDD typically worsens over several months after onset and is aggravated by activities that increase compressive forces on the spine. No explanation of why such activities cause pain is accepted widely, though several theories exist. One is possible leakage of disk catabolites, which may create adverse reactions in the regional nerves around the disk and spinal canal and/or produce constitutional disturbances mediated by the immune system.
Adams and colleagues have proposed an appealing biomechanical model, suggesting that creep leads to concentrated areas of stress in the annulus.^{[49 ]}
- Results from in vivo stress profilometry led to the postulation that biomechanical changes due to degeneration may transmit excess force to the vertebral endplate and that shear stress develops in the disk because of anisotropic force concentration. The result is that the annulus functions as a mechanical support rather than a retaining membrane.
- Combining these postulates with results of previous intradiskal pressure studies leads to a potential explanation of why patients with IDD frequently have predictable symptoms and examination findings. That is, patients often indicate that their symptoms do not improve rapidly with rest but that unloading the spine may ameliorate them.
- Partial pain relief is achieved by resting in the lateral decubitus position, that is, the supine position with knees and hips flexed, and changing from unsupported to supported sitting. Symptom exacerbation occurs with positions or maneuvers that load the spine.
Patients frequently describe increased symptoms during prolonged sitting and lumbar flexion, and lumbar flexion, especially with rotation. Aerobic and anaerobic deconditioning, resulting from prolonged inactivity, leads to complaints of frequent fatigue, weight gain, and soft tissue tightness.
- Some patients experience weight loss, but, in clinical experience, this tends to be the exception.
- Some patients describe extremity or perineal pain.
- An insidious history is typical and peripheral symptoms fluctuate directly with intensity of back pain.
- Radicular complaints are rarely confused with these somatically referred symptoms.
- A deep aching pain, a sense of weakness without corroborative objective evidence, and a feeling of heaviness are experienced commonly.
- Lower-extremity symptoms may involve the thigh, lower leg, and/or foot.
Some depression is common. When one assesses patients with IDD, make a critical assessment of psychological factors, particularly when surgical intervention is considered.
- Physical findings consistent with IDD syndrome, which are not found in every case, include provocation of back pain with pelvic rocking, straight leg raise, partial forward flexion in the standing position with the knees extended, pressure application over the intervertebral disk space, and sustained hip flexion.
- These provocative maneuvers should not be accompanied by exorbitant demonstrations of perceived pain. Such overt pain behavior should alert the clinician to possible psychosocial issues.
Partial pain relief is achieved by reducing axially transmitted forces. Although the patient is sitting at the edge of the bed, ask him or her to shift his or her weight to the hands by lifting the buttock slightly off the bed. ROM testing of the lumbar spine leads to commonly observed findings.
Performing standing forward flexion with or without simultaneous trunk rotation with the knees fully extended is painful, whereas extension may provide symptom reduction.
- In some instances, peak pain intensity is described during the return to the neutral position from the terminally flexed position. When this occurs, patients commonly use their hands to apply force to the anterior thigh, reducing the intensity of the pain associated with this task. Such symptom and examination findings are generally accepted but not proven by scientific study.
- In 1 study of the components of history or physical examination that were predictive of IDD, none could be identified. Results of another study suggest that using a McKenzie approach can reliably differentiate diskogenic from nondiskogenic pain.

Prognosis:

See the section on Mortality/Morbidity.

Patient Education:

An education-based paradigm for the patient with LBP can be inexpensive, beginning with providing reassuring information to patients.
- Seeds of the educational approach exist in back schools, functional restorative programs, and innovative prevention and rehabilitation strategies.
- LaCroix found that 94% of patients with a good understanding of their condition returned to work, whereas only 33% of patients with poor understanding of their condition returned to employment.^{[50 ]}
- Reassurance that activity is helpful promotes return to function.
For excellent patient education resources, visit eMedicine's Back, Ribs, Neck, and Head Center and Muscle Disorders Center. Also, see eMedicine's patient education articles, Back Pain, Lumbar Laminectomy, and Chronic Pain.

Miscellaneous

Medicolegal Pitfalls

In 1988, Deyo and colleagues reported on various red flags with statistically significant correlation with cancer, including age greater than 50 years, history of cancer, duration of pain greater than 1 month, failure to improve with conservative therapy, elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and anemia.^{[51 ]}
Pain produced by neoplasm was often worse when the patient was at rest and during the night.
Unexplained weight loss, absence of recent back injury, and failure of bed rest to relieve pain were also associated with cancer.

Special Concerns

Possible psychological issues or personality disorders

References

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].
Kirkaldy-Willis WH. The pathology and pathogenesis of low back pain. In: Managing Low Back Pain. New York, NY:. Churchill Livingstone;1988: 49.
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].
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.
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].
NCHS. National Center for Health Statistics. Prevalence of Selected Impairment. Hyattsville, MD:. US Department of Health and Human Services;1984.
National Center for Health Statistics. Vital statistics of the United States. Washington, DC:. Government Printing Office;1968-1988.
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].
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].
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.
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.
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
Robecchi A, Capra R. L'idrocortisone (composto F): prime esperienze cliniche in campo reumatologico. Minerva Med. 1952;98:1259-63.
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].
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].
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].
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].
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.
Kraemer J, Ludwig J, Bickert U, et al. Lumbar epidural perineural injection: a new technique. Eur Spine J. 1997;6(5):357-61. [Medline].
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].
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].
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].
Weiner BK, Fraser RD. Foraminal injection for lateral lumbar disc herniation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. Sep 1997;79(5):804-7. [Medline].
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].
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].
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].
Weinstein J, Claverie W, Gibson S. The pain of discography. Spine. Dec 1988;13(12):1344-8. [Medline].
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].
Kapural L, Mekhail N. Novel intradiscal biacuplasty (IDB) for the treatment of lumbar discogenic pain. Pain Pract. Jun 2007;7(2):130-4. [Medline].
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].
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.
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].
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.
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.
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.
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.
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
Andersson GB. Epidemiologic aspects on low-back pain in industry. Spine. Jan-Feb 1981;6(1):53-60. [Medline].
Andersson GB, Schultz AB, Nachemson AL. Intervertebral disc pressures during traction. Scand J Rehabil Med Suppl. 1983;9:88-91. [Medline].
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].
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].
Bernard TN Jr. Lumbar discography followed by computed tomography. Refining the diagnosis of low-back pain. Spine. Jul 1990;15(7):690-707. [Medline].
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].
Bigos SJ, Battid MC. The impact of spinal disorders in industry. In: Frymoyer JW, ed. The Adult Spine. New York:. Raven Press;1991.
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].
Block AR, Vanharanta H, Ohnmeiss DD, Guyer RD. Discographic pain report: influence of psychological factors. Spine. Feb 1 1996;21(3):334-8. [Medline].
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].
Bogduk N. The innervation of the lumbar spine. Spine. Apr 1983;8(3):286-93. [Medline].
Bogduk N, Modic MT. Lumbar discography. Spine. Feb 1 1996;21(3):402-4. [Medline].
Bogduk N, Twomey LT. Clinical Anatomy of the Lumbar Spine. 2nd ed. London: Churchill Livingstone;1991:161.
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].
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].
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].
Butler D, Trafimow JH, Andersson GB, et al. Discs degenerate before facets. Spine. Feb 1990;15(2):111-3. [Medline].
Butt WP. Lumbar discography. J Can Assoc Radiol. 1964;14:172.
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].
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].
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.
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].
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.
Crook HV. Internal disc disruption. In: Frymover JW, ed. The Adult Spine: Principles and Practice. New York, NY: Raven;1991: 2015.
DePalma AF, Rothman RH. The Invertebral Disc. Philadelphia, PA:. WB Saunders;1970.
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.
Deyo RA, Bass JE. Lifestyle and low-back pain. The influence of smoking and obesity. Spine. May 1989;14(5):501-6. [Medline].
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.
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].
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].
Forssell MZ. The back school. Spine. Jan-Feb 1981;6(1):104-6. [Medline].
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].
Fry J. Back pain and soft tissue rheumatism. In: Colloquium Proceedings of Advisory Services. London, England:. 1995.
Frymoyer JW. Back pain and sciatica. N Engl J Med. Feb 4 1988;318(5):291-300. [Medline].
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].
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].
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].
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].
Hadler NM. The predicament of backache. J Occup Med. May 1988;30(5):449-50. [Medline].
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].
Heliovaara M. Risk factors for low back pain and sciatica. Ann Med. Aug 1989;21(4):257-64. [Medline].
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.
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].
Hirsch C, Ingelmark BE, Miller M. The anatomical basis for low back pain. Acra Orthop Scand. 1963;23:1-17.
Hopwood MB, Abram SE. Factors associated with failure of lumbar epidural steroids. Reg Anesth. Jul-Aug 1993;18(4):238-43. [Medline].
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].
Hurri H. The Swedish back school in chronic low back pain, I: benefits. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1989;21(1):33-40. [Medline].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
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].
Kambin P, Zhou L. History and current status of percutaneous arthroscopic disc surgery. Spine. Dec 15 1996;21(24 Suppl):57S-61S. [Medline].
Kawakami M. Histochemical and immunohistochemical demonstrations of nerve fibers on human paraspinal soft tissue [Japanese]. J Wakayama Med Soc. 1989;40:621-30.
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].
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].
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].
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].
Kummel BM. Nonorganic signs of significance in low back pain. Spine. May 1 1996;21(9):1077-81. [Medline].
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.
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.
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].
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].
Lipson SJ, Muir H. Experimental intervertebral disc degeneration: morphologic and proteoglycan changes over time. Arthritis Rheum. Jan 1981;24(1):12-21. [Medline].
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].
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].
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.
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].
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].
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].
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].
Medical Economics. Physician Desk Reference. 54th ed. Montvale, NJ:. Medical Economics Company Inc;2000.
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].
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].
Modic MT, Masaryk TJ, Ross JS. Imaging of degenerative disk disease. Radiology. Jul 1988;168(1):177-86. [Medline].
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].
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].
Ohnmeiss DD, Vanharanta H, Ekholm J. Degree of disc disruption and lower extremity pain. Spine. Jul 15 1997;22(14):1600-5. [Medline].
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].
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].
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.
Praemer A, Furrier S, Rice DP. Musculoskeletal Conditions in the United States. Rosemont, IL:. American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons;1992: 23-33.
Pritzker KP. Aging and degeneration in the lumbar intervertebral disc. Orthop Clin North Am. Jan 1977;8(1):66-77. [Medline].
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].
Resnick D. Degenerative diseases of the vertebral column. Radiology. Jul 1985;156(1):3-14. [Medline].
Resnick D, Niwayama G, Guerra J Jr, et al. Spinal vacuum phenomena: anatomical study and review. Radiology. May 1981;139(2):341-8. [Medline].
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].
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].
Rowe ML. Low back pain in industry. A position paper. J Occup Med. Apr 1969;11(4):161-9. [Medline].
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.
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.
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].
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.
Schellhas KP. HIZ lesions. Spine. Jul 1 1997;22(13):1538. [Medline].
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].
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].
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].
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.
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].
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.
Slipman CW. Discography. In: Gonzalez E, ed. Acute Low Back Pain: Assessment and Management. New York, NY:. Demos Vermande;1998.
Sobel DF, Zyroff J, Thorne RP. Diskogenic vertebral sclerosis: MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr. Sep-Oct 1987;11(5):855-8. [Medline].
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].
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].
Troup JD, Martin JW, Lloyd DC. Back pain in industry. A prospective survey. Spine. Jan-Feb 1981;6(1):61-9. [Medline].
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].
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.
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].
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].
Viner N. Intractable sciatica-the sacral injections- an effective method of giving relief. Can Med Assoc J. 1925;15:630-4.
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].
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].
Waddell G, McCulloch JA, Kummel E, Venner RM. Nonorganic physical signs in low-back pain. Spine. Mar-Apr 1980;5(2):117-25. [Medline].
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].
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].
White A, Mattmiller A, White L. Back School and Other Conservative Approaches to Low Back Pain. St Louis, MO:. Mosby;1983.
White AA III, Gordon SL. Synopsis: workshop on idiopathic low-back pain. Spine. Mar-Apr 1982;7(2):141-9. [Medline].
White AH. The socioeconomic cascade. In: White AH, Schoffermand JA, eds. Spine Care: Diagnosis and Conservative Treatment. St Louis, MO:. Mosby;1995; 27-34.
White AW. Low back pain in men receiving workmen''s compensation. Can Med Assoc J. Jul 9 1966;95(2):50-6. [Medline].
White L. Back School State of the Art Reviews. Philadelphia, PA:. Hanley and Belfus;1991.
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].
Williams AL, Haughton VM, Meyer GA, Ho KC. Computed tomographic appearance of the bulging annulus. Radiology. Feb 1982;142(2):403-8. [Medline].
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.
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].
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].
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].
Yu SW, Haughton VM, Sether LA, Wagner M. Anulus fibrosus in bulging intervertebral disks. Radiology. Dec 1988;169(3):761-3. [Medline].
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].
Zdeblick TA. A prospective, randomized study of lumbar fusion. Preliminary results. Spine. Jun 15 1993;18(8):983-91. [Medline].

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

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.

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

eMedicine Specialties > Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation > Lumbar Spine Disorders

Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease

Introduction

Background

Pathophysiology

Frequency

United States

Mortality/Morbidity

Sex

Age

Clinical

History

Physical

Causes

Differential Diagnoses

Other Problems to Be Considered

Workup

Laboratory Studies

Imaging Studies

Other Tests

Procedures

Histologic Findings

Treatment

Rehabilitation Program

Physical Therapy

Occupational Therapy

Recreational Therapy

Medical Issues/Complications

Surgical Intervention

Consultations

Other Treatment

Medication

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Aspirin (Anacin, Bayer Aspirin, Ascriptin)

Dosing

Adult

Pediatric

Interactions

Contraindications

Precautions

Pregnancy

Precautions

Ibuprofen (Ibuprin, Motrin)

Dosing

Adult

Pediatric

Interactions

Contraindications

Precautions

Pregnancy

Precautions

Naproxen (Naprelan, Naprosyn, Aleve)

Dosing

Adult

Pediatric

Interactions

Contraindications

Precautions

Pregnancy

Precautions

Nabumetone (Relafen)

Dosing

Adult

Pediatric

Interactions

Contraindications

Precautions

Pregnancy

Precautions

Meloxicam (Mobic)

Dosing

Adult

Pediatric

Interactions

Contraindications

Precautions

Pregnancy

Precautions

Ketorolac (Toradol)

Dosing